I'm an independent media critic. On my website - trekkingwithdennis.com - I write about Star Trek, Star Wars, the video games industry, and many other geekdom-related topics!
Remember Starfield? That space game we got all excited about in 2023? I wouldn’t blame you if you’d forgotten all about it by now; I haven’t touched the game in months myself and I have no real plans to go back to it. Any lingering feelings of positivity I might’ve had toward the game – and developer Bethesda Game Studios in a more general sense – evaporated pretty quickly when microtransactions and paid mods were added to this single-player title, so I’ve pretty much moved on.
But the launch of Shattered Space – the first of several larger pieces of DLC that are planned for the game – has dragged up the shambling corpse of Starfield for me once again, and I couldn’t let it pass by without sharing my thoughts on what I’ve seen… and offering some unsolicited advice to Bethesda and parent company Microsoft. There are things to consider for both Starfield’s future as well as any potential new games that Bethesda may be lucky enough to make. Let’s get into all of that today.
So far at least, Shattered Space doesn’t appear to have saved (or even really helped) Starfield.
The reaction to Shattered Space has been mediocre at best outside of Bethesda and Starfield mega-fans. The expansion is currently sitting at a “mixed” rating on Steam… but far more worrying for Microsoft and Bethesda should be the real lack of engagement that Shattered Space is driving. There are, at time of writing, fewer than 1,000 reviews of Shattered Space on Steam – a number that seems pitifully small for the first major expansion pack for the newest Bethesda role-playing game. And the release of Shattered Space didn’t give the game much of a boost in terms of player numbers, either; Starfield was beaten by both Fallout 4 and Skyrim on the day the expansion launched and every day since.
This is even more alarming when you consider that many players will have already pre-purchased Shattered Space last year. In order to pick up the “deluxe” version of Starfield (or whatever it was called), which gave players access to the game on its real release date instead of almost a week later, players had to fork over an additional £35 on Xbox, Steam, and even Game Pass. Included in that price was Shattered Space, so even players left underwhelmed by the base game should have still had access to this DLC. The fact that so few of them could be bothered to even download it or check it out should be ringing alarm bells at Bethesda HQ and for Xbox, too.
Shattered Space’s launch (date highlighted) didn’t bring in a lot of players. Image Credit: SteamDB (above) and Steam (below).
The mixed reception to Shattered Space from those who did bother to fire it up is something that I think could’ve been avoided – and could at least be mitigated in the future. But it would require a change in approach from Bethesda. I’ll try to explain what I mean.
Over the last few weeks and months, Bethesda has been rolling out updates to Starfield. Among the biggest of these have been the rover/buggy, which allows players to traverse the game’s maps more quickly, and also the ability to decorate the interior of spaceships. Both of these were highly-requested by players, and the fact that Bethesda added them is a positive thing.
But part of the disappointment some players and critics are noting with Shattered Space is that it’s “only” a story expansion. The DLC doesn’t add anything of substance to Starfield beyond one new planet and some quests, and that’s leaving some people feeling underwhelmed yet again.
A scene from the Shattered Space trailer.
A few months ago, I wrote a piece here on the website in which I argued that Starfield’s first piece of DLC needed to be comparable in how transformative it is to Cyberpunk 2077′s Phantom Liberty, which was released last year. That expansion came with a new area of the map and new quests – just like Shattered Space. But it also came with a major update that overhauled whole in-game systems, completely fixed some of the biggest disappointments with the game, and significantly improved the experience. That’s what Starfield needed… and that’s what it still needs.
The conversation around Shattered Space might’ve been different if things like detailed city maps, interior ship decorating, and the rover vehicle had all arrived along with it. It wouldn’t have fundamentally “fixed” Starfield, but it might’ve given the game more of a boost and gotten more players talking about the game in a positive light for a change. Instead, this opportunity was missed.
Starfield has a rover now.
So here’s my advice for Microsoft and Bethesda: stop the trickle of minor updates. Obviously you’ve gotta keep working on fixing bugs, so there can’t be a total lack of patches, but from now on, everything should be saved up for the next DLC. The next and final DLC.
Take two years – or three, if that’s what you need. Use that time to craft a larger expansion to Starfield’s world and story – perhaps one with an actual ending to the game’s main quest. But save up all of the smaller things that might’ve been added along the way, and add them all at once. Instead of trying to wring as much money as possible out of a disappointed and shrinking player base, focus on transforming the game into something that more people might actually want to buy. For me, that also means stripping out the entire microtransaction marketplace… but since that doesn’t seem realistic, at the very least focus on making one significantly larger expansion that can launch alongside overhauls to in-game systems. In a word, make Phantom Liberty… but for Starfield.
Starfield’s executive producer Todd Howard.
Starfield feels like a very greedy game right now, and £35 for a single expansion pack that only really adds one new location and questline isn’t doing anything to change the narrative. A “single-player live service” type of game – which is clearly what Bethesda wanted to create – is absolutely not my thing and never will be, and for that reason I’m almost certainly never going to play Starfield again. But even knowing that, and knowing what kind of penny-pinching game this is… Shattered Space still seems pretty unexceptional.
There should be a way around this, but only if Bethesda and Microsoft are willing to listen to feedback. Right now, Starfield is on its last legs. It’s been surpassed in so many ways by its contemporaries, and most players have just moved on already. Shattered Space, because of how it was designed and launched, was never going to bring them back en masse. And part of that is because of the way the DLC was structured and how these other free updates have been drip-fed to players over the months since Starfield launched. At a time when the game needed a win, decisions taken earlier in the year tripped up Shattered Space’s launch… and the end result seems to be that most players just aren’t paying attention any more.
Microtransactions and paid mods have been added to Starfield since the game was released last year.
For me, Starfield would only become playable again if the microtransactions and paid mods were removed and all of that content added either totally for free or as part of the next expansion. Given the lack of things like costumes, skins, and other cosmetic items in both the base game and Shattered Space, I’d argue that all of those should be added for free. But rather than doing so bit by bit in small updates over the span of months, what Starfield really needs is one big update and one big expansion that can get players talking about the game once again. Phantom Liberty for Cyberpunk 2077 is my go-to point of comparison, but I’m sure you can think of other similarly large and similarly transformative expansion packs that have been released over the years.
As to the content of Shattered Space itself… I have to say that, based on what I remember of the game, this House Va’Ruun stuff seems like it should’ve been part of the base game from day one. I mean, you literally have a companion character who’s an ex-member of this faction, and they’re mentioned multiple times across the main quest. Shattered Space, having been planned and developed alongside Starfield, basically feels like cut content to me.
I’m over Starfield at this point.
I’m not surprised that Shattered Space hasn’t turned things around for Starfield based on what I’ve seen. And as someone who was genuinely looking forward to this game once upon a time, my concern now is that Bethesda is running out of chances to make Starfield into the game that I thought it should’ve been. Without a serious re-think and complete change in approach, I don’t see that happening. And given how brutal Microsoft can be when games and studios aren’t performing to their high expectations… well, let’s just say it probably isn’t a great time to be a Bethesda executive right now.
Despite how I feel, I will be keeping up with the latest Starfield news to see if there are going to be changes or improvements in the future. I sincerely hope that Bethesda takes its time with the next update and expansion, because that feels like the game’s best chance to come back strong and re-capture at least some of its lapsed players.
But I have to be honest: the microtransaction marketplace has killed any residual support I had for the game, and it will be a weight around its neck for as long as it continues to exist. Charging £10 for a single mission, £7 or £8 for a tiny pack of cosmetic items, and selling in-game currency at the usual awkward exchange rate are all truly scummy, shitty things for a massive company to try to get away with. I loathe Starfield’s microtransactions, and seeing the way Bethesda has behaved not only with this game but with Skyrim’s “creation club” and Fallout 76 too… it’s really put me off The Elder Scrolls VI. I can’t root for Starfield’s redemption as long as this stupid live service marketplace remains in a single-player game.
Starfield and the Shattered Space DLC are out now for PC and Xbox Series consoles. Starfield, Shattered Space, and all other properties discussed above are the copyright of Bethesda Softworks, Bethesda Game Studios, Xbox Game Studios, and/or Microsoft. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Minor spoilers may be present for some of the titles on this list.
Happy Spooktober!
It’s officially the spookiest, scariest, most horrifying month of the year, and that can only mean one thing: it’s time to watch some horror films! Horror is not my favourite genre most of the time, but when October rolls around I’m happy to dip my toes in the dark waters of the scary side of cinema.
There have been some exceptional horror films made over the years, and the genre is currently in vogue. Some of the biggest films of the last decade have been in the horror genre; titles like Stephen King’s It, A Quiet Place, and The Conjuring all come to mind. These blockbusters broke out of the horror niche to attract huge audiences – and that’s great!
Pennywise the clown from Stephen King’s It.
When I was a kid, I moved in nerdy friendship groups where watching horror films was almost a rite of passage. Being able to brag that you’d watched a particularly scary film at the cinema (or rented it on VHS from the shop) was a big deal – though I’m sure most of us were just putting on a brave face in those days! As mentioned, though, I’m not the world’s biggest horror fan these days, and when I do choose something spooky for Halloween, it tends to be a lighter, more kid-friendly title! I guess I’m just a big old scaredy-cat.
So to mark the arrival of Spooky Season, let’s pick five horror films that I think are worth watching. I’ve had fun with all of these films over the years, and I recommend each of them.
Ready to go trick-or-treating?
As always, my usual caveats apply: this is by no means an exhaustive list! There are literally thousands of horror films out there, and I’m only picking a few on this occasion. And all of this is simply the subjective opinion of one person – a person who isn’t a big horror fan! So if I pick a film you loathe or skip a film you think should be included… that’s okay! There’s plenty of room for differences of opinion when talking about cinema.
With all of that out of the way, let’s jump into the spookiest list I’ve ever put together!
Film #1: Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror 1922
Let’s step back in time to the earliest days of cinema and watch a bona fide classic! I watched Nosferatu for the very first time this year, and while silent films are usually not my thing at all… I have to say that I found a surprisingly coherent film. The story behind Nosferatu is almost as compelling as the film itself: it was produced in Germany just after the end of the First World War, and ended up being sued by the estate of author Bram Stoker as a shameless rip-off of his Dracula novel. The film’s producers lost the case and were ordered to destroy all copies and prints of Nosferatu – but thankfully some survived!
You know the classic vampire story by now: Count Orlok (no, his name isn’t Nosferatu!) lives in a castle in Transylvania, feeding on the blood of innocent humans. He moves to Germany to continue his reign of terror, after enlisting a man to buy a house for him there. But can he be stopped in time? One of the all-time classics of cinema, and a film that did more than most to establish the foundations of the horror genre, Nosferatu is worth a watch for any horror fan. With the film being out of copyright, you can find high-quality copies online with ease.
Film #2: The Hole 2001
This film really creeped me out when I first watched it! The Hole recounts the story of a group of teenagers who become trapped in an underground bunker having sneaked inside to throw a party. As the situation becomes increasingly desperate, some of them are killed in pretty gruesome ways. The film documents the descent into madness of its main characters, and touches on some pretty dark themes along the way.
The Hole was an early project for Keira Knightley, who later went on to star in films like Pirates of the Caribbean and 2005’s Pride & Prejudice. Thora Birch takes the lead role, and The Hole tells a really disturbing tale of teenage love gone horribly wrong. There are twists and turns along the way, and I was on the edge of my seat most of the time.
