this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
253 points (96.7% liked)

Star Trek Social Club

11218 readers
103 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episode. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll busmittions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books, etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/Quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"
12-12 LD 5x09 "Fissure Quest"
12-19 LD 5x10 "The New Next Generation"
01-24 Film "Section 31"

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Strange New Worlds (TBA)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)


In Development

Untitled theatrical film

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.

Allied Discord Server


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bgb_ca@lemmy.ca 43 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Maybe if they did not pull it from the service I am paying for in order to try and make me pay for yet another service this would not be a problem. But, no, corporate greed dictates that I must pay for 100 different streaming platforms to watch the one show on each one.

I am sick of this...

[–] pachrist@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago

To the room full of millionaires out there who think I'll spend $14.99/month indefinitely on their shitty platform to watch a better than average Star Trek show:

Ahoy matey.

[–] PhictionalOne@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Same. I won't watch the season until I complete my streaming service rotation...

I rotate them like quarterly.

[–] MajorHavoc@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I also rotate them quarterly, but since Paramount's app has like 14 tracker libraries, it's not part of my quarterly rotation.

[–] NuPNuA@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Same here, I was there day one watching legally when it was on Amazon, then they pulled the rug out from under me at the last moment, so now it gets torrented. Sorry Mike, blame your managers mate.

[–] xusontha@ls.buckodr.ink 39 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

With how many Lower Decks gifs I've been using, the show should never end

[–] ummthatguy@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] xusontha@ls.buckodr.ink 21 points 2 years ago

T'Ana looks so done with everything lol

[–] iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world 32 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I love Trek but I haven't watched Picard or anything in the last ten years because it's not available.

I also have no interest in download a dozen apps to watch shit, and no interest in paying for individual channels.

Paramount/CBS keeps Trek viewership down by keeping their content walled off.

[–] Pofski@sopuli.xyz 28 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] gnuplusmatt@startrek.website 4 points 2 years ago

buy the discs to show Paramount you're interested?

[–] Seasm0ke@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

VPN to country where its available hasnt let me down so far.

[–] enthusiasticamoeba@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I tried to watch Lower Decks that way (on Prime) but it detected the VPN and didn't let me. 😭

[–] Seasm0ke@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Ahh I have never used it with Amazon, that one is less surprising because of how hard they blow

[–] h14h@midwest.social 25 points 2 years ago

Star Trek is the only reason I'm paying for Paramount+.

If Lower Decks and/or SNW go, I go.

[–] chahk@beehaw.org 18 points 2 years ago

First off, I want very much for Lower Decks and Prodigy to continue.

That said, I would love to see Paramount+ crash and burn to the fucking ground, taking all the execs and bean counters down with it. Same with HBO Max, or Plus, or Minus, or whatever the fuck they rebranded to this week. Let them ALL fail and be sold for pennies on the dollar so that someone with half a brain can pick up the pieces.

[–] Dogyote@slrpnk.net 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

To those complaining about streaming services, I've been using free alternative streaming websites for years and haven't had an issue.

[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Right, but isn't that what also causes these shows getting cancelled? You watching it on a non legit platform means you didn't watch it at all

[–] pachrist@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

No, because the market has become so fragmented, no streaming services are profitable, so there's no show on one that will ever last. Average shows last on TV channels because of ads. A medium performing TV show can last forever on TV with ads. A medium performing TV show on a streaming service gets canceled after a couple seasons to transition resources to a new show. They're looking for that next big flashy thing to draw subscriptions.

In the current broken system, the only options are to continually churn shows, or push ads on streaming services. Both are happening.

So, if you pirate a TV show today, you aren't killing it, and you aren't part of the problem. Paying for the service won't keep the show around, and not paying for it won't kill it either. The show is already dead, you're just not forking over your hard earned cash for a bite at its dead corpse.

[–] Arrakis@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

This interaction reminds me of an Always Sunny episode. The gang are mad because their favourite movie franchise sold out and got bad, so the whole episode is about them complaining with the movie execs about how the changes made to the movie (to attract different audiences in order to try to make the franchise profitable again) all suck, and what they should be doing differently. But the punchline of the episode is they have all along been streaming the movie series and not paying to watch it, so they are part of the problem.

Never expected to see it played out IRL though, and the fact you're being downvoted makes it all a bit less funny...

E: and now me :D maybe the dissenters would like to enlighten us as to how piracy doesn't affect capitalism?

[–] Void_Sloth@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Most people don't want to be pirates they just don't want to pay for an inferior service. You want people to pay then make a product worth paying for that's prorated by country, and they gladly will.

As an example of just how bad it is, pirate streaming sites have sort by date, country, IMDb score, genre, etc. but most paid services don't have any sort feature beyond genre. This effectively makes paid services unusable for a lot of people.

[–] Arrakis@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-piracy by any means, and I'm as bothered by the changing of services as the next person. I just found it amusing that people seemed to disagree that pirating would have an impact on the bottom line of the execs, so that life was imitating art.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because you're pretending like pirating is any different to the bottom line than not buying the product.
There is no difference. They're going to make a marvel movie next year. If I don't go see it did the company lose any money?
No.
Same if I pirate it. Whether or not you actually watch the movie is irrelevant.

[–] Arrakis@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

If you want to see a TV show, but pirate it instead, did the company lose any money*? Yes.

This thread is hilarious.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, dude whether or not I watch a movie has NOTHING to do with the movie company's income.

[–] Arrakis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Stay in high school then once you get past learning basic economics, have another go at thinking.

[–] Pheonixdown@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

The point the other person is trying to make is that if a person wants to watch something, but the price is higher than they value or can afford for the experience they will not pay the price, so the company will not profit. If the person then pirates the content to view it, the company has lost nothing additional.

However, one could also make the argument that the viewer having the ability to pirate lowers what they are willing to pay, thus the company does lose some amount of profit in aggregate over time. This though is not necessarily true for those who lack the means to pay, rather than just the willingness.

Ultimately for people who do have the means, piracy is a symptom more of a service issue rather than a price issue. People generally will follow the path of least resistance to acquire what they desire. For most people a small payment and easy access will lead them not to pirate, but as prices rise, content fractures and UIs enshitify, the aggregate effort crosses the line and they start to withdraw and turn to other methods.

Everyone has their own willingness to pay for things on the demand curve, if companies pick an optimal price, they maximize profits, and aren't harmed by people who cannot or will not pay that price utilizing a non-consumable resource without payment.

[–] Dogyote@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 years ago

True, but if you're not going to subscribe regardless then why not?

[–] gnuplusmatt@startrek.website 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This is one tangible draw back to being on the fediverse instead of mainstream social media - no one at companies are going to be watching or considering engagement here. So if it sort of locks us out of fan noise. I guess keep streaming it

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 years ago

If they get rid of lower decks and don't give us legacy imma scream

[–] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago

Get them to stop making their own damn streaming platforms, pick one or two and just live with those.

I want to see lower decks, but I'm not paying for yet another streaming platform to do so.

[–] ArugulaZ@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago

Paramount couldn't be dumb enough to cancel its best Star Trek series, could it?

(Remembers that someone at Paramount gave us six seasons of Two Broke Girls)

...probably.