What is Digg?Sponsored by She's Out of My League
This "She's Out of My League" Trailer Is NSFW view!
GetYourRating.com - Exactly why you want to watch it, probably at work, hopefully while your boss is out sick...
100 Comments
- ZebraApocalypse, on 06/14/2009, -2/+25I just hope the game is fun... but it will probably suck.
- dreamer98, on 06/14/2009, -2/+20Archer and the events of Enterprise exist the same in both timelines since the split in the universe doesn't occur until the USS Kelvin is attacked.
They should really have hardcore trek nerds vett these press releases before they get published. - psion01, on 06/14/2009, -2/+20I've considered "Enterprise" part of an alternate timeline itself after Zephram Cochrane and Lily Sloane saw Picard's ship as shown in "First Contact". That contamination altered a lot of Cochrane's ideas about warp drive, who no doubt influenced Archer's dad heavily in the design of the NX program. The original NX was likely named something entirely different, looked at least a little different, and was certainly less advanced than the one that occurred after the contamination. Additionally, "Future Guy" was mucking about with Earth's history and even introduced humans to Klingons much too early.
- getoffmybridge, on 06/14/2009, -2/+15When the hell is this coming out?
- sdcarter, on 06/14/2009, -5/+18I couldn't have put it better myself. I enjoyed the new Star Trek movie (minus the overuse of lens flares); but it was a good sci-fi action movie... NOT a good Star Trek movie. Honestly though, it's hard to pay homage to something as loved as Star Trek, and stick to canon, while also appealing to the main stream. The explanation was a bit ham-handed; but the action was good, the acting was decent, and I'll probably see the sequel on launch weekend.
- MarkBrent, on 06/14/2009, -19/+32These guys aren't stupid. The new timeline is for kids growing up now. The core fan base for this MMO are going to be generations who grew up with both the old movies and, most importantly, TNG (and its spinoffs.) We want the real, canonical Trek universe, not something set in the new dumbed down and shined up Tiger Beat Time Travel Trek. New Trek has all the quality and gravitas of New Star Wars. Both of which are their franchises' respective New Coke.
- nguyencs, on 06/14/2009, -0/+10The past few star trek movies weren't very successful. They weren't going to do another prime timeline movie if they weren't sure it's going to succeed. Only other option to keep the Star Trek franchise alive was to reboot it. I'm happy that the franchise is alive and kicking. I liked the new movie for the most part and glad they at least linked it to the original timeline. I am a big fan of The Next Generation so STO staying in the prime timeline is going to be great fun.
- frankdozier, on 08/10/2009, -0/+9It says that the game will follow the "prime" timeline. It'll be OK. Worf will still be a good guy. Albeit a surly good guy.
- inactive, on 06/14/2009, -1/+9It's pretty much impossible for anything "Star Trek" to be made without pissing somebody off. It's a complicated "Universe." Try to have fun.
- asgardshill, on 06/14/2009, -2/+10Archer and the events of Enterprise shouldn't be in the "prime" timeline at all, as it violated established canon six ways from Sunday. Where were the renderings of NX-01 in all those pictures and sculptures showing "all these ships were named Enterprise" in all the TV shows and movies before Enterprise came along? Where was any mention of the Xindi attack on Earth, a somewhat major event in timeline history? And never a Denobulan, Xindi, or darned near any other race mentioned in Enterprise to be found in later timeline history.
- DivisibleByZero, on 06/14/2009, -0/+7"Star Trek Online is set in the "prime" Star Trek reality. This is the timeline of the five television series and the first 10 movies. It is the world in which the Gorn attacked Cestus III, Kirk fought Khan in the Mutara Nebula, Picard explored the galaxy, the Federation fought the Dominion War, Voyager was stranded in the Delta Quadrant and Captain Archer and the crew of the NX-01 showed us how it all began."