Film #3: Annihilation 2018
Annihilation seems to be overlooked, but it’s a surprisingly strong sci-fi/horror title that’s well worth your time. There are some genuinely shocking “mutated” animals, and moments of body horror as the mysterious Shimmer begins to affect the humans sent to find out what’s happening inside it. There are relatively few out-and-out jump-scares, which is something I appreciated, but there are plenty of moments in the film that linger long after the credits have rolled.
There’s some technobabble about how the alien Shimmer is distorting the DNA of the plants and creatures within its boundary, and the scientific focus of the expedition is something relatively uncommon in the horror field. Alex Garland, who directed Annihilation, also directed 2024’s Civil War – a review of which you can find by clicking or tapping here, if you’re interested.
Film #4: Pan’s Labyrinth (El Laberinto del Fauno) 2006
I think there are enough disturbing and scary moments in Guillermo del Toro’s Pan’s Labyrinth to earn it a place on a list like this one! It’s actually been a while since I watched it, but some scenes and moments are still etched in my mind eighteen years later. Young Ofelia is tasked with completing three trials to prove her worth as the reincarnation of a princess from a fairy-tale realm.
Some of the puppets and prosthetics created for Pan’s Labyrinth are truly outstanding – and grotesque. And the film’s twin storylines set in the dark underworld and Francoist Spain are both deeply engaging. The young performer who took on the incredibly challenging role of Ofelia really excelled, and del Toro’s direction is fantastic as well. A disturbing film in many ways… and well worth a watch.
Film #5: Hotel Transylvania 2012
Despite its themes of death and horror, Halloween is still a holiday for the little ones! So I’ve chosen to include a kid-friendly entry on the list, and this year it’s the turn of Hotel Transylvania. The original film was a blast, as an unexpected human guest shows up at Dracula’s hotel – which is supposed to be a refuge for monsters, vampires, ghouls, and other horror movie staples.
What ensues is a classic comedy with a romantic sub-plot, one set against the backdrop of a haunted hotel/castle populated by Dracula and his clan. There’s a ton of fun to be had here, especially at Halloween, and Adam Sandler puts in what might just be my favourite performance of his as this version of Count Dracula. Hotel Transylvania has since been spun into a franchise – because of course it has – but for me, the first film is still the best of the bunch.
Bonus TV Series: The Terror Season 1 (2018)
In addition to the films listed above, I thought it could be fun to highlight one of my favourite horror TV shows of the last few years. The Terror takes Franklin’s lost expedition to the Arctic as its starting point, and weaves a tale of explorers trapped on the ice while being hunted by a soul-eating monster. The crew of the expedition grow increasingly desperate as they’re snowbound and trapped in ice, leading to a desperate bid to reach civilisation.
The monster in The Terror is largely unseen (in the style of films like Jaws), and I think it works incredibly well. There are excellent performances from Jared Harris, Tobias Menzies, and Adam Nagaitis, among others, and the world of The Terror’s first season really grabbed me and pulled me into the world of the mid-19th Century. At time of writing, a third season of this anthology series has just been greenlit, so maybe we’ll watch that together next Halloween. Is that the first time you’ve seen someone mention Halloween 2025?
So that’s it!
Happy Spooktober!
We’ve picked five spooky films – and one bonus spooky TV programme – to watch this October.
I hope this has been a bit of fun. I like to branch out and explore some horror films at this time of year – even though I wouldn’t usually devote much time to the genre. There are a couple of films and series on the horizon that I’d like to take a look at this month, too, and I have a couple of other Halloweeny ideas that may (or may not) make their way onto the website before the 31st. So I hope you’ll stay tuned here on Trekking with Dead-nnis… if you dare!
All that’s left is for me to wish you a happy and spooky October. This really is my favourite time of year!
All films and TV shows discussed above are the copyright of their respective studio, broadcaster, distributor, or company. Some stock images courtesy of Unsplash and Pixabay. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Trek: Strange New Worlds Seasons 1-2 and Star Trek: Lower Decks.
Before Season 2 aired, we got an announcement at one of the Comic-Cons, Star Trek Days, or other such live event about a crossover episode – and I was pretty excited! Not excited enough to push through my Star Trek burnout to watch it last year, but we’ve been over that so let’s not get back into it. Suffice to say that Those Old Scientists captured my attention long before I sat down to watch it… and I had pretty high hopes that the episode would be fun, if nothing else.
Star Trek doesn’t do full-blown crossovers like this very often, looking back. If we don’t count re-cast characters in shows like Discovery or the return of “legacy” characters from shows that are no longer airing, then the last time there was a fully-fledged crossover episode was quite a long time ago. Back then, characters like Troi and Barclay cropped up in a couple of Voyager episodes, and the Enterprise-D even paid a visit to DS9. There was also These Are The Voyages – the finale of Enterprise – but maybe the less said about that last example the better!
Director Jonathan Frakes in a behind-the-scenes photo.
Those Old Scientists brought characters from Lower Decks into Strange New Worlds, and it promised a degree of light-heartedness imported from Star Trek’s first foray into the world of animated comedy. Add into the mix Star Trek legend Jonathan Frakes as director, and the stage was set for a truly outstanding episode.
I had a blast with Those Old Scientists – the title of which, in case you missed it, is a pun on the initials T. O. S.; a joke that first appeared in Lower Decks and that makes reference to the way Trekkies have referred to The Original Series for decades. Now that I think of it, Those Old Scientists could be the first self-referential Star Trek episode title, and the first to be named for a pun!
Ensign Boimler as you’ve never seen him before!
But I don’t think Those Old Scientists was entirely perfect or free from narrative flaws. While I had a ton of fun watching Boimler and Mariner stumbling their way through the 23rd Century, there are a couple of weaknesses in the way the episode was scripted and structured that took away from the more emotional and entertaining moments. That isn’t to say the episode was “bad” by any stretch, and I love that Paramount greenlit a crossover like this. But I would be remiss not to point out some of the moments that didn’t work – especially because there’s a recurring theme that has also taken the shine off of other Star Trek projects in recent years.
In short, Those Old Scientists tried to cram in too many character interactions and sub-plots, and these came at the expense of what should have been the episode’s more powerful emotional moments. Too many scenes and meetings between 23rd and 24th Century characters felt rushed… and when several of these could have been so much more interesting, entertaining, and/or emotional with just a couple of extra minutes awarded them, I just think that’s a bit of a shame.
Dr M’Benga with Boimler.
This is something that modern Star Trek has done in other ways in other episodes and shows, and I find myself making some variation of the same remark over and over again: if there isn’t enough time to do justice to a storyline or to make a scene work, then put it back on the shelf. That doesn’t mean “never do this, it’s a terrible idea,” but rather that every episode and every story has to prioritise; an episode can’t possibly cram everything in. And in several places, Those Old Scientists felt… crammed.
I would have loved to have seen more of four character interactions and storylines that should’ve been key to the episode’s success. Firstly, the Orion captain and his apparent desire not to be considered a pirate. Secondly, Mariner’s conversation with Uhura and how Mariner – potentially – may have been the one to push Uhura to realise that taking breaks from work is important. Third, Boimler’s conversation with Nurse Chapel about Spock, and the possible ramifications on the Chapel-Spock relationship. And finally, the ensigns’ conversation with Captain Pike, in which he seemed to allude to his impending accident and disability.
Captain Pike toward the end of the story.
Those moments felt like the core of the episode – but a desire on the part of the writers and director to have Mariner and Boimler meet everyone and go all over the ship cut into those moments. An episode like Those Old Scientists needed to prioritise what was important so those aspects could really shine through… and I can’t help but feel that the right balance wasn’t struck this time.
When what we ultimately got were a handful of moments with other main characters, I can’t help but feel I’d have traded most or even all of those for a few more minutes on those bigger, more impactful storylines. Boimler’s moment with Dr M’Benga or when he visited the bridge, as well as some of Ortegas’ lines when she was with Mariner and Uhura… these were fun but ultimately felt like fluff in an episode where other storylines could and should have taken priority. As fun as some of these moments were, perhaps the real issue is that there were just too many of them in an episode that didn’t have time for it. If Those Old Scientists had been structured completely differently from day one, with a focus on entertainment and comedy without a more serious side… maybe it would’ve been okay. But then I can see the potential pitfalls with that idea, too.
I would’ve liked the story to have spent longer on a handful of key moments.
The Orion captain felt so underdeveloped that I don’t even remember his name. I liked the idea of a member of a race known for one overwhelmingly negative stereotype wishing to be seen on his own terms. In that sense, the Orion captain was not unlike the Ferengi scientist from The Next Generation Season 6 episode Suspicions. That idea can work well, and a story that touches on harmful stereotypes and building bridges between the Federation and other factions is something I’d be supportive of.
But this character and his ship needed way more time on screen to to justice to something with such a heavy theme, and the result of the short runtime dedicated to this idea meant it was underwhelming – especially at the end. Captain Pike promises the Orion captain that his people will be known as the scientists who discovered the time-portal (apparently he didn’t make good on that promise, but that’s a whole other tangent), and the Orion captain basically says “oh, neat,” and then toddles off stage. There was no depth to a character who felt like he should’ve been way more developed – and I lament the missed opportunity to tell a more complex story with this “not all Orions are pirates” idea.
The Orion captain felt pretty one-dimensional.
Mariner’s time with Uhura and Boimler’s conversation with Chapel both needed a bit more time – but these moments still managed to convey at least the majority of what they were supposed to. If the only criticism I really have of these is “I wish we got more time with some interesting and unconventional character pairings,” then that isn’t really a terrible thing. Again, I just feel like opportunities were missed to give a bit more depth to these moments.
Perhaps, though, this is something Strange New Worlds will pick up in a future episode or season. Chapel’s relationship with Spock was always destined to burn out, but maybe both of them will think on what Boimler said and that could lead to drama or interesting conversations in the future. Likewise with Uhura, perhaps her conversation with Mariner will help her change and grow – though in that case I’d argue we’ve already seen some of that growth over the past season-and-a-half.
Ensigns Mariner and Uhura.
The final place where I felt Those Old Scientists needed to have spent more time was the conversation between the two ensigns and Captain Pike. After they were caught trying to contact the Orions, both ensigns were in trouble – but Pike also hinted to them that he knew what lay in store for himself in the future. This should’ve been a huge revelation to Boimler in particular, and maybe Pike would’ve wanted to push these two future-dwellers to see what they knew – or at least share something with them that he can’t with anyone else except for Una and Spock. There was potential here.
Instead, Pike launched head-first into a “traumatic backstory” about his father and his birthday that wouldn’t have felt out-of-place in Discovery… and no, I don’t mean that as a compliment. This moment just wasn’t set up very well, and the idea that Pike would simply dump this exposition onto two people he doesn’t know (and who he clearly shouldn’t feel are trustworthy) just missed the mark for me. It’s something that could’ve worked if we’d had more time for this scene and maybe had another moment or two between this trio of characters earlier on.
Boimler and Mariner in Pike’s quarters.
Okay, that’s basically all of my criticisms out of the way! So now we’re free to talk about what I liked… which is basically everything else in Those Old Scientists.
First of all, the time-portal. This is exactly the kind of randomly weird artefact that Kirk, Picard, and Janeway seemed to stumble upon almost every week. An ancient relic of a long-lost civilisation powered by a magical macguffin… everything about it, including its design, felt wonderfully old-school Star Trek, and I’m 100% there for that!
