Why are Star Trek ships so skinny and sucky looking compared to Star Wars ships?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Mar 10, 2005
14,647
2
0
anything star trek wins a fight with anything else simply because star trek people wield god-like powers just ordering lunch. conjuring matter and energy out of nothing? puh-lease. star trek is soooo out of whack it's laughable.

and, infuriatingly, they don't even believe in money!
 
Mar 10, 2005
14,647
2
0
and HK-47 would rape both

HK47desk_1024.jpg

my money is on roberto

roberto_futurama_knife.jpg
 

ultimatebob

Lifer
Jul 1, 2001
25,134
2,446
126
I sure that some really hardcore Star Trek geek could explain that the ships need to be shaped that way to properly construct the warp field around the ship, or some other such techno-babble.

I think that the real reason was that Gene Roddenberry wanted the original Enterprise to look like a flying saucer, and future generations of Star Trek writers stuck with the meme.
 

pandemonium

Golden Member
Mar 17, 2011
1,777
76
91
I sure that some really hardcore Star Trek geek could explain that the ships need to be shaped that way to properly construct the warp field around the ship, or some other such techno-babble.

I think that the real reason was that Gene Roddenberry wanted the original Enterprise to look like a flying saucer, and future generations of Star Trek writers stuck with the meme.

Already been discussed earlier in the thread by the WildHorse fellow.
 

Murloc

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2008
5,382
65
91
I find star wars more retarded than star trek.

It's just a movie. If they were more massive the story would be boring .

huge useless mass is useful if your shields suck.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,559
8
0
Ill take a fleet of white stars with some earth cruisers flanking over a star wars battle group.

besides the white stars had telekinetics on board who would freak out you pilots anyway


HA
 
Last edited:

Away

Diamond Member
May 1, 2005
4,430
1
71
DefiantDS9.jpg


I don't think a warship with the ability to cloak is sucky.
 

tommo123

Platinum Member
Sep 25, 2005
2,617
48
91
Ill take a fleet of white stars with some earth cruisers flanking over a star wars battle group.

besides the white stars had telekinetics on board who would freak out you pilots anyway


HA

telepaths, not telekinetics. that was 1 dude only in 1 ep of B5 (iirc)
 

Newbian

Lifer
Aug 24, 2008
24,768
864
126
Sorry but the fact that human males can get knocked up by female aliens in Star Trek will always mean Star Wars > Star Trek.
 

Nik

Lifer
Jun 5, 2006
16,101
2
56
Star Wars Battlercruiser
MC80.jpg

That's a Mon Cal cruiser. They're priceless. They're actually crafted out of larger chunks (absolutely massive) coral. Yes, like ocean coral.

images

This is all the lazy Federation can muster? Cant they mine some more armor from a asteroid?

Federation ships are built that specific way because of the way their engines generate a warp field. They're built that way to be "tuned" to their warp engines.



However, the short of it is "who cares?" They're different universes and shit would be boring if it were all the same. People who ask dumb questions like this irritate the fuck out of me.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
TNG didn't suck.

i'll admit that I enjoyed, mostly, the handful of episodes that I watched. But the problem is: it's star trek. I can only take so much space politics.

Also, here is Star Trek's idea of a suave, badass, galactic Pimp:

1057451625_opriker-s4.jpg


This is Star Wars:

Hansoloprofile.jpg



oh, and also:
how-031008-lando_calrissian.jpg


any questions, suckas?

:awe:
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Right, 15 minutes of Ja-Ja Binks, the most annoying role ever created in ANY Sci-fi film kinda disproves that..

I honestly don't know what you are talking about. I grew up with Star Wars my entire life, have watched each movie a bazillion times, and have never heard of this of which you speak.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Because Star Tek ships have some relationship to reality. Makes sense to isolate propulsion systems from living quarters.

Star Wars is fantasy. No relationship to reality is required.

so, Star Trek is more valid because it is, in your mind...real?

wow.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
comparison_huge.png


So what does Star Wars have that's better than V'Ger or the Whale Probe? Nada.

Oh and that dumb ass midi-chlorians. Sounds like a synthesizer.

As far as the Jedi and the Sith, they're doing my yard work, and the Q are making sammiches.

Hayabusa Rider aka Gary Mitchell :awe:
 

qliveur

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2007
4,086
70
91
i'll admit that I enjoyed, mostly, the handful of episodes that I watched. But the problem is: it's star trek. I can only take so much space politics.

Also, here is Star Trek's idea of a suave, badass, galactic Pimp:

1057451625_opriker-s4.jpg


This is Star Wars:

Hansoloprofile.jpg


oh, and also:
how-031008-lando_calrissian.jpg


any questions, suckas?

:awe:
I'll concede that, minus the awful prequel trilogy and Lucas' douchey revisionism, Star Wars > Star Trek; at least from a coolness standpoint.

Factor in the prequels and the revisionism and it quickly becomes a draw.