Battlestar Galactica Rant

DVad3r

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2005
5,340
3
81
Amazing show, I am on the 3rd season, but I just can't get over the fact that so many things are technilogically advanced, like FTL drives, cylons, etc, but yet they resort to using regular weapons with bullets? And what's up with all the diesel hummer vehicals and army trucks and stuff? Im pretty sure that much into the future they have more advanced ground vehicals? Also vipers etc have no autopilots to land themselves on the Battlestar? And why not use explosive rounds all the time on the centurions since they are basically immune to regular rounds? Oh and one more thing, why don't they use Sharon the cylon to hack the cylon basestars/raiders like she did before and disable them?

Misa mad!
 

DVad3r

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2005
5,340
3
81
Originally posted by: KillerCharlie
It's science fiction... if you can't let it go, don't bother watching any science fiction.

You're missing the point. I love science fiction. But good science fiction is congruent with almost every aspect of the setting. In star wars, they have ships that travel at light speeds, their vehicals on ground hover, everything is congruent. Here it's a jumbled mess. I like the show, don't get me wrong, this is just a rant.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
73,168
34,497
136
But that is how life is. We use microchips to built virtual worlds yet mash our potatos the same way the cavemen did.
 

darkxshade

Lifer
Mar 31, 2001
13,749
6
81
And how exactly are you to know how far certain technologies advance in the future? If the Romans could see us today, would they have guessed we still use fire to cook our food?
 

DVad3r

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2005
5,340
3
81
Originally posted by: darkxshade
And how exactly are you to know how far certain technologies advance in the future? If the Romans could see us today, would they have guessed we still use fire to cook our food?

It's an FTL jump drive. You're telling me we are going to have inter galactic space travel before we make a truck that runs on some other means of propulsion than diesel?
 

darkxshade

Lifer
Mar 31, 2001
13,749
6
81
Originally posted by: DVad3r
Originally posted by: darkxshade
And how exactly are you to know how far certain technologies advance in the future? If the Romans could see us today, would they have guessed we still use fire to cook our food?

It's an FTL jump drive. You're telling me we are going to have inter galactic space travel before we make a truck that runs on some other means of propulsion than diesel?

Just because we've broken a barrier to speed doesn't mean we adopt that technology on everything we use. US Navy ships run on nuclear power but do you see trucks running on it? We've broken the sound barrier with our jets but you don't see us strapping rockets on wheelchairs.
 

spacejamz

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
10,981
1,701
126
they have already explained the autopilot one when apollo had to land using a manual stick on the galactica...
 

KaOTiK

Lifer
Feb 5, 2001
10,877
8
81
The Vipers do have auto pilot to land but Adama doesn't allow autopilot landings on the Galactica. That was in the mini series I think before S1. When Apollo is first landing on Galactica before the attack he made a comment about how the auto landing (cant remember exactly what they call it) didnt work and I believe it was D who said all landings are manual as per Commander Adama's orders.
 

bsobel

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Dec 9, 2001
13,346
0
0
Originally posted by: DVad3r
Originally posted by: darkxshade
And how exactly are you to know how far certain technologies advance in the future? If the Romans could see us today, would they have guessed we still use fire to cook our food?

It's an FTL jump drive. You're telling me we are going to have inter galactic space travel before we make a truck that runs on some other means of propulsion than diesel?

Diesel made from algea, something still in our future ;)
 

kevman

Diamond Member
Apr 20, 2001
3,548
1
81
I don't get how stuff explodes in space when there is no air or oxygen
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
14,604
6,091
136
You have to remember that Battlestar Galactica is an OLD ship that was about to be DECOMMISSIONED permanently.

They probably had more advanced technology, but it was too expensive/destroyed in Cylon attacks. Given the fleet's limited manufacturing capabilities having conventional firearms and limited explosives makes sense. No reason to abandon tech that is still effective.
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81
Originally posted by: Baked
That's why Doctor Who > BSG. Hyper sonic screw driver FTW!

You can literally do pretty much anything with a sonic screwdriver...
 

KaOTiK

Lifer
Feb 5, 2001
10,877
8
81
Originally posted by: Spartan Niner
You have to remember that Battlestar Galactica is an OLD ship that was about to be DECOMMISSIONED permanently.

They probably had more advanced technology, but it was too expensive/destroyed in Cylon attacks. Given the fleet's limited manufacturing capabilities having conventional firearms and limited explosives makes sense. No reason to abandon tech that is still effective.

The Pegasus showed off some really impressive firepower and she was going in to be overhauled as it was lol.

But yeah Galactica was in the first war with the Cylon's and was purpsoly held back in at least some areas of tech due to the commanders that controlled her through the years.
 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
The corner cutting on the paper used in bsg drives me nuts. I understand it's an inside joke of some sorts but it's so unbelievable that it's annoying.
 
Oct 25, 2006
11,036
11
91
Originally posted by: DVad3r
Amazing show, I am on the 3rd season, but I just can't get over the fact that so many things are technilogically advanced, like FTL drives, cylons, etc, but yet they resort to using regular weapons with bullets? And what's up with all the diesel hummer vehicals and army trucks and stuff? Im pretty sure that much into the future they have more advanced ground vehicals? Also vipers etc have no autopilots to land themselves on the Battlestar? And why not use explosive rounds all the time on the centurions since they are basically immune to regular rounds? Oh and one more thing, why don't they use Sharon the cylon to hack the cylon basestars/raiders like she did before and disable them?

Misa mad!

They resort to bullets because Galactica is one of the original Battlestars. Its like the first Ironclads of the Civil War compared to our Battleships.

They have fuel trucks because...the Galactica was commissioned to be a museum during the attack on the colonies.

And during the part of New Caprica, they probably created those with limited manufacturing capability

The Vipers hare all fly by wire because they are afraid that computer automation will let Cylons hack into their systems, which let them destroy the 13 colonies. Also, manual is alot faster.

They have a shortage of explosive rounds. You see that when Centurions attacked the Galacica

The Cylons probably know that Sharon has hacked them before, and would most likely stop her from doing it again

And yes, the stuff exploding in space is a bit overdone. But it makes the show look amazing. I can suspend the cynic in me for the special effects
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
lasers are instant, you don't have to lead your aim, and that is boring.
basically you'd have two capital ships just blast each other to death with continuous beams. there would be no point in having raptors or any other small spaceship with instant hit weapons. they want to film it ww2 dog fight style so regular type weapons are more exciting.

you might as well ask why startrek ships manage to miss with such high tech weapons. or why torpedos would work when they have instant hit weapons that could just blast them like point defences.

other problems are worse, the logistics of keeping a fleet operational without all the support infrastructure from their home planet means they have to have some insane tech.

as for galactica being old, i think the cylons also use regular guns. so its not because its old. its because thats just the tech they use.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
I suspect the reall answer is closer to budgetary concerns.

TV shows can't afford the same production standards as blockbuster (budget busting) movies.

Fern