This is what Strange New Worlds has been so good at, in my opinion: recapturing the feel of “classic” Star Trek in a way that other modern productions haven’t always managed to do. There was something really fun about Pike and the crew finding this time-portal that harkened back to the days of The Next Generation and The Original Series, and it would’ve made for a fantastic self-contained story even without the Lower Decks crossover.
Director Jonathan Frakes with Babs Olusanmokun, Jack Quaid, and Ethan Peck on the set of Those Old Scientists.
We should also talk about how good Boimler and Mariner looked when they crossed over into live-action. Jack Quaid and Tawny Newsome resemble their 2D characters – so that’s a good start – but the costume design for their uniforms, the prop work for their combadges, and particularly the hairstyling to bring Boimler’s iconic purple quiff and Mariner’s bushy ponytail to life were all fantastic.
There are some animated characters for whom this crossover idea just wouldn’t work – for a number of reasons. Not every voice actor can be as good at live-action work; the two skills are not the same. Not every actor bears even a vague resemblance to their animated counterpart. And so on. On this front, Those Old Scientists succeeded – and it was so much better to reimagine Boimler and Mariner in live action than to try to have Pike and the crew awkwardly interacting with animated/CGI avatars. That would have been a travesty!
The animated main characters of Lower Decks.
And since we’re talking about animation: I loved that we got an animated epilogue with Pike and the Strange New Worlds crew drawn in Lower Decks’ distinctive style. It was a blast to see our favourite characters reimagined in this way, and the “weird alien drink” angle even gave it an in-universe explanation for why the characters might see themselves in that kind of distorted way.
With Paramount continuing to struggle financially, with the matter of a sale and long-term ownership still unresolved, and with the likes of Discovery and Picard coming to an end… I can’t help but wonder if there might’ve been a sort of “backdoor pilot” angle to this epilogue. You know, Paramount just testing the waters to see if an animated Strange New Worlds might be viable. I could be completely wrong about that – and the show has been renewed for a fourth season already that (presumably, at least) will continue to be live-action! But like The Original Series before it all those years ago, I can’t help but wonder if an animated continuation might be on the cards one day. Obviously I’d rather have more live-action, but if the choice is animation or cancellation… I think Those Old Scientists has opened a door, at least.
Could more animated Star Trek be on the agenda?
One final point on animation in Those Old Scientists: the animated opening title sequence was amazing! Seeing the whole thing recreated – with a couple of inclusions from Lower Decks for good measure – was just incredibly cute and not at all what I was expecting. The Enterprise looked great in that style – similar, in some ways, to how it appeared a few years ago in the Short Treks episode Ephraim and Dot. After the opening aboard the Cerritos, this was a great way to mix things up heading into the main part of the episode.
I think I’m inclined to give Those Old Scientists a bit of a pass on the whole “contaminating the timeline” thing. Star Trek has occasionally stumbled over time travel stories – and I’ve said more than once that time travel isn’t usually my favourite story premise in the franchise – but because this episode had a less serious tone for the most part, I think we can overlook most of that. Boimler and Mariner undeniably messed with the timeline – but no more so than other characters elsewhere in the franchise going all the way back to Kirk’s crew and their early adventures with time travel.
Boimler and Mariner definitely contaminated the timeline!
As a Trekkie, it’s been a lot of fun to watch a character like Boimler on Lower Decks and how he geeks out at things that you or I would get just as excited about – and that theme continued in Those Old Scientists. Set aside Boimler’s excitement to meet his heroes like Pike, Spock, and Una – his enthusiasm for small things like computer panels or a tricorder really elevated the episode and made it a lot more fun. It reminded me of visiting Star Trek: The Exhibition in the mid-1990s, or more recently the 50th Anniversary exhibit in Blackpool here in the UK. I was fascinated and excited to see some of the props from Star Trek… and Boimler was, too. That point of connection felt great as a long-term fan.
But it wasn’t only Boimler who got excited. Mariner also met one of her heroes: Uhura. The scenes between the two of them were great, particularly as Mariner came to realise that this younger version of the person she had learned about and looked up to was somewhat different to what she’d expected!
Boimler and Mariner in engineering.
There were plenty of funny and cute moments throughout the episode as Boimler and Mariner stumbled their way through the 23rd Century, and I had a smile on my face much of the time. There were a couple of missed opportunities, though; character moments and storylines that really needed a bit longer in the spotlight to truly shine. As much as I enjoyed this crossover and feel like it was truly “made for the fans,” I can’t help but feel that Those Old Scientists tried to cram too much into its runtime.
I don’t want to be too negative, though. By far my biggest takeaway from the episode is how fun it was to get a crossover like this – and if we’re fortunate enough to see Star Trek remain in production over the next few years, I hope Those Old Scientists won’t be the last crossover episode. With the franchise’s 60th anniversary only a couple of years away, that could be a great opportunity to do something like this, bringing together characters from different parts of Star Trek for one spectacular story!
Another thing I’m reminded of is that I need to finish catching up on Lower Decks! Season 5 is right around the corner, and I’d love to get back up to speed with the series before it goes off the air. This was an enjoyable, entertaining crossover – and I’m glad to have belatedly seen it.
Star Trek: Strange New Worlds Seasons 1 and 2 are available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. The series is also available on DVD and Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including Strange New Worlds and all other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This review contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
1999 was probably one of the most fun and exciting years of my life! It’s been a quarter of a century since then, so I thought we could spend a few minutes looking back and reflecting as we acknowledge that milestone.
I think it can be hard to explain to folks who didn’t live through the millennium – or who are too young to remember it clearly – but the end of the ’90s really was a landmark event for many of us. 1999 was the final countdown to the biggest party of the century, and it also came along at an interesting point in history that really amplified many of those celebratory qualities. I’d like to take a look at all of that today, share some of my recollections of the year, and also look at a few films, games, and TV shows that debuted in or were running through 1999.
Let’s load up some old memories together!
Let’s get one thing clear right off the bat, before the pedants jump in! Technically the year 2000 wasn’t the first year of either the 3rd millennium or the 21st Century – those honours fall to 2001. But for all intents and purposes, New Year’s Eve 1999 is when the switch happened for most of us: this was the moment the ’90s ended, the moment years began with a 2 instead of a 1, and the moment it felt like things had switched. At the time that seemed to annoy some nerds… but who cares, right? It’s party time!
1999 also coincided with a rare alignment of social, economic, political, and diplomatic positivity and stability – at least here in the UK. The end of “the Troubles” in Northern Ireland after decades, the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, a new and relatively popular government with a substantial governing majority, inflation at a low and stable level, the economy growing, British entertainment from books to bands taking the world by storm… the tail end of the ’90s was quite the time to be coming of age!
The Good Friday Agreement brought an end to decades of conflict in Northern Ireland in 1997.
The end of the Cold War in particular led to one of history’s most infamously wrong assessments: Francis Fukuyama’s book The End of History and the Last Man. Fukuyama argued that the collapse of communism meant that liberal democracy had “won,” and that humanity had reached “the end of history.” As strange and silly as that argument may sound today, that was how many people felt at the time.
Technology was also in its ascendency – and the growth in computing power year on year seemed to be without end. A PC I bought in 1997 – for no small amount of money at the time – felt pretty out-of-date by 1999, struggling to run more up-to-date games and software that rapid advances in technology made possible. This was also the time of the switch from 2D to 3D graphics in games, and what I consider to be the real beginning of video games as a narrative art form that could rival film and television. Later in the year, to mark the anniversary of its release, we’ll take a look at one of the landmark games of this era that really encapsulated that feeling for me.
Do you remember this song?
As dawn was breaking on New Year’s Day 1999, I remember being hit with a sense of “wow, this is really it!” It felt like there was about to be a 365-day-long buildup to the party of a lifetime – a party that would end when the year 2000 began! As Prince sang on his hit song 1999, which had been released seventeen years earlier: “2000 zero-zero, party’s over, oops, out of time!” Do you remember that song? It must’ve been played incessantly on the radio in 1999, and I’m sure it was the last song many folks heard at New Year’s Eve parties that year!
But before we reached the biggest party of the millennium, there was an entire year to get through! For me, this was a year of school, Saturday jobs, trips into town with friends, and being stuck at home with the family. I know that I’m looking back with rose-tinted glasses and over-romanticising some of those memories, because school in general wasn’t great for me, and my anxiety kept me on edge a lot of the time. But there were some highlights: I starred in a school play in the spring, then took a leading role in organising the end-of-term Christmas event for the first time. My elderly English teacher used to drag a bunch of us to church to perform a reading or two, but in ’99 I was given the task of organising it – choosing the music, the running order, and so on. It felt like a huge responsibility at the time – and I remember it being a lot of fun.
A typical British high street in 1999. Photo Credit: James Cridland via Flickr; james.cridland.net, CC BY 2.0
In terms of media, I was doing pretty good in 1999! My parents had a VCR in the living room, and with a few blank tapes of my own, I was free to record and re-watch some of my favourite films and TV episodes. I was also able to rent videos – there was a local video rental place that had a selection of the latest films, and the local library service had also expanded into video for the first time. The library was actually a great place to find VHS tapes – it was cheaper than the rental shop at only £1 per video, and you got to keep them for an entire week! Toward the end of the ’90s, Star Trek even started popping up at the biggest library in the area.
I also had a PC, and although I was only running Windows 95, I was still able to play some pretty fun games. I would’ve certainly still been playing Age of Empires and The Rise of Rome expansion pack in 1999, and probably Actua Golf 2, as well. I got Midtown Madness in the summer, and I played that to death! Tearing up the streets of Chicago and getting chased by the police was so much fun.
Remember when computers were beige?
But my PC was meant to be used for school and homework first and foremost – so my gaming platform of choice was a Nintendo 64. 1999 was the year of Donkey Kong 64, Fifa ’99, and Jet Force Gemini – as well as multiplayer offerings like the venerable Mario Kart 64 and Mario Party, which were great fun whenever I had people over and we could hang out together in the living room! Nintendo is one of the few companies these days to still regularly make couch co-op titles, with the focus of multiplayer games long ago having moved online. Again, this is the nostalgia talking: but I do miss the old days of playing games with a friend or two huddled around the TV!
1999 was the year that the Dreamcast launched in the UK – soon to be followed and overshadowed by the PlayStation 2. I wouldn’t get a Dreamcast until the following year, but it’s worth noting as this was also the year that Shenmue was released. To this day Shenmue is one of my favourite games of all-time, and it was the first game that I played that truly felt cinematic. The Dreamcast was a massive leap forward compared with my old Nintendo 64, which had already been an enormous jump from the old 2D world of the SNES just a few years earlier. The rate of technological change – which, as a teenager, I mostly experienced through the growing and evolving graphics of video games – was phenomenal during this era.
The venerable Nintendo 64 was my games console of choice in 1999.
And I think that kind of encapsulates 1999 and the late ’90s in general: the rapid advancement of technology and the rapid uptake of technology. Prices continued to fall through the ’90s, making these things affordable. In 1990, my household didn’t have a computer, a games console, or a mobile phone. By 1999, we had two computers, two games consoles, and a mobile phone each for myself and my parents (my younger sister would get one a few years later).
That’s unprecedented, isn’t it? The level of change in technology and connectivity – I don’t think anything like it has happened before or since. It’s a trend that would continue into the 2000s and beyond – and depending where you are in the world it might’ve been a bit earlier or a bit later. But for me, at least, it feels like this period of great change is anchored around 1999 and the turn of the millennium.
