Star Trek vs. Star Wars (and a collection of memes)

I haven't, but I've heard they are not all that great.

 

Battlefront 1 EA put me off because it only featured OT content (although I think there was added Rogue One content but only 2 extra playable characters - Jyn and Krennic), while 2 has more stuff but I'm sure you have to pay sign up online or something again - not with steam but another greedy Trade Federation-like corporation (either EA or someone else).

I'm more interested in playing the old Battlefront 2 myself and a Star Wars version of Age of Empires called Galactic Battlegrounds (don't have them yet but looking out for them)

 

I have both, and have played them a lot. Personally I really enjoyed both, although I’d recommend you just go with 2 - the first doesn’t really do single player, and everything multiplayer the second does better. The campaign of the second isn’t bad though - I enjoyed playing through it. However, the real part is the online multiplayer. That’s definitely the best part, and where all the focus is. If you’re interested in that, then get it, but if you aren’t planning on playing it at all, the campaign is good, but I don’t think it alone is worth getting the game for

 

In regards to Battlefront 2, I heard it was very micro-transaction heavy. Suffering from a pay-to-play mentality. Is there any merit to that?

 

Definitely not anymore. At first there was a loot box system, but even that didn’t feel too micro-transaction heavy. They changed it after the backlash, and now there isn’t anything like that at all. Everything can be purchased with in game credits. There are a couple of things that can be brought with the premium currency, but it’s all cosmetic and can be brought (often easier) with the in game currency. It’s definitely not something you need to worry about now

 

That's great to hear - Galaxy of Heroes has this mechanic too, thank goodness - even crystals can be replenished if you play enough battles.

I remember in what was essentially the predecessor to Galaxy of Heroes, Star Wars Galactic Defence, which used credits and crystals like GoH (or 'Gems' as they were known in GD) to purchase characters but only credits could be obtained in game in reasonably large quantities, so it was always a pain when they made something only available through gems as it meant I'd never be able to get it

 

I pretty much avoid games where developers employ that tactic. If I am paying for a triple A game I expect to be able to enjoy the full experience. Cosmetic stuff doesn't bother me, they can micro-transaction that all they want.

 

Gods yes that scene was awful, and one of the many ways that made Episode VII flop in my view. However, I believe it wasn’t necessarily to promote feminist ideals, but mainly to bring on the 70s-80s escapism theme that the OT used a lot.

 

I disagree.

When Luke first fought Vader it went exceptionally badly for him. Episode V in general is contrary to your statement. The good guys lose in that movie, and they lose badly.

 

Empire Strikes Back is hardly gritty. Yes I know the heroes lose on a personal level, but the defeat they suffer at Hoth is nothing compared to the events of Revenge of the Sith or The Last Jedi from the perspective of the whole galaxy. In fact the Battle of Scarif, even though it was a victory, was arguably more devastating than Hoth.

In Revenge of the Sith, it is believed that the Separatists are on the back foot, and that the war will be over, but it will instead start a whole new one as the Republic is taken over by the Chancellor who forces it into an evil dictatorship, the Jedi are exterminated by their own troops and the few survivors forced into hiding. Things are even worse for the Separatists, whose leaders are massacred, their Droid armies are shut down and many of their member races enslaved or exterminated by Palpatine’s new Empire.

In The Last Jedi, the last remnants of the Resistance fleet are destroyed and the majority of their army massacred on Crait with only a few First Order tie fighters as casualties - all the indomitable walkers and soldiers survive. There are so few people left in the Resistance that they can all fit on the plot-armoured Milennium Falcon, while the First Order are now free to take over the entire galaxy.

Both of these are far more devastating defeats.

In Rogue One, the Rebels do get away with the Death Star plans, but at what cost? Much of the Rebel fleet is destroyed, one of their key Admirals taken prisoner and presumably executed afterwards, the majority of their best troops are dead and most of their Starfighter squads also destroyed.

This was a Pyrrhic victory of the highest standard.