Captain Archer commanded the NX-01 in both universes... - asgardshill, on 06/14/2009, -2/+9"most of America seems to disagree with your review"
To be fair, "most of America" watches American Idol and all those tedious survival shows too. I'd rather be anally raped with a Number 4 metalworking file than have my tastes dictated by what "most of America" watches and enjoys. - psion01, on 06/14/2009, -2/+9Just goes to show P.T. Barnum was right. Three's Company and the A Team were popular in their day, too. Does that prove they were paragons of production?
- guybrush3000, on 06/14/2009, -2/+8Digg is so full of haters. Old* star trek was awesome. New star trek is awesome. "Enterprise" was never awesome. Them's the rules. Deal with it.
*(TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager**, films 2,4,6,8)
**after the first couple seasons - lawrencethomas3, on 06/14/2009, -0/+6Star Trek set the bar for Science Fiction television. TOS for its time; TNG, DS9, and Voyager for their time.
The reason Enterprise (and the ST X) failed was because they failed to reach that bar. Not because fans were tired of Star Trek. The new movie is good, like someone else said it kinda goes more toward the Star Wars bar than the Star Trek bar, but that's alright. Star Trek will continue to live on as long as they don't let people start shoveling it out mindlessly again (see: a few seasons of Voyager, first three seasons of Enterprise, four or 5 of the movies).
If Paramount gets back to the soul of Trek -- that being classically trained actors immersing themselves in science fiction stories that have a real message -- Star Trek will make a very welcome TV come-back no mater what 'universe' its set in. There are TONS of stories to tell in both the "Prime" universe and this new "Alternate" universe. (Seriously, a lot of the acting in Star Trek is incredible. Avery Brooks as Sisko, anyone?)
That being said, I dunno how they are gonna pull off a good ST MMO, but they had better take some cues from EVE Online and improve upon them. I'm going to play it, for sure, I just hope it isn't another Matrix Online or LOTR Online or Star Wars Galaxies (NGE) where the developers really missed the mark. - assbeard, on 06/14/2009, -1/+7when did Worf die??
- phathampstah, on 06/14/2009, -4/+9most of America seems to disagree with your review.
Also, battlefield promotions are not unusual during war. - inactive, on 06/14/2009, -2/+7Yeah, it seems a few characters go from peon to knight rather quickly. Bones gets promoted to Chief Medical Officer due to the death of the Chief Medical Officer, simple. Kirk gets promoted after Spock steps aside and the captain is unfit to handle duties (due to some ST2:WOK rip-off parasite that crawls into him). Which leaves Scotty going from working in an abandon outpost with an ugnaught as punishment for "killing" a superior officers dog.
How exactly does Scotty end up being Chief Engineer? I must have completely missed that one. - mareksoon, on 06/14/2009, -4/+9Man, I can't wait for 2063. Bricks will be shat.
- nguyencs, on 06/15/2009, -1/+6The last season of Enterprise had some of the best Star Trek episodes ever(excluding the lame finale). I guess they knew the show was getting canned and they went awesomely wild with the stories.
- lawrencethomas3, on 06/14/2009, -1/+6
Star Trek has indeed been known for its special effects, acting, sets, and production values for decades... not like you would know since you are just trolling and, from reading your posts on here, not even a Star Trek fan in the first place. Star Trek set the bar for Science Fiction television, anyone whos a fan of SciFi knows it. - nguyencs, on 06/15/2009, -0/+4I guess me saying "the last season of Enterprise" wasn't an obvious enough clue to which season I am referring to.
Yes, the first two seasons were awful. 3rd, was bearable. 4th was fantastic. The episodes where Brent Spiner came back to play Dr. Soong, or them explaining how the Klingons looked like they did in the TOS were pure awesome. The 3-episode arcs made some nice story telling. - MacHarborGuy, on 06/14/2009, -0/+4why Star Trek fans cannot be like Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy fans I'll never know. There is so many retellings of Hitchhikers, yet all of it is canonical in some weird yet adequately unexplored reason.
- mdaize, on 06/14/2009, -7/+11"How do you officially go from cadet to captain of the federation flagship in a few days?"
