Indy

Wow! That's a lot of added detail!

As you said though, it's interesting they go back to old stuff that isn't really used anymore. Then again, it is Cryptic, so decision-making can be perplexing; and, of course, we must always be wary of -- "TIMELINE CHANGE IMMINENT!"

Bonus Marks: July 25th at 8am PT to July 29th at 12pm PT on PC

Phoenix Prize Pack Event: July 25th at 8am PT to August 1st at 12pm PT on PC

Indeed, I find that the multiverse stuff is actually dis-engaging me from the story because it doesn't cohesively connect with what feels like Trek to me. Of course, neither does the warp-in-destroy-everything-warp-out either. So, ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Agreed. Although, as of these past few days, I find myself pondering what I'd like to do to/when spend(ing) more time in-game. I mean, why do I grind for all this stuff and DPS, if I'm not enjoying it when I'm playing it?

PC Patch Notes for 7/18/24

General:

• Resolved an issue with the Credence's Starship Trait, Surplus Supply, which was not correctly restricting nearby affected targets to Player Only.
• Resolved an issue on the Kelvin Timeline Constitution II Intel Cruiser regarding the hull registry textures missing.
• Resolved an issue with the Mirror Crossfield (Open Shuttlebay) having Starfleet insignia instead of Terran Empire insignia.
• Resolved an issue with the Kelvin Timeline Vengeance Intel Dreadnought Cruiser's saucer spotlights that caused them to look incorrect when viewed at certain angles.

This is beautiful! I love data and I'm delighted you were inspired by my post to gather the data.

Thank you for doing this!

I'm not sure. Perhaps "Captain and Crew Test" isn't the right way to look at it either. ST:LD seems to do a good job of not focusing too much on one story or character per episode, so it avoids failure even if every character is "the captain".

There would have to be some way of reworking the criteria to evaluate overall balance (as mentioned elsewhere in this thread) rather than just Captain and Crew, I guess.

Regardless, that's a really good question. Hmmmm

I like that idea. It measures the depth/breadth of the world-building that way too.

I love this! Now you need to do an analysis like this one on Star Trek and the Bechdel-Wallace test!

TOS is already a rough rewatch with some of its acting and portrayals of the future. I can't imagine how tough it would be to rewatch it through that lens. Haha!

I realize you’re not trying to predict quality, just personal enjoyability, but I do wonder how it relates to quality.

I don't mean for this to measure quality. To each their own, as they say. After all, it is just entertainment and I'm free to watch anything else or skip this or that episode. This is all just a fun observation for me, much like a discussion on the finer points of warp theory or Federation economics.

Still, I'm glad it's something that clicked for you too. I figured there would be a number of people whose appreciation of Trek relates to this "test".

.... Even then, I believe [TOS] would have a pretty low “pass” rate compared to all the '90s series.

Agreed. I note elsewhere in this thread that I think TOS would struggle with this little "test" and it was THE Star Trek show when it all started.

(Incidentally, since Burnham wasn’t Captain until season 4, Discovery passes on a technicality for most of its run).

Indeed it would pass and I think the captains/crew of those seasons were well portrayed and balanced Burnham's presence as a character as well.

I’ve seen this complaint a lot with some of the newer shows, but it doesn’t really resonate with me. A good central character ought to be able to carry a show, and I don’t hold Trek as being inherently different in that regard.

As you say. And to be clear, I'm not taking this too seriously, nor is it meant to be a complaint. Just a measure I noticed in my own mind. I am still watching all the Star Trek made, whether it "passes" this measure or not.

A fair point. However, I just think this sums up my preferences for Trek shows well and had a feeling that many would agree.

Meanwhile, other people might have an internal measure for their preferences which amounts to "is not animated", eliminating TAS and ST:LD.

To be clear, for everyone reading: I have watched every episode of every Star Trek show; I greatly and sincerely appreciate and value the time, effort, and energy of the production crew, writers, and actors of every show. These media of entertainment are impactful and deeply meaningful. Every show has a message for its current time and future audiences and it is so important that, as a fan, I hear those messages and allow myself to appreciate this art as an audience member.

No arguments for or against these yet? I'll nudge this part of the conversation by pointing out that TOS -- THE original Star Trek show -- seems to have a high percentage of episodes which would "fail" this silly "test".