And what about the Empire Strikes Back? Well, on Hoth the Rebels take down several of the supposedly-indestructible AT-ATs and their whole fleet escapes, along with the vast majority of the troops and officers. Then we have the Bespin charade, where a Bounty Hunter tracks down our heroes to the gas giant, but he can’t even defeat and arrest them himself despite his alleged fame - he has to rely upon the pre-defined arrangements between Lando and Vader to secure Han Solo. So Solo is frozen in carbonite, a process that’s often seen as fatal, but oh look, he survives in hibernation - a nice bit of plot armour. Then Luke arrives and attempts to save his friends. Quite rightly he is beaten by Vader in personal combat, but Vader takes a long time to beat him considering Luke only having trained for a few days at most, and Luke is still spared due to Vader’s compassion for his son, when he could have killed him pretty quickly. He then survives falling down one of the many Star Wars endless tunnels where he is conveniently located and picked up by the Millennium Falcon where all of its crew bar Han are no worse for wear. I understand you all believe it to be a grave defeat on a personal level, but in my opinion at least, I wouldn’t call that being ‘beaten badly’ by any means - at worst it was simply a minor setback for the Rebel alliance which they quickly overcame in Return of the Jedi. That, at least in my view, is hardly contrary to OT escapism, and only reinforces it.

 

An interesting write-up @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl . While everything you wrote is correct, I believe you are wrong (and I will try to explain my rationale) . I used the term "wrong" but not in reference to the merits your analysis, but rather what you have chosen to analyze. A story is an emotional journey and we experience that emotion vicariously through our focal character, which is usually the protagonist of the story. Let me give you an example...

Let's say we have a story about a war torn country that is facing an invading force that is thought to be far superior to them and is hell bent on eradicating its citizens. Enter our focal character, a mother of three small children. Her husband has perished in the war and things look bleak. Our story encompasses her decision to risk it all and cross her country so that she might flee with her remaining family into a neutral country where they will be safe. She is advised against this course of action because it is an extremely dangerous journey (especially with small children in tow) and she will never make it. Against the advice of those she trusts, she sets out to reach the neutral country with her children. Throughout the journey we experience the story through her eyes. When she is in danger we experience the tension alongside of her. We see her flashbacks to better times, and we smile with her. When there are close calls throughout the journey and narrow escapes we hold our breath. When she is relieved, we are relieved. When she is happy, we are happy. When she is sad, we are sad. When she is terrified, we experience that emotion as well. Okay, let's skip forward to two possible conclusions to our little experimental story...

1. The mother makes it across the border with one of her three children. She was separated from the other two and they are believed to have perished. Leaving her child in safe hands, she prepares to go back across the border the border to hopelessly search for the other two. Just then, her husband, who was believed to have been lost in the war, shows up with her remaining two children, safe and sound. There is a tear filled reunion and our little story family is safe. He explains how he had survived and how he had been trying to find them all this time. Over the radio, we hear that her country has fallen to the invaders; it is a complete loss, the people of the land have been eradicated. She listens to the news as she cradles and comforts her family.
2. In the second scenario, we find ourselves with the mother who is within a kilometer of the border. She frantically searches for the two children she was separated from. She eventually comes across their broken little bodies. She is devastated at their loss and feels guilty that her decision to make the journey has gotten them killed. Very reluctantly she must leave them behind and carry her remaining child across the border. We see her running towards the border as gunshots can be heard. Mere meters away the mother is hit by a bullet and she falls to the ground. She has taken the non-fatal wound to the arm but her focus immediately shifts to the child who has been fatally struck and dies in her arms. Her world is shattered and she lies there holding her child's still warm body. Darkness takes her. When the story resumes, we find that she has been carried across the border to safety and is in a hospital. As she regains consciousness, her thoughts focused purely on the loss of her family. Her heart is broken and she weeps. In the background, a television is running and the news anchor explains that her country has somehow miraculously repelled the invaders and saved its citizens. The news means nothing to her, all she can think about is her lost family.

So in which story have we experienced greater loss? In ending #1 we have an entire country that is in complete ruins. It's people have been murdered and all has been lost. But on a personal level, the family is safe and the focal character (the mother) has achieved not only her goal but has been reunited with a husband she thought she lost. In ending #2, the entire country is saved. It's people, it's culture and it's sovereignty have been maintained. There is celebration in the streets. However, our focal character (who we experience the story through) has lost everything.

Ending #1 In the big picture we have a complete loss, but a touching personal victory

Ending #2 In the big picture we have a victory, but personal tragedy


So my point in all this is one that you made yourself...

This is what really matters emotionally in a story. Everything else is just a backdrop used to experience the story through the viewpoint of our key characters. If hypothetically you have a beloved character die in an X-wing that is more sad and dark than losing an entire capital ship filled with thousands of "nobodies". That is how we are wired as human beings, we care most for those in our inner circle.


Armed with that, let's re-examine our movies...