Have you seen the movie? Cause they explain it. Clearly he was the right person for the job, and were in a very dangerous and 'at-the-moment' decision warranted such a situation as following promotion regulations was not suitable. - USER1236, on 06/14/2009, -2/+6He was promoted to first officer by captain Pike.. plus in the original Star Trek movies, Spock was promoted to captain when Kirk became admiral however when captain Kirk became captain again Spock still retained the rank of Captain (he wasn't "downranked") Also by the looks at the end of the movie Spock wanted to resign Star fleet to help his people. Spock may have started the "paperwork" thus promoting Kirk in Spocks and Pikes absence.
- MacHarborGuy, on 06/14/2009, -1/+5... so you are saying that the latest Star Trek movie, that for all accounts was a great film, is considered "alternate timeline crap"? guess you're late to the party, but Star Trek has been doing alternate timelines and alternate realities since the 60s. nothing new here
- palehorse864, on 06/14/2009, -1/+5I'm glad they were smart enough to set it in an alternate universe. I think all these writers/producers etc. want to go back and be Gene Roddenberry judging by how they are all traveling back in time and either going to Kirk or creating the odd mishmash of stuff that was Enterprise. Enterprise would have been better off if it had followed a similar idea to the movie and set it in the alternate universe. Then it would have probably worked better with fans. That said, it was surprisingly a very good show upon rewatching, but the fan base had reasons not to accept it.
Plus, Trek fans would rather "boldly go", not retread where we've already been. The movies from First Contact onwards screwed with continuity, but not in a huge way. Data becoming bullet proof for example or being able to float was a minor change (Nemesis managed to forget a huge chunk of important information that was central to its plot) . After voyager though, things looked exciting for the next series. New travel options, every quadrant at least partially explored, the Borg wounded, new technology way ahead of the time for the federation to use. A series continuing the timeline could have introduced a new galaxy if set far enough ahead, show the federation using this new technology to gain an upper hand in negotiations, etc. Things get exciting though and then the new series is set back in the past.
Even with it set back in the past though, the writers aren't satisfied and want to write all the stuff in from the other series. By the time they had figured out their own niche, everyone had lost interest. I suppose it's appropriate though that the series trying to be like TOS would only go four seasons. It would have been interesting and satisfied Trek fans though if Enterprise took the xindi/temporal cold war and used that to explain that Enterprise took place in an altered timeline. Had they done that in advance, fans might have accepted it. - jeremymccurdy, on 06/14/2009, -1/+5The ***** are you talking about? Worf didn't die.
- inactive, on 06/14/2009, -1/+5Psst...'irregardless' is not a word. You were looking for 'regardless'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless - MacHarborGuy, on 06/14/2009, -0/+4you forget, even the series itself (before the latest film) has changed the timeline so much that I doubt there is any of the original timeline left. Remember the STTNG episode where the Enterprise C went thru a wormhole in time and the whole TNG universe turned into a Federation vs Klingon war AND Yarr was still alive? That is just one example of possibly hundreds.
I just hope Star Trek Online has Q in some form or another - psion01, on 06/14/2009, -3/+7Nah ... it's an answer from the gullible. Ladyleelee is right about the plot holes and bad planning from this movie. It's a great popcorn action flick -- the Fifth Element of Star Trek -- but as soon as you start examining it closely it falls apart faster than a teenager's wet dream.
What was Nero doing for 25 years? How come the Narada was left alone by the Klingons? Why didn't Nero act to rescue Romulus once he went back in time? How was an artificial singularity supposed to reverse a supernova when one that big almost certainly creates a black hole in the first place? Why did Scotty jettison the warp core when he needed more power from the warp engines? Where was Delta Vega again?
And then there are the size issues. We've recently learned ST2009's Enterprise was supposed to be bigger than the original timeline's Enterprise-D (cause, y'know, bigger is better), but they left the window arrangements on the saucer the same as the refit ship from the first six movies. The Narada had a drill that was supposed to be five miles long, but in the film we see space divers go from vacuum to a breathable atmosphere along side it.
Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.
elister: The redshirt carrying the explosives on the drill assault was the chief engineer. - FearlessFreep, on 06/14/2009, -10/+13That's a copout answer
- frsrblch, on 06/14/2009, -1/+4* Zebra
- inactive, on 06/15/2009, -1/+4Is that steaming pile of ***** Star Trek V still cannon? If so then all arguements are rendered void.
- digiguy, on 06/14/2009, -3/+6Make another movie to correct the timeline
- BenSerwa, on 06/14/2009, -1/+4But... but... but... MY CANON!!!
- fandyllic, on 06/15/2009, -0/+3Sigh, it's "canon". Cannons are the things you put cannonballs in.
- MacHarborGuy, on 06/14/2009, -0/+3correct WHICH timeline? remember, almost every Star Trek TV series has had some sort of "alternate" timeline.
- shipwreck58, on 06/14/2009, -2/+5Fanboys ruin everything.
- TwwIX, on 06/14/2009, -0/+3I still don't think that Cryptic can pull it off. They are doing a rather sloppy job with Champions Online.
- FearlessFreep, on 06/14/2009, -4/+7yeah, by a rank maybe. Going from O-nothing it O-6?
- MacHarborGuy, on 06/14/2009, -1/+4I am one of the hold outs that doesn't believe "Star Trek Enterprise" ever happened in the timeline, since the first Star Trek movie never depicted THAT enterprise on the images of all past enterprises. Plus that series had way too many logic problems for my tastes (and when STAR TREK has a logic problem, theres something really wrong)
- Suilenroc, on 06/14/2009, -0/+2I hope they take SOME queues from EVE, but they shouldn't take too much from it. EVE is an interesting game, but the grind is horrible. Absolutely, disgustingly horrible.
- fandyllic, on 06/15/2009, -0/+2I have to agree with Kestrel. The new movie was fun and entertaining, but had alot of what I call "Armageddon" moments (scenes ripped right from "Top Gun", starships build on the ground, cheap time travel plot device, etc.).
- Brhine, on 06/14/2009, -1/+3Spock was an ambassador on Romulus at the time. He was involved before Starfleet. It's in the prequel comic.
- asgardshill, on 06/14/2009, -1/+3@ParticleMan420:
1. Not in my opinion.
2. Of course the novelizations aren't canon (note the correct spelling, please). I never claimed they were.
3. You assume a lot when you assume that I am a "non-fan". And I never said that Enterprise wasn't canon, just that it shouldn't be considered canon by knowledgeable fans because of the inconsistencies I mentioned (and a whole lot I didn't).
A guy dressed up in a cheesy rubber lizard suit is canon, but is it good canon? "Spock's Brain" is canon, but is it good canon? The terms "Vulcan" and "Vulcanian" are BOTH canon, but are they both good canon?
Point is, Paramount has my permission to dress up Spock in a leprechaun suit and call it "canon" if they want to. They don't feed me any less if the Gorn looks fake or "Spock's Brain" got made or Vulcans are sometimes called Vulcanians. As a fan however, I do get the right to have an opinion on the matter when canon gets violated or falls ridiculously short of the mark. - ParticleMan420, on 06/14/2009, -1/+3sorry, Enterprise is Cannon and it happened before the split so is still cannon.
non-fans dont get to choose what is cannon. Paramount does.
If it upsets you that Picard doesnt have a model of Archer's enterprise, then ask him why he didnt have one.
if the fans do get to choose, then i say all of those terrible books are not cannon. - mabba18, on 06/14/2009, -1/+3Who the hell dugg you down? You hit the nail right on the head.
Old Star Trek= Chess
New Star Trek=Checkers, with explosions. - fandyllic, on 06/15/2009, -0/+2Nowhere, just the honest opinions got buried probably. I enjoyed the movie, but I'd also like to see Avery Brooks in a Star Trek movie. Fat chance of that. I guess despite the efforts of Gene Roddenberry, Star Trek is going back to the white boys.
- morogolus, on 06/18/2009, -0/+2It was a good movie that revitalized an otherwise dying franchise. It's nice seeing people interested in Trek again as opposed to five years ago after the garbage that was Nemisis (I can't really comment on Enterprise cuz I never watched it)
-
Show 51 - 100 of 100 discussions