A Motorola mobile phone. I had a similar one in 1999.
Maybe that’s because it was my “coming-of-age” moment, and maybe everyone looks back on their late teens in a similar way. But I’m not so sure about that! If I compare 1999 with when my parents would’ve been in the same position in the early ’60s, I just don’t see the same kind of technological change. Societal changes, sure – the ’60s was the decade of the Beatles, the sexual revolution, and so on. But would they look back on, say, 1965 the same way as I look back on 1999? I doubt it.
This technological change came along at a time of optimism and hope. As the millennium approached, things really seemed to be looking up… and that’s a feeling which, looking back, I don’t think I’ve felt again in twenty-five years. Definitely not to the same degree. By the time we got to 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, that sense of hope for a more peaceful future had faded. When the financial crash happened a few years later and austerity policies came in, it was entirely dead.
There was a real sense of optimism as the sun set for the final time in 1999.
But let’s not end on such a depressing note, eh?
I’ve picked five films, five games, five TV shows, and five songs from 1999 that I think are worth your time, and I thought it could be fun to go through them together. The lists are not exhaustive (obviously) and are in no particular order. They’re just a few titles from this landmark year that I enjoyed – and kind of encapsulate the mood of the year for me.
Film #1: Tarzan
Tarzan feels like an underappreciated gem from the Disney renaissance. A great soundtrack from Phil Collins contributed to making this Disneyfied take on the classic tale of the “wild man of the jungle” feel unique and special, and the film really packs an emotional punch. There are some adorable scenes between Tarzan and his adoptive family, as well as some great moments of humour, too. Tarzan can feel overlooked, sometimes – slipping into the cracks in between bigger releases that continue to see attention from Disney. But it’s a great film in its own right, and well worth a watch.
Film #2: Deep Blue Sea
Genetically-engineered sharks? What could go wrong?! Everything, apparently, and this horror/disaster film shows us how. The premise is undeniably silly, but after sequels to Jaws had failed to recapture the fear factor of sharks, Deep Blue Sea demonstrated that there were still plenty of things to do with the ocean’s apex predators. Samuel L. Jackson is the standout performer, and the film is also an early project for producer Akiva Goldsman – known more recently for his work on the Star Trek franchise. A “guilty pleasure” type of film, perhaps… but it was a blast to watch at the cinema back in 1999!
Film #3: Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace
The Phantom Menace isn’t my favourite Star Wars film, and that’s putting it mildly! But as someone who’d come to appreciate the Star Wars franchise in the ’90s, I was undeniably excited to watch it at the cinema for the first time. Getting tickets wasn’t easy, and the theatre was packed! The Phantom Menace may not have been my thing, but it successfully brought on board legions of new Star Wars fans and set the stage for the franchise’s continued expansion.
Film #4: South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut
After the first season of South Park had proven to be a hit, creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker branched out and made a feature film. Bigger, Longer, and Uncut is typical South Park fare – it’s crude, rude, and tremendously funny. South Park still manages to stay fresh; recent episodes about the pandemic and the special Worldwide Privacy Tour have been great. But in many ways, the film still feels like the series’ high-water mark. Oh, and it had a great soundtrack!
Film #5: The Matrix
The Matrix is excellent on so many levels! It’s a pioneering work of cinematography, with its innovative “bullet-time” being repeated – but never bettered – in many other works of media in the years since. Its sci-fi story of humans trapped in a pleasant but fake world dominated by machines rests atop a deep metaphor that I think many folks can find relatable. I certainly do. And who knows: maybe the machines were right. Maybe 1999 was the perfect time period for their digital world!
Song #1: Sitting Down Here – Lene Marlin
This song’s gentle acoustic pop melody masks some pretty dark lyrics about following and spying on a love interest! But Sitting Down Here is pleasant to listen to, and I can remember buying the CD single after hearing it on the long-running music show Top of the Pops!
Song #2: Ready to Run – The Dixie Chicks
Country music isn’t as popular here in the UK as it is in its native land, but I’ve always had a soft spot for the genre. The Dixie Chicks are one of the late ’90s/early ’00s most popular country acts, and I daresay many British people would have at least heard one or two of their songs. Their album Fly was released in ’99, and it was a great album. Ready to Run was the lead single from the album and it peaked at number two on the US country chart – as well as reaching a creditable 53rd place in the UK charts.
Song #3: We’re Going To Ibiza! – Vengaboys
The Vengaboys, a Dutch electronic dance/club group, broke through to worldwide fame in 1999 thanks to their Party Album. By far the biggest hit was Boom Boom Boom Boom, but We’re Going To Ibiza! also topped the charts here in the UK. Sometimes it felt like you couldn’t turn on the radio without hearing the Vengaboys, but I didn’t mind! The up-tempo, happy songs were a ton of fun.
Song #4: Livin’ La Vida Loca – Ricky Martin
Ricky Martin’s English-language debut topped the charts around the world, and in style! Livin’ La Vida Loca is just a hugely fun track, the kind that makes you want to get up and dance! I remember it being played at the Millennium Eve party I attended, and it was just a great song to let loose and dance to.
Song #5: Bring It All Back – S Club 7
S Club 7’s first chart-topper, Bring It All Back kicked off the pop band’s career in mid-1999. It was also the theme song to their Miami 7 TV show, and it was a fun bubblegum pop song to dance to… even though it seemed incredibly cringeworthy in the friend groups I moved in in those days! Still, listening to S Club 7 in secret was possible – and a guilty pleasure at the time!
TV Show #1: SpongeBob SquarePants
I had no idea that SpongeBob SquarePants was still running, but the Nickelodeon staple debuted in 1999 in the United States. I don’t think I encountered it until the first film in 2004, but I daresay I was dimly aware of it through its merchandise. As with the best of kids’ TV, SpongeBob has jokes and storylines that appeal to adults, too – which goes some way to explaining its ongoing popularity!
TV Show #2: Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Here in the UK, we were a season or two behind the USA when it came to Star Trek in the late ’90s – but I was thoroughly enjoying DS9′s Dominion War story arc. Captain Sisko is probably my favourite Star Trek captain, too, so there was a lot to love as DS9 continued its run, solidified its cast of secondary characters, and told some wonderful stories. Voyager was on the air, too, making it a great time to be a Trekkie!
TV Show #3: Farscape
Cancelled before its time, Farscape was a brilliant work of sci-fi. Taking inspiration from Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, and more, this underappreciated television series was truly fantastic to watch. Some excellent puppets and prosthetics brought its world to life, and a truly engaging main character and main villain kept the series on track. The idea of an organic, living spaceship was also something new as human astronaut John Crichton found himself in a far-flung part of the galaxy.
TV Show #4: Futurama
Another great sci-fi series – but with a completely different style and focus – Futurama was developed by Matt Groening of The Simpsons fame. As we were getting excited for the start of the 21st Century, Futurama shot forward in time by 1,000 years – with protagonist Fry emerging from his accidental cryogenic sleep in 2999! The show has plenty of humour and was inspired by some of my favourite sci-fi properties, and its first season in particular was a blast.
TV Show #5: Buffy the Vampire Slayer
In the UK, I think we were only up to Season 2 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer by 1999, but I was having a ton of fun with the show and its great cast of characters. A decidedly different take on the monster-of-the-week drama/horror format, Buffy brought vampires, werewolves, and other tropes of the horror genre to modern-day California, and the interplay between Buffy’s life as a regular high schooler and the secret world of vampire-hunting made for a really unique series.
Video Game #1: Shenmue
We’ll talk more about Shenmue in December to mark its anniversary, but for now let me just say that this was a landmark game for me. At a time when I could’ve begun to drift away from gaming, Shenmue came along and showed me a glimpse of what video games of the future could be: cinematic, intense narrative experiences that could absolutely go toe-to-toe with films and TV programmes. Although it didn’t sell particularly well, Shenmue was a game light-years ahead of its time.
Video Game #2: Midtown Madness
I have a longer piece about Midtown Madness that you can find by clicking or tapping here! But the tl;dr is this: the game was a ton of fun. It was the first racing game I played that let you roam around its open world, and getting into scrapes with the police and generally causing chaos on the streets of Chicago was a blast. There were cool vehicles to unlock, plenty of different modes to get stuck into, and a mountain of fun to be had… even if I was stuck trying to play it with a mouse and keyboard!
Video Game #3: Donkey Kong 64
Unfairly maligned by some critics today, Donkey Kong 64 was one of my favourite N64 titles. Yes, there are a lot of things to collect – and collect-a-thons can be annoying, sometimes. But if you look past that, the game has a lot to offer with a variety of gameplay styles, mini-games, and character-specific objectives and levels that make for a wonderfully diverse title. DK’s first foray into the 3D world felt great in 1999.
Video Game #4: Age of Empires and The Rise of Rome expansion pack
Released in 1997, Age of Empires was my first historical real-time strategy game. I’d played a bit of Command and Conquer prior to picking it up, but stepping back in time to control real-world civilisations was so much fun. There were some neat campaign missions, but where I had the most fun was playing deathmatches against a friend – once we’d figured out how to get a LAN up and running! To this day, teal-coloured Sumeria is my nemesis!
Video Game #5: Star Trek: Hidden Evil
Hidden Evil is a pretty standard PC adventure game of its time… but as a Trekkie, getting any new story to sink my teeth into was great in 1999! Playing as a human raised by Vulcans was an interesting idea, and being able to use the Vulcan nerve pinch as an in-game attack felt innovative. Gameplay wasn’t anything to write home about, but the story was great – and the game brought in Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner to voice their iconic characters. I still have my copy of the game on a shelf somewhere!
So that’s it.
The Pacific island nation of Kiribati was the first place on Earth to ring in the year 2000.
Those are a few of the songs, films, games, and TV programmes that I enjoyed in and around 1999. All that was left to do was get ready for New Year’s Eve. During the day, 2000 Today rang in the millennium across the world, beginning in New Zealand and Australia and slowly working its way to the UK! That evening I attended a big party, celebrating the arrival of the year 2000 with friends, neighbours, and strangers – and a bit too much to drink! I even strutted my stuff on the dancefloor.
1999 was a great year – but also an interesting one, looking back. It was the end of an era in more ways than one, for the world but also for me personally. And it was a time where I felt hopeful and optimistic in a way that I just… don’t any more. Maybe that’s life events, ageing, and changing circumstances – or maybe 1999 really was a uniquely special point in time.
In any case, I hope this has been an interesting look back. Reminiscing and wallowing in these memories has been fun and occasionally bittersweet – but my recollections of 1999 are far more positive than negative as I look back on the year a quarter of a century later.
All properties discussed above are the copyright of their respective owner, publisher, distributor, etc. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Trek: Strange New Worlds Seasons 1 and 2.
Welcome back to my Strange New Worlds Season 2 episode review series. I know it’s been a while, and I’ll address that briefly before we jump into the review proper.
Last year, while Strange New Worlds was airing, I began to feel burned out on Star Trek as a whole. I also found myself writing less frequently here on the website, and I think I just needed a bit of a break from what had been a pretty hectic schedule for the franchise. There’s been a lot of Star Trek on our screens over the last couple of years in particular – some of which has been quite heavy, with themes of mental health that hit close to home for me. Long story short, I ended up taking a break from Strange New Worlds halfway through Season 2… but now I’m finally ready to jump back in. I’m going into these episodes completely fresh; this is my first time watching Lost in Translation and I haven’t seen the remaining Season 2 episodes yet.
