![star trek 25th century star trek 25th century](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/startrekrpg/images/d/d9/Duty_Uniforms.jpg)
![star trek 25th century star trek 25th century](https://static3.srcdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Star-Trek-Ships-of-the-Line.jpg)
The new future brings forth a new Starfleet that looks to start a renaissance with humanity, reconnect with the final frontier, and restart the Federation, all while exploring a changed and newly mysterious galactic arena.
![star trek 25th century star trek 25th century](https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/09/07/quark.jpg)
They are destroyed, but the damaged unraveled the Federation and brought forth a dark age upon the Alpha and Beta quadrants. The only thing I can think of is this: a late 25th or early 26th century that's 100 years after the war with the Borg. I've said it before, they only way to make future Trek any good would be to have some event force it back to its roots. I know people like to say canon forces writers to be creative, but that's like forcing an artist to be creative with only 3 crayons on an index card. People are going to question were race-x came from and why what is what in a negative context due to canon being law to fans. If TNG was the last future Trek we had before Enterprise, then there would be enough mystery in the Trek-verse for a 25th century series.Īlso, as someone else said before, there is too much established canon to work with. This would be as big of a problem if DS9 and Voyager had not over explained and over saturated the universe. Future Trek has unfortunately dated itself before it could even be explored. 25th century and beyond Star Trek would be a future based off a 1990s interpretation of a 1960s vision of the future. Here is my problem with 25th century in 2017. Which I attribute more to marketing and commercial considerations. This seems more like apologist points for Discovery and nostalgia/prequel mania more than a reasoned consideration of the reasons for the choice. There's absolutely no concern for canon or at least minimal concern when inventing new technology, species or ideas.
#Star trek 25th century series
This is a flimsy excuse given what we are seeing with the prequels, be it Enterprise, the new film series or Discovery. Star Trek is so weighed down with what people call "canon" that writing new stories that take into account all that history is really difficult. Ditto Kim Stanley Robinson.īut there's a bigger problem. His technology is not even as advanced as what you find in Star Trek. There are plenty of SF novels that deal with the far future, certainly 400 years or more. We can't plausibly imagine what anything might be like in 400 years.īut we can in 200? Have you seen what depictions of the future looked like in 1817? Or even what depictions of the year 2000 looked like in 1899? That's not just hard for the writer it's no fun. Everything you think of, you have to first make sure it hasn't been done before in 600-odd hours of content, and then you have to make sure that it isn't contradicted or made moot by something in those 600-odd hours of content. The pace of change, both technological and social, has been blistering, and even if you assume the pace will merely remain constant, trying to tell stories that are both plausibly set in the far future and engaging to a general audience is incredibly hard.īut there's a bigger problem. In 60 years we went from powered flight to setting foot on the moon, and in about the same amount of time we went from the first electronic computer to the damn iPad. Consider that 400 years ago we had only just circumnavigated the globe. There are two big problems with trying to tell a story set that far in the future.įirst, yeah, you said it yourself: We can't plausibly imagine what anything might be like in 400 years. I think the possibilities are almost limitless and it could be every bit as dramatic and engaging as a reimagined/rebooted concept. You could imagine a scenario where Starfleet ends up defending the Cardassians and/or Romulans against a hostile faction of Klingons who see an opportunity for conquest against old enemies, etc. The fallout from these events and how the Federation navigates trying to assist / manage the geopolitical landscape could be an amazing backdrop for a serialized series. In terms of the story of the Star Trek universe (i.e., the actual prime timeline) is no one interested in seeing what happens post-Dominion War, post Nemesis? The Cardassian Empire has fallen and the Roman Empire is in disarray after Shinzon's coup. but then they make prequels where everything looks more advanced than anything we've seen in 'the 24th century'! I just don't buy that excuse. They say things like the technology is too advanced, etc. There's a lot of arguments about why the powers that be don't want to move forward. The consensus seems to be that most fans are generally not in favor of prequels.