Empire Strikes Back - Our focal character, Luke, loses everything. He abandons his training with Yoda thinking he can win the day. He learns painfully that he was absolutely wrong. Vader bests him in combat and takes his hand. He then finds out that the worst guy in the galaxy is his father (remember at this point [chronologically by release date] the emperor is nothing but an unknown background character). Han has captured and Luke throws himself off the ledge (choosing what he must assume would be death over joining his father). That is emotional stuff. There is a huge amount of personal loss. The music and the ending of the movie all reinforce this. It is the most somber point in the entire movie franchise.

Revenge of the Sith - There is a great amount of personal loss here as well, but the execution is lacking. The primary character, Anakin, loses everything. He becomes a traitor. He loses his wife. I believes he has lost his children. The Jedi order is gone. He is bound in servitude to Sidious. This is all pretty emotional stuff as well, but we have a few problems (some of which are due to poor execution, while others are the unavoidable byproduct of this being a prequel). The first problem is that the silliness of Padme dying of "sadness" removes much of the emotional impact of her death. Next, Anakin is a very disliked character in the prequels (not because he turns evil, but because of his portrayal and whiny nature) so it is harder to feel for him. In addition, Anakin becomes the villain and ultimately we are seeing the villain pay for his crimes (while Luke is the hero and is willing to sacrifice himself rather than join his father in evil). Lastly, some of the impact is lost because we already know how the story ends This is something that afflicts any prequel story. The film's close is intermixed with hope in the form of Luke and Leia. I don't want to shit on ROTS because I think it the best of the prequels and I do really enjoy it. However, it does not have the emotional impact of ESB.

The Last Jedi - Here there is virtually no personal loss (other than for real life Star Wars fans ). Yes Luke fades away, but Rey and Leia seem to understand and accept it pretty easily. Plus, Luke was a bum in this movie to begin with. Overall the mood in the Falcon is pretty jovial and the music in the background reinforces this. Sure the resistance has lost a great deal, but things aren't even that bleak. They have Rey who should be able to stomp the whole first order single-handily. The only villain worth fearing is dead (unless they retcon it) and the remaining leaders are either largely incompetent (Kylo) or an absolute buffoon (Hux). Sure the first order has massive Star Destroyers, but now you can just fly kamikazee droid piloted smaller craft into them at hyperspace velocities. Nothing in the end of this movie even comes close to recreating ROTS, let alone ESB.

Rogue One - The issue with this movie has always come down to the characters. I know you love them (and I am not trying to convince you otherwise), but to the vast majority of people, they were flat, boring and forgettable. If you can't connect with them, then you don't emotionally experience the story. Yes they all die, but aside from K2, nobody (or very few) people give a crap. We also have the same prequel issues as we had with episode III, we know how the tale concludes. In the end, what is the ending of Rogue One remembered for?... Vader finally being portrayed as people imagined him to be, as he slaughters the rebels (very cool scene by the way). However, none of this has the emotional impact of episode V. The personal loss is negated because most people don't care for the characters. Also, as you said, they still win this engagement... which leads to a greater victory in the future.


While a largely disagree with your conclusion, I must say it was a good read. You are correct in many ways, but I view the movies through a different lens. Overall, it made for the most interesting exploration I have had on this thread. Your write up did allow me to see the topic through a different viewpoint and while I ultimately feel a different way, it was a worthwhile engagement.

 

For me, these have got to be the most emotional moments in Star Wars. Sure, there are moments of drama in the films, and a couple of upsetting points, but not on par with these, especially if you’ve watched the shows and are invested in the characters. The setup, the acting and the music in both if phenomenal, and far more likely to elicit tears then any moment in any of the films.

Spoiler: Star Wars The Clone Wars and Rebels MAJOR SPOILERS!

(Yes @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl we all know how you feel about Ahsoka. Unless you have anything meaningful to add that you haven’t already said before, it’s probably not worth saying it)

 

I’m glad you enjoyed reading my argument anyway . I do see what you mean about the poignance of an individual character’s story, but I think it’s really all down to opinions, as you say, ‘viewing the films through different lenses’. I suppose because I saw Episodes I-III first and I prefer the characters in those films, I see Episode III to be darker, while you saw Episodes IV-VI first and connected with Luke and co more so you see V to be darker. Similarly, because I liked the Rogue One characters more their deaths are more hard-hitting to me, while to most others they weren’t.

And here I would say that this supports that view - because I care little about Ahsoka and Kanan such scenes would matter little to me, whereas you care about them more so these scenes are sadder to you. That’s completely fine by me and I respect that.

 

That is definitely an advantage of a television show. You really have time to build and develop characters.

 

Overruled!