So I hope you’ll excuse the lateness of this review! I plan to pick up where I left off last year, and while I don’t promise to do one review a week… hopefully by the end of the year – or at least by the time Season 3 is upon us – I’ll have finally wrapped up this batch of episodes.
Behind-the-scenes photo from the set of Lost in Translation.
Onward, then, to Lost in Translation!
This episode put a somewhat dark and distinctly modern spin on Star Trek’s trusty old “they were only trying to communicate!” premise, and it worked pretty well. Outside of the main thrust of the story were a couple of moments of characterisation that I felt either weren’t set up particularly well or that might’ve needed an extra moment or two in the spotlight, and there was a rare CGI miss for Strange New Worlds as the series used a sub-par visual effect that had also appeared in Picard’s third season. Other than that, though, I had a pretty good time with Lost in Translation; it was a nice way to return to Strange New Worlds after an absence of more than a year.
I think I’ve noted this before in either my Season 1 review or one of my earlier Season 2 episode reviews, but I just adore the opening title music. I got goosebumps listening to the theme this time after not hearing it for months, and the way composer Jeff Ruso deconstructed and then recreated the music from The Original Series is really something special.
Lost in Translation focused on Uhura.
Let’s talk about what I didn’t like in Lost in Translation – which, thankfully, isn’t too much this time around.
There were a couple of pretty abrupt scenes where two different sets of characters seemed to have fallen out with one another off-screen, and the way this was communicated wasn’t great. First we had the two Kirk brothers: Sam and Jim. Their rivalry came from an understandable place, but it needed way more buildup to have been effective. We’ve seen these characters on screen together more than once in Strange New Worlds already, and there was no indication in those earlier appearances that Sam might feel Jim’s rise through the ranks was a sore spot.
And when we boil it down… this argument felt incredibly petty. Jim Kirk has just been promoted, becoming the youngest-ever first officer in Starfleet. And Sam feels jealous of that because their father – who we’ve never met and hasn’t been mentioned before – likes Jim more because of it? Have I even got that right? For the brothers to go from sharing a hug on the transporter pad to Sam storming off – twice, I might add – just felt so incredibly ham-fisted and rushed. There was the smallest nugget of an interesting idea at the core of this, and both actors did the best with the material they had. But this argument/sibling rivalry needed way more time on screen and more development, ideally over more than one episode. Strange New Worlds has done well so far with its blend of episodic storytelling and serialised character arcs… but this one didn’t stick the landing this time.
Jim and Sam argued at the bar.
In a similar vein we have Una and Pelia’s conflict. This one has the benefit of being resolved (or apparently resolved, at least) by the end of the episode, meaning that the final scenes they shared together in the shuttlecraft and the conversation that Pelia forced went some way to compensating for their earlier conflict. But the same basic issue arises as with the Kirk brothers above: it needed more setup and more time on screen to play out.
This kind of conflict between two main characters can’t be a one-and-done, throwaway thing in a single episode; it deserves to have more time spent on it. Not for the first time in modern Star Trek I find myself saying this: if there isn’t enough time to do justice to a storyline that needs room to unfold… skip it. Don’t forget it entirely, but put it back on the shelf for later and find something smaller that would be a better fit for the short runtime available – then when you have the time to fully explore this kind of grief-driven character conflict, return to it and do it properly. This isn’t an isolated issue, unfortunately, as we’ve seen similar problems in all of the modern live-action Star Trek productions since 2017.
Pelia and Una on their way back to the Enterprise.
There was one particularly poor use of CGI in Lost in Translation, and I think it’s worth looking at briefly. The scene where the doomed redshirt Lieutenant Ramon is blasted out into space had some great animation work for the USS Enterprise and the nebula that the ship was in – and visual effects across the rest of the episode were pretty good. But Ramon’s death was poor, and the “freezing” effect used as his body was floating in space was a long way wide of the mark.
It’s a lot harder to accurately animate a person – and facial features in particular – than it is to do things like spaceships, planets, and inanimate objects, and unfortunately that’s what we saw with Ramon’s death. The CGI model just wasn’t up to scratch, and although other elements of the same animated sequence looked good, the individual at the centre didn’t. Earlier in 2023, I noted the exact same problem with the death of another character in Star Trek: Picard Season 3. This character was also ejected into space, iced over, and died – and the same issues were present. Paramount has done a lot of great work with CGI and animation in modern Star Trek… but there’s still a long way to go to get some of these character models and effects to where they need to be. It didn’t ruin the entire episode – but it was noticeable in that sequence, particularly because the rest of the animation work was so good.
This CGI moment didn’t look great.
So those are the only parts of Lost in Translation that I can say I didn’t really like or that didn’t work for me. Next, I’d like to talk in a broader sense about a character who returned in this episode – and their death in Season 1.
The episode All Those Who Wander is one of my favourite Star Trek stories of the last few years – probably of all-time. It’s an episode that shows how Star Trek isn’t always going to be the kind of nerdy sci-fi franchise that people think, and how it can dip its toes in genres like horror. It’s a gruesome, shocking story – and one that comes with a final, brutal twist right at the end.
All Those Who Wander wouldn’t have been so impactful if Hemmer had survived – and I fully appreciate that. One of the things his death showed is that most of Strange New Worlds’ characters don’t have “plot armour” and therefore can’t be considered as safe as main characters in previous shows. That’s great in some ways – it’s modern, it can ramp up the tension and drama at key moments, and it represents a franchise that’s still growing and evolving even after more than half a century in production.
An illusory Hemmer at the end of Lost in Translation.
But – and you knew there had to be a “but” coming after all of that – Hemmer was a great loss for Strange New Worlds. Killing off such an interesting character so soon, and after he’d only really had a chance to make an impact in a couple of episodes was an odd decision, and I can’t help but see parts of Lost in Translation as a reaction to Hemmer’s death. Perhaps the decision to bring him back in this way is even a bit of an admission on the part of the writers that they miss this character and regret not being able to do more with him.
Pelia is great. She adds a comedic flair to Strange New Worlds that the series needs, and she has a way of making even tense and dangerous moments feel lighter. Many stories have already benefitted from her inclusion – and I have no doubt that others will in the future, too. But that doesn’t mean Hemmer’s early demise feels any better. And it’s impossible to talk about Lost in Translation without going back to Season 1 and thinking about what might have been if Hemmer had stuck around. As a blind character, as a member of a race that Star Trek hasn’t explored in depth since Enterprise, and as a pacifist working on a ship that might be called into action… there was a lot of potential in Hemmer that we never got to see realised.
Uhura watches a recording of Hemmer on a padd.
I was entirely unprepared for the zombie Hemmer jump-scare just before the credits – and I about pissed myself when his mangled, decaying corpse showed up, growling at poor Uhura. That was an incredibly well-executed moment, and it left me on edge for much of the rest of the story, especially when Uhura was hallucinating and the camera panned around. I kept expecting another jump-scare at that level!
We talked a moment ago about a CGI effect that missed the mark – but the makeup and prosthetics used to create Hemmer’s hallucinatory form were absolutely pitch-perfect. I genuinely cannot fault the way Hemmer appeared in those moments, and the changes from how he looked when alive to the bloodied, decaying, zombified form that appeared to Uhura must’ve taken a lot of time both at the planning stage and in the makeup chair.
I very nearly needed to change my pants after this jump-scare.
It makes a lot of sense to use a character like Hemmer to tell a story about grief and loss – and I would argue that Strange New Worlds managed to do a far better job on this front than the likes of Picard or Discovery when those shows attempted to look at comparable themes. The reason for this is Hemmer: we as the audience had known this character, seen him interact with the crew across several Season 1 episodes, and were mentally prepared for him to continue on as part of the show. His death was shocking and untimely – so we can absolutely see how his death would have had a major impact on characters like Una and Uhura.
Hemmer and Uhura struck up a friendship in Season 1, and he played a role in helping her choose to remain in Starfleet when she was having doubts. This friendship was expanded upon in Lost in Translation, as we got to see them working together through the recording that Uhura carried with her. This also helped build up the sense of grief and mourning that was key to this side of the story. It was well-written, beautifully performed, and is a storyline that I think should be relatable to anyone who’s been through the loss of a close friend or family member. We often talk about Starfleet and crews on Star Trek as akin to families; this is another side of that analogy.
Lost in Translation was, in part, a story about grief and loss.
Uhura and Hemmer had that closeness in Season 1, but I’m struggling to remember a comparable moment between he and Una. Despite my criticism of the rather short and abrupt nature of her conflict with Pelia, I think the underlying theme of coming to terms with loss and having to see someone new as a “replacement” for a fallen friend or comrade was an interesting one. Again, it’s something that should be relatable to a lot of folks in the audience – I just fear in this case that the way this particular conflict was handled may have got in the way of the message.
Hopefully Una and Pelia have come to an understanding, at least, and future episodes might be able to build on this relationship, taking them from adversarial to something closer to friendship. If future stories are plotted out that way, we might be able to look back somewhat more kindly on their conflict in Lost in Translation.
Pelia and Una aboard the refinery station.
I’ve lost count of the number of times Star Trek has used the “it was only trying to communicate!” storyline! Some of these have worked better than others, to be blunt – and it isn’t unfair to call it a trope of the franchise. Season 1’s Children of the Comet wasn’t a million miles away from that premise – and also featured Uhura in a big way. Lost in Translation is a very dark interpretation of this narrative idea, though, and I think it worked quite well.
Maybe this is a reach (actually, it’s definitely a reach) but I felt that there were at least some superficial similarities to Voyager’s Season 6 episode The Haunting of Deck Twelve. That story was different in tone – with its frame narrative and “ghost stories around the campfire” style – but it also featured nebula-dwelling lifeforms caught in a starship, desperate to survive and get home. I doubt it was intentional, but it’s interesting, at any rate!
The life-forms made their home in this nebula.
We’re used to seeing aliens in Star Trek that are very humanoid. Recent and not-so-recent stories have even tried to provide an in-universe explanation for the abundance of humanoid alien races… with limited success, in my opinion! But episodes like Lost in Translation remind us that the galaxy is also home to alien races that are so very different from humanity that it can be hard to even conceptualise – let alone find a way to communicate. These stories have always been interesting to me – and while Strange New Worlds gave us a more action-heavy, even horror take on that idea, I thought it worked exceptionally well.
There was plenty of room for science and for problem-solving as Uhura, Kirk, Pelia, and others all struggled to understand what was happening. Maybe it’s because I’m a seasoned Trekkie, but I felt maybe some of the characters – Spock in particular, perhaps, but also Pike and Pelia – should have suspected that something alien was going on when both Uhura and Ramon fell ill while the station was experiencing sabotage… but I can’t really hold that against the episode. I have to remind myself, sometimes, that Strange New Worlds is set before most of the rest of Star Trek – so the characters wouldn’t necessarily know what to look for and wouldn’t have the experience of those other stories to draw upon.
The aliens were able to communicate through illusions and hallucinations.
Pairing up Uhura with Kirk was great – and seeing how they got to meet for the first time in the prime timeline was great fun. There’s a lot of history with these two characters that Strange New Worlds had to respect – and I think the writers did them justice on this occasion. I also like the idea that it was Uhura who made the introduction between Kirk and Spock – that feels fitting, somehow.
At first I thought we were going to learn that Kirk was another of Uhura’s hallucinations! That seemed to be a possible route for the story to have taken. I’m glad it didn’t turn out that way, though, especially as the episode wore on and we got to see some genuinely sweet moments between them. Kirk is a flirt and a womaniser – something we know from his appearances across The Original Series, the Kelvin films, and beyond. But I felt the way this was handled in Lost in Translation – with Uhura shutting him down pretty quickly – was both a little bit funny and true to both of their characters. Any inclusion of characters from The Original Series has to be handled carefully, and pairing up Uhura and Kirk for basically an entire story could have gone awry. I’m glad that it didn’t.
Celia Rose Gooding, Dan Jeannotte, and Paul Wesley during production on the episode.
We spoke earlier about character conflicts that hadn’t been set up particularly well. Lost in Translation also offers at least one counter-point to that: the developing relationship between La’an and Kirk. After the events of Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow earlier in Season 2 left La’an pretty devastated, she’s clearly still struggling with the memories she has of alternate-timeline Kirk. Running into him was difficult for her, and while that part of the episode was only in focus briefly, I think it worked well. As a storyline that is (hopefully) going to be picked up in a future story, these small steps can be important. We’ve followed La’an and Kirk in two episodes now – maybe by their third or fourth meeting, something more will come of it.
In terms of sets, I liked the new nacelle control room that we saw Uhura, Pelia, and Ramon using. It even had the angled ladder that Scotty would famously crawl into in The Original Series any time the Enterprise needed repairs! There may not be a ton of uses for a nacelle room, but being able to put that set together sometimes for engineering scenes is a neat idea.
Did this ladder feel familiar to you?
The refinery/space station set didn’t feel all that special, but thanks to some creative use of the AR wall and animated wide-angle shots, we got at least some of the sense of scale that the place needed. It also had a pretty industrial feel – not unlike modern-day oil rigs or refineries, which I suppose will have been the inspiration.
Uhura’s hallucinatory shuttle crash was also really well done, with transitions between the indoor sets and outdoor filming locations feeling particularly creative. The wreck of the shuttle looked great, and although we only saw parts of the interior in an out-of-focus shot, that choice was clever, too.
Uhura with the wrecked shuttle.
Speaking of creative cinematography, the scene in the corridor as Uhura felt the walls closing in around her, then stretching away, looked fantastic – and I think I’m right in saying that most of that was camera work rather than post-production special effects. It was creative, at any rate, and it really hammered home the panic and fear that Uhura felt at that moment.
So I think that’s all I have to say this time.
Lost in Translation was a good episode, and one that put a different spin on a familiar premise. We got to see Kirk’s first meetings with both Uhura and Spock, which was fantastic, but at the episode’s heart was some creative storytelling that touched on themes of grief and the loss of a friend. After Hemmer’s demise in Season 1, I’m glad that Strange New Worlds hasn’t just forgotten about him and moved on, and remembering him through the way he helped his friends and the impact he made on his crew was touching.
A famous first meeting!
Not everything in Lost in Translation worked as well as it could’ve, and perhaps trying to cram in two character conflicts like this was a bit too much for the episode’s runtime. Hopefully, now that the Una-Pelia conflict has been resolved, we can see a bit more from those two in a future episode, building on the foundations that were laid this time. As for the Kirk brothers… I think we need to see a little more from them if the series wants to do this whole “sibling rivalry” argument justice!
After a break of more than a year, Lost in Translation has been a nice way to return to Strange New Worlds! Not every episode of Star Trek can be a great one, but I’m glad that I didn’t end up coming back to the series with a dud! That might’ve been offputting as I aim to review the remainder of the season. Thankfully it didn’t happen this time – and I hope you’ll stay tuned for reviews of the remaining four episodes in the days, weeks, and possibly months ahead!
Star Trek: Strange New Worlds Seasons 1 and 2 are available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. The series is also available on DVD and Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including Strange New Worlds and all other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This review contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
By now I’m sure you’ve heard about the PlayStation 5 Pro controversy. Sony’s mid-generation update to its flagship console will come with an outrageous price tag, will be missing basic components, and doesn’t even seem – at first glance, anyway – to offer a significant visual upgrade. With better frame-rates and higher resolutions being basically the only reason to pick up a PS5 Pro for someone who’s already a PlayStation customer… that’s not great.
But I think there’s a lot more to say – and unfortunately, it gets worse! At time of writing, pre-orders for the PlayStation 5 Pro haven’t gone live in the UK, but there’s already a ton of interest in the console, its missing disc drive, and even its ridiculously overpriced stand. The stand is basically just a small ring of metal and plastic, and shouldn’t be worth anywhere close to its purported £25 price tag. But it seems as if eager fans and gamers are queuing around the digital block to pick up the console and its add-ons; pre-orders for the disc drive have sold out in some places in the United States already.
The overpriced stand.
I’ve already criticised Sony here on the website for hiking up the price of the base PlayStation 5 at a time when the corporation is making record profits. To clarify that: Sony has never, in its corporate life, made more money or had a greater profit margin than it has right now – and yet these ridiculous price hikes continue. Microsoft is not immune from this, either – and I’ve been critical of Xbox in recent months too, so please don’t think I’m coming at this issue from a “console war” perspective! If anything, I’m trying to approach this subject from a consumer perspective and a basic fairness perspective. Nintendo… the jury’s out. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the new Nintendo console follows suit and is similarly burdened with a high price tag.
There are two reasons why I find the PlayStation 5 price tag so disturbing, and we’ll look at these issues in turn.
First of all, despite the outrage and dissatisfaction on social media, as mentioned there are plenty of people who seem quite happy to pay the inflated price for the new console – as well as its expensive add-ons. In fact, I wouldn’t be shocked to see the PlayStation 5 Pro become one of this year’s festive bestsellers, with high demand from gamers and parents as Christmas draws nearer. It will almost certainly out-sell anything that Xbox has to offer, and with Nintendo’s new console not due until next year at the earliest, the PS5 Pro could have a fairly open market when it launches this November.
A PS5 Pro DualSense control pad.
Video games are a consumer marketplace – and that means if there are willing buyers, Sony will be able to get away with selling this underpowered, overpriced, incomplete console to all and sundry. We often hear some variant of the expression “social media is not real life,” and for all of the outrage and criticism that has been thrown at Sony since the PlayStation 5 Pro was announced… that won’t actually matter to the company’s bottom line if people still show up and buy the damn thing en masse. And it seems like that’s exactly what’s gonna happen.
Which leads into my second problem with Sony’s price hike: other companies in the games industry are watching, they’ll see Sony succeed, and they’ll follow suit. Maybe Xbox will release an updated console with a disc drive sold separately. Maybe Nintendo will see Sony’s high price point and bump up the price of its next console by £50 or £100. If Sony’s getting away with it, it will encourage everyone else to do the same thing.
Other companies will be watching to see if Sony’s high price point succeeds.
When Sony jacked up the price of the base PlayStation 5 a couple of years ago, Microsoft was quick to jump in and promise that the price of the Xbox Series X would stay the same. And that lasted all of a few months before the price was quietly raised. At the beginning of this generation – less than four years ago – the base price of a standard video game was usually £55 here in the UK – $60 in the United States. 2K Games then announced that their next-gen sports titles would be priced at £65/$70… and what happened next? There was a fuss online… but then those games sold pretty well and every major publisher in the industry followed suit and jacked up the prices of their games, too.
It will happen again with the PlayStation 5 Pro, so I hope you’re prepared to pay £700 or more for a video game console. By the time the next generation of machines are ready in, say, 2028 or 2029… could it be more? Could a PlayStation 6 be £900? Who will be the first to break the £1,000 barrier for new consoles? It now feels like a matter of “when” not “if” that happens.
Gaming is getting more expensive all the time.
In the early days, video game consoles actually were pretty expensive. The Atari 2600, one of the earliest home consoles to sell a significant number of units, was priced at $190 in the United States when it launched in 1977 – the equivalent of more than $900 today when accounting for inflation. Its competitors, like the Magnavox Odyssey 2 and Intellivision, were similarly-priced. But the price of consoles came down with the price of home computers in general, and by the time I was buying my first console – a Super Nintendo – in the early 1990s, prices were similar to where they are today when you account for inflation. My SNES was £150 when I bought it (after saving up my pocket money for ages!) which is close to £400 in today’s money.
So for a long time – several generations at least – consoles have been hovering around that price point. There have been some that were cheaper and some that were more expensive, like the Xbox One, but by and large folks have come to expect that home consoles will be affordable. £700 is really pushing the boat out; that’s approaching the kind of money you could spend on a gaming PC. In fact, after a brief Google search I found several gaming PCs at that exact price point!
At time of writing you can get this gaming PC – and many others – for the same money as a PS5 Pro.
I’m sick of profiteering and price-gouging by these corporations. The so-called “cost of living crisis” that we’ve been going through for several years now is at the very least being exacerbated by greedy corporations that are trying to use it as an excuse to grab as much money as possible and make as much profit as possible. There have been record-breaking profits announced by everyone from supermarkets and tech companies to oil companies and banks… and it all comes at our expense. That’s the lens through which I view the PlayStation 5 Pro’s exorbitant price tag.
The sad thing is that, in lieu of better options, people will shell out for the PS5 Pro this winter. Folks who don’t have a PlayStation 5 yet may wait to get the refreshed model, and some will undoubtedly be tempted by promises of higher frame-rates and more visually stunning games. Even though the comparison between the base PS5 and the PS5 Pro leaves a lot to be desired, in my opinion!
Will the PS5 Pro be worth the upgrade?
And as I said at the beginning, this feels like an omen of more price rises to come. Nintendo, Microsoft, and other big players in the games industry will be watching the PlayStation 5 Pro. They’ve already taken note of the criticism and backlash it received… but if it still sells like hot-cakes, we can surely expect further price rises when other companies follow suit. It’s disappointing, but honestly not unexpected in this late-stage capitalist marketplace that we all have to wade through.
Sony should be riding high at the moment. The PlayStation 5 has been selling really well, recent console exclusives like Astro Bot and Helldivers II have been well-received, and in spite of Concord proving to be a high-profile flop, the company is raking in money and seems to be at the pinnacle of the games industry right now. The company’s reputation will take a hit from this price hike and the ridiculously expensive add-ons for the PS5 Pro… but as I said a few weeks ago when talking about Concord, I doubt it’ll matter in the long run. Sony probably priced in a certain amount of anger and backlash, and from the company’s point of view it won’t matter as long as players turn up and buy the console; even a begrudging sale is still a sale, at the end of the day.
As we pass the midpoint of this console generation, and with Nintendo preparing its new machine for release, I think the PlayStation 5 Pro and its price tag are just the beginning. A harbinger of things to come.
The PlayStation 5 Pro will be release in the UK on the 7th of November 2024. The PlayStation brand and all related properties discussed above are the copyright of Sony Interactive Entertainment. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Trek: Discovery Seasons 1-5 and Star Trek: The Next Generation Season 6.
So this is it, then! Star Trek: Discovery’s fifth and final season has come and gone, and its finale really does feel like the end of a chapter for the Star Trek franchise.
Two points before we get into the meat of this review. Firstly, this full season review is taking the place of the individual episode reviews that I did for Seasons 3 and 4. I didn’t pick up Paramount+ to watch Discovery week-to-week, and I didn’t really have the energy to spend on writing ten full episode reviews like I did for the past couple of seasons. If that’s something you really wanted to see, well… sorry. I may revisit individual episodes from Season 5 in the future.
Secondly, now that Season 5 has wrapped up, I would like to do a deep dive into Discovery as a whole; a kind of “post-mortem” for the series. But that isn’t the objective of this review, and this time around I’ll try to stick to Season 5, its story, and its characters. That doesn’t mean I won’t talk about plot points from earlier seasons or other parts of Star Trek where necessary (and spoiler alert: it will be necessary to do that) but rather that this review is meant to be about Season 5 first and foremost. I will be taking a look at Discovery as a whole in a future article – so stay tuned for that!
Michael Burnham on a promotional poster for Season 5.
I’d like to start with an observation that might set the tone for the rest of this review. Often when I’m binge-watching a series I can hardly wait to start the next episode. There’ll be a sense of excitement as I get ready to watch the next chapter of the story… and sometimes I even let the chores pile up because I just don’t want to wait or put the next episode on hold! When I get into a story and I’m in “the zone” I don’t want to break out. That didn’t happen for me with Discovery this time around.
Even though I could’ve binged Season 5 over the course of a couple of evenings… I didn’t want to. I took breaks of several days in between episodes, sometimes – and I was running down the clock on my single-month subscription to Paramount+ with a couple of episodes still to go. This time around, I don’t feel that Discovery grabbed me in the way it has in the past, even though there were some genuinely interesting storylines. Probably this is more an issue on my end than with the show itself – I’ve talked in recent months about how I’ve come to feel rather burned out on Star Trek as a whole, so perhaps I jumped back in before I was ready. But I think it’s worth noting that Discovery didn’t really succeed at pulling me back in.
Director Jonathan Frakes and Tilly actress Mary Wiseman in a behind-the-scenes photograph.
Although I had a specific concern about the series finale, I went into Discovery’s fifth season feeling somewhat optimistic about the direction of the story as a whole. It seemed – based on the season’s marketing material – as if Discovery was finally ready to give up on the whole “the entire galaxy is in danger and only Michael Burnham, the Chosen One, can save it!!!” story outline that the show had recycled, in some form, across its first four seasons. And I was excited about that; seeing what Discovery and its characters might be able to do with a completely different style of narrative held a lot of appeal. Even if that change had come too late to save the series from cancellation, I still would’ve liked to see the writers giving Burnham and the crew a new challenge and a fundamentally different kind of adventure – one that might’ve been smaller in scale but still interesting and entertaining.
But as you probably know by now, Season 5 recycled that same story outline yet again. There was a mystery at the centre of the narrative, and an adventure to follow as Burnham and the crew followed the trail. But there was also a “catastrophic galactic threat” underpinning it all, and villains intent on wreaking havoc who had to be stopped. Discovery had one final chance to try something genuinely different – a style of storytelling that might’ve better suited the show and its cast of characters. But instead, we got a story that felt derivative. Like in every season before, Michael Burnham and the crew faced a threat that could wipe out the Federation and all life in the galaxy. Like in every season before, they had to follow a trail of clues to uncover the threat. And like in every season before, there were villainous rascals trying to stop them. If this is the only kind of story that the show’s writers wanted to tell or were capable of telling… then I think I’m glad to see the back of Discovery. One or two of these kinds of stories might’ve been okay… but five in a row? Too many.
The Progenitors’ device.
It wasn’t only the main storyline that felt recycled. Book’s story of feeling alone and looking to reach out to someone he considered “family” felt pretty repetitive, as did his interactions with Dr Culber. Tilly went back and forth with her characterisation, bouncing between caring about her cadets as she did last season and seemingly forgetting they existed a moment later. Despite being brand-new, Commander Rayner was given a typical Discovery “traumatic background” that, naturally, became critical to advancing the main story. And then we come to the dreaded Burnham Relationship Drama™.
Book and Burnham broke up in the season premiere – setting the tone for a season where one of the themes involved other characters also going their separate ways. Later, Burnham’s conflict with Book over how to approach Moll and what to do with her – giving her to the Breen to prevent a war and save lives – felt incredibly similar to the arguments the pair had about the DMA just last season. So not only did Season 5 curse us with more Burnham Relationship Drama™, but the story wasn’t even an original one.
Booker and Burnham’s bike-based break-up.
Discovery is arguably Star Trek’s first series to have a singular protagonist instead of either a trio or an ensemble. And I would have loved it if that protagonist could have had just one season – just one out of five – in which she wasn’t at the centre of a soap opera story involving her love interest(s). We got it in Seasons 1 and 2 with her on/off relationship with Tyler. And we had it again in Seasons 3, 4, and 5 with Book. Discovery’s writers have been completely unwilling to let Burnham settle, and even as she’s developed, grown, and matured in other ways – like her relationship with Starfleet, her friendships with members of the crew, and so on – her romantic life has been a constant mess. If it served some greater narrative purpose, maybe it wouldn’t feel so repetitive and annoying. But after watching her and Book at loggerheads for much of Season 4 before belatedly reconciling, I’d hoped that we’d finally seen the last of the Burnham Relationship Drama™.
This repetitiveness was present throughout the season, both in the main story, side-stories, and moments of characterisation. The Archive that Book and Burnham visited felt no different from Season 3’s seed vault, for example, and it’s hard to view the Progenitor’s technology and the race to protect it as being much different from the Control AI battling to seize the Sphere data in Season 2. The Breen, while a returning faction from Star Trek’s past, filled a role that the Klingons had in Season 1 and the Emerald Chain did in Season 3. Moll and L’ak were the villainous duo who needed to be stopped, but who had a connection to one of the main characters – just like Book and Tarka in Season 4 or Voq in Season 1. The trail of clues that the crew followed also felt just like the ones that led them to the cause of the Burn in Season 3 and the DMA/Species 10-C in Season 4.
The story turned out to be repetitive.
With Discovery’s writers unwilling or unable to write a genuinely different kind of story – one without a “massive galaxy-ending threat,” Burnham Relationship Drama™, and all of the other repetitions we’ve noted – then I come back to something I said at the beginning: it was probably the right time for the series to end. I don’t think I’d have wanted to see a sixth or seventh season if both the main story and many side-stories were just going to be recycled once again. Season 5 may not have been the strong send-off that I’d hoped for, but at least we can say that Discovery went out on its own terms. Which is something… right?
This isn’t to say the season was universally terrible. There were some highlights, both for the main story and in individual episodes, as well as some of that often-elusive sense of “Star Trek-ness” that’s made the franchise so enjoyable to me for more than thirty years. Practically all of the episodes had something that made me smile, laugh, or feel some of the emotions that the story was reaching for. I just wish that those moments hadn’t come in a repetitive story that, once again, saw all of the drama turned up to eleven. And perhaps if I were being brutally honest, I’d say that I wish those enjoyable moments hadn’t been so few and far between.
The main cast of Season 5.
I was a little surprised that the duo of bridge characters who’ve been part of the series since Season 1 – Owosekun and Detmer – weren’t included in a big way this time around. They had a couple of lines each, mostly in a flashback sequence, but otherwise seemed to have been replaced by a couple of other characters whose names I didn’t even catch. I don’t know why this was – was there some reason why the actors couldn’t take part in the full season? It seems odd to me that these familiar faces were effectively written out of the show; there wasn’t really a reason given.
Other members of the bridge crew – Rhys, Linus, and co. – got about as much attention as they ever had. These secondary characters have never been Discovery’s focus, and while I felt that the series had the potential to expand its roster in a kind of Deep Space Nine-inspired way, utilising a broader cast of secondary characters, that never happened. At this point I wasn’t expecting it to, but at least we didn’t get any completely shallow, contrived story moments involving these characters like we had in past seasons. Giving a secondary character one scene’s worth of “development” in a single episode either to force an emotional reaction at their death or to nakedly add to the main story is something Discovery has done more than once and it seldom works well.
Detmer and Owosekun – mainstays on the bridge since Season 1 – abruptly disappeared this time.
On the main character front, aside from Burnham the only two to get much screen time and proper storylines were Dr Culber and Book. Tilly seemed to abandon her post at the Academy for no reason, and her role there was only sporadically brought up. Stamets was, for me, the least-well-developed main character this season. His story of wanting to find a new scientific legacy had a poor setup, was only referenced once or twice, and then was blitzed through right at the end. It ended up being a bit of a nothing-burger, and I feel Stamets would’ve been better used in a supporting role for Culber and Adira; those moments were far and away his best of the season.
Not for the first time with Discovery, I find myself saying this: this narrative concept wasn’t bad in principle, but the writers and producers clearly had their attention elsewhere, so it didn’t get enough time on screen to fully play out. There’s potential in the story of someone coming to terms with their life’s work being shut down (and that could’ve been more than a little therapeutic for Discovery’s writers, given what happened to the series), as well as in someone desperately reaching for some kind of “legacy” as a way to find meaning in their life or metaphorical immortality. Stamets’ storyline flirted with these ideas, but the series didn’t commit to them – because its energies were, as always, being spent elsewhere. The result was that the curtain fell on yet another underwhelming season for Stamets.
Not a great season for Stamets… again.
Saru got what was by far the most optimistic individual character storyline – as Discovery set up his marriage to T’Rina. There were a few sitcom-style bumps in the road, because of course Discovery is that kind of show, but by and large I liked what we got. Saru and T’Rina had an understated chemistry together, and at a time when tensions and dangers were rising, having two characters “back home” planning their wedding was a bit of a change of pace. I wish it didn’t have to happen at the expense of Saru having a major role in the show, though – his presence on the bridge was missed.
Speaking as we were of underdeveloped storylines: T’Rina’s complex political situation was mentioned once, in a single episode, then seemed to instantly disappear without her suffering any repercussions. This idea of “Vulcan purists” being upset at her engagement to a non-Vulcan was, again, interesting in theory… but went nowhere. Being generous we might say that this was something the writers hoped to explore more of in a potential sixth season, but I’m not convinced of that. It feels like a throwaway idea designed to create a bit of forced tension in Saru’s relationship, and nothing more.
T’Rina and Saru at their wedding.
“Subtlety” has never really been a word that Discovery’s writers seem familiar with, and in Season 5 we saw that trend continue. After explaining his tragic backstory, we saw Rayner go from crotchety a-hole to inspiring leader who cares about his crew almost in a heartbeat. It reminded me of the change that Saru underwent with his vahar’ai – a change that took him from cowardly to aggressive predator also in a split-second. For me, this abrupt character switch didn’t really stick the landing, and while Rayner is still an interesting character whose forceful personality left a stamp on the series, there’s something to be said for making these kinds of changes a more gradual affair.
I was disappointed that we didn’t get to see more of Admiral Vance and President Rillak – two characters who had been pretty enjoyable in Seasons 3 and 4. Both had moments on screen, but their roles felt diminished compared with the last couple of seasons. In a story with profound in-universe consequences (something we’ll talk about more in a moment), there was scope to see the Federation’s president and Starfleet’s top admiral wrangling with the fallout of Burnham’s mission and the “Red Directive.”
Admiral Vance had less of a role this time around.
Dr Kovich is a character who has been an enigma since Discovery shot forward to this time period. I’d speculated that perhaps he was the head of this era’s Section 31, but this season we got the explanation we’d been waiting for… and it wasn’t what anyone had been expecting. The reason for that is simple: this explanation is dumb. Kovich is, somehow, an older Crewman/Agent Daniels: you know, the secondary character from Enterprise? The time-traveler who messed up Archer’s mission. Crewman Daniels.
Sorry, but this really was a stupid idea – one that was in no way set up by anything else in the series. It feels like Discovery’s writers came in late one day, weren’t really feeling like doing much work, and just threw out this idea as a cheap way to connect the series to something else in Star Trek. Why Daniels? Why not Captain Braxton – the time-traveling character from Voyager? Why not Wesley Crusher? Why not any one of a hundred other totally random characters? They’d make no less sense than Daniels. In a way, I admire the writers’ attempt to link events in Discovery’s otherwise disconnected 32nd Century to other parts of Star Trek. But this one was just so random with absolutely no setup that it fell flat on its face. I didn’t think this was possible – and it shouldn’t have been – but this revelation makes Kovich as a character feel less interesting and less important in retrospect.
Dr Kovich… a.k.a. Agent Daniels.
The season’s villains – Moll and L’ak – had potential as a kind of “Bonnie and Clyde” outlaw couple, and there were moments where they came close to achieving that status. But the connection between Moll and Book put a downer on things, and I felt like screaming at Discovery’s producers that not everyone in the galaxy needs to know or be related to everyone else! Characters can meet for the first time and form connections; villains don’t have to be someone’s daughter, uncle-in-law, or ex-boyfriend in order to be interesting, entertaining, and impactful.
As mentioned, I liked that we got a closer look at the Breen. The Breen had been part of what is probably still my favourite Star Trek story arc: the Dominion War. And in Deep Space Nine we never got to see them or even hear their language translated. Learning more about the Breen and particularly their biology was genuinely interesting, and it didn’t tread on the toes of anything that had been set up in Deep Space Nine or elsewhere – which is a low bar, perhaps, but one that modern Star Trek has occasionally tripped over!
Behind-the-scenes photo showing one of the Breen scenes being shot.
The Breen seemed more or less in line with their earlier appearances – but I would say that, in a story that aimed to be a bit more nuanced and modern, the two Breen leaders that we met both felt pretty one-dimensional. L’ak was an interesting character, and I liked the idea of the rebellious human-lover running away from his strict military upbringing and family. But the pair of Breen primarchs that we met – Ruhn and Tahal – felt like your bog-standard “evil for the sake of it” power-hungry villains. I wasn’t expecting a lot from either character, and I think they kind of work in the context of a brutal militaristic power, but neither felt especially interesting.
Discovery also came close to being written into a corner with this season’s Breen conflict. L’ak was supposedly incredibly important to Ruhn in particular, as he needed him to press his claim to the throne. But when L’ak died – in Starfleet custody, no less – Ruhn simply walked away without exacting his revenge. When it had been established that the Breen – with their Warhammer 40K-inspired massive warships – were more than capable of wiping out Starfleet… I don’t know. It didn’t feel right for this hardliner to just place his trust in Moll and walk away without retaliating.
The Breen warship dwarfed both the USS Discovery and Federation HQ – and would have made short work of both, if the shooting started!
Speaking of starship designs, I liked the massive Breen warships – though, as mentioned, I noted a definite influence from Warhammer 40K and other sci-fi properties! We didn’t really see many other new ships or vehicles this time around; Rayner’s Starfleet ship was okay but nothing special. I didn’t really like the first episode’s hover-bikes, though – they seem completely superfluous in a setting where everyone has a personal transporter built into their combadges and where spore drives can hop across the entire galaxy in an instant! The sequence was pretty tense and exciting, though.
Let’s talk about the main thrust of the story. Discovery surprised me by returning to a race called the Progenitors – ancient humanoid aliens who only appeared once in The Next Generation. And… to be blunt, I think there’s a reason why this storyline hadn’t been picked up or even so much as mentioned since then.
Behind-the-scenes with one of the Progenitors.
Some stories in Star Trek – even ones that seem to be transformational for our understanding of certain factions or characters – don’t work as intended or just reach a natural end point, and for me, the ancient humanoids from The Chase are in that category. Star Trek didn’t need this fundamental explanation for why many alien races are humanoid, and while The Chase wasn’t a bad episode per se, its ending and the way it wrapped up wasn’t great. For me, this kind of in-universe explanation was never needed, and as a result I was content to leave The Chase and its ancient humanoids on the back burner. They were never written into the franchise in a big way, and every subsequent story – even those focused on history – never returned to this pretty convoluted story.
So why did Discovery dig up these aliens – now named the Progenitors?
I would be genuinely curious to learn why the show’s writers and producers decided to go down this narrative path, to be honest! While the story we got expanded our knowledge of the Progenitors a little, it didn’t tell us a lot about the galaxy, the other races that the Progenitors may have seeded, and it ended with more questions unanswered than answered. We didn’t even get a technobabble explanation for how they did what they did or how their tech worked. The result was an unsatisfying feeling that was compounded by Burnham’s decision to conceal the Progenitors’ device and not even allow Stamets or someone else at Starfleet HQ to examine it.
Season 5 revisited The Chase – an episode from The Next Generation.
The ending of the story – with Burnham declaring that the Progenitors’ desire to create a diverse galaxy teeming with life had been accomplished – was great, and I liked the feeling that came from that. But as with many things in Discovery, it was an end point that was pretty rushed, that needed a bit more time on screen, and that came at the end of a season that spun its wheels in places and spent too long dealing with relatively minor or unimportant things.
I could have happily spent an entire episode just on the debate Burnham was having with other characters about what to do with the Progenitors’ technology. For instance, no one even suggested that it could have incredibly useful applications in a galaxy still recovering from the effects of the Burn. Discovery’s 32nd Century is still, in many ways, post-apocalyptic, and if the Federation had access to what is basically an infinitely more powerful Genesis Device, with the ability to create life from nothing… isn’t that a power worth having and using for the common good? Even if the end of the story was still the same, with the technology being deemed too powerful and ultimately unnecessary, couldn’t we have still had that conversation?
I could have spent an entire episode just debating the pros and cons of using and studying the Progenitors’ technology.
For me, this deep cut to a single episode of The Next Generation was a bold move that didn’t really pay off. I love that Discovery’s writers have tried to tie into the lore and history of Star Trek in different ways, but for me, the decision to revisit this faction of ancient aliens was a mistake. I’d rather have seen a brand-new race – like last season’s Species 10-C – that could’ve filled the role of the creators of this technology, simply because I don’t think Star Trek as a whole benefits from this kind of story.
Part of the appeal of going out into space – and thus the appeal of Star Trek and other space-based fiction – is that we don’t know all of the answers and we don’t know what’s out there. Part of the human condition is that sense of not knowing – we don’t know for a fact how or why we came to be, where consciousness came from, whether there’s a greater meaning or purpose. When a story comes along and says “well here’s exactly what happened, here’s who created you, and here’s why and how they did it…” I think we lose something from this fictional setting. The thrill of Star Trek is in the unknown, and answering too many of these questions just doesn’t sit right. That’s why I was never a fan of the end of The Chase and why I’ve been pleased that, for more than thirty years, generations of Star Trek writers have basically ignored it. Discovery revisited it in a big way… and I don’t think the payoff was worth it.
Captain Burnham with one of the Progenitors.
When I look at Star Trek’s history and I think of storylines and factions that I would’ve wanted to see brought back… again, I can’t find a justification for this return to The Chase – not for what was a glorified macguffin that Discovery didn’t actually do anything with. We might as well have said that the Tzenkethi or the magic-wielding aliens from that one episode of The Animated Series had created something powerful, or that Khan secretly replicated a second Genesis Device. The story could’ve unfolded in pretty much the same way without bringing up a piece of Star Trek’s past that has just… never worked.
I don’t want to go to extremes and say that the Progenitors “ruin” Star Trek. But the very concept of these ancient aliens essentially creating humans and a bunch of other races is a story point so profound that it absolutely changes everything for the characters in that world. If the entire Star Trek franchise had been built around a reveal like that, with the Progenitors being conceived from the start and every season and story slowly building up to this massive revelation, then maybe it could’ve worked. But in what was a one-off, throwaway episode we got this big reveal that Star Trek has never really known what to do with. Like other story beats that didn’t hit the mark, it should have been left alone. For Discovery’s writers to build an entire story around this faction… I’m afraid it doesn’t work for me.
Burnham and the crew at the end of the story.
More than a year ago we learned that the decision to cancel Discovery came after Season 5 had already been written and filmed, and that work had to be done after the main production had already wrapped up in order to “make the finale into the finale,” as director Jonathan Frakes put it. Alarm bells started ringing when I heard that, as I was worried that the pick-up shots would be incredibly obvious and that the story wouldn’t be able to come to a proper end. More so than any other Star Trek series to date, Discovery – with its serialised storylines and characters who changed and developed over the course of sixty-five episodes – needed some kind of definitive end.
Although it was incredibly obvious where the season would have originally ended and where the last-second additions were made, I don’t think that turned out to be a problem in the end. The decision to have the epilogue set decades after the events of Season 5 was a good one – perhaps the least-bad option available, but still – and it worked well. After all the issues noted above with Burnham Relationship Drama™, it was pretty cathartic to see her settled with Book, in a home they shared, enjoying her semi-retirement.
It took a long, meandering route to get Burnham and Book to this point… but they made it in the end.
It might’ve been nice to see one or two of the show’s other principal characters in the epilogue rather than just having them be mentioned, but all things considered I think Discovery got a pretty solid send-off. It wasn’t as spectacular as it could’ve been if the entire story had been written with a definite end point in mind, perhaps… but there’s something to be said for an understated, un-dramatic epilogue to a series that has constantly tried to inject as much drama as possible into its stories. Had cancellation been known ahead of Season 5 entering production, I would’ve half-expected the season finale to end with three-quarters of the crew dead and the ship blowing up!
In terms of production values, I’m still disappointed that Paramount+ doesn’t offer Discovery in 4K. 1080p HD is fine, but it’s not spectacular, and I would’ve liked to watch the series in that higher resolution. Most other streaming platforms offer this for their flagship shows, and it’s disappointing that Paramount+ still doesn’t – at least on the standard price plan here in the UK.
Grudge the kitty cat!
Discovery’s music has always been pretty good, and that was the same in Season 5, really. My rule of thumb for any movie/TV soundtrack is “do no harm;” i.e. a good soundtrack should be unobtrusive most of the time, and Discovery happily clears that admittedly low bar. The show’s title sequence has always been fun to watch, though its title theme has always felt a little understated for my taste.
Was anyone else playing a game of “spot the AR wall?” Because I definitely was – and at too many points I felt the AR wall was noticeable. Star Trek worked hard to escape its reputation for low-budget special effects and sub-par set design, but the AR wall – and some of the camera angles used during AR-heavy scenes – are in danger of bringing it back! On both the Breen warship and the Progenitors’ pocket dimension, I felt the AR wall was not at all well-integrated with the physical sets and props around it, and the end result was that this incredibly expensive piece of kit that Paramount paid a lot of money for created a visual effect that looked… cheap.
Spot the AR wall…
There are good ways to use an AR wall and bad ways… and Paramount/the Star Trek franchise needs to do better. Simply having this massive screen and projecting a background onto it isn’t good enough; designers and producers need to get much more creative with how the AR wall is used and how it blends in with what’s in front of it. Discovery is over now, but with other Star Trek projects still in production… I hope more can be done in future. Some of the AR wall scenes in Season 5 felt like those in Season 3, when the AR wall was brand-new. By now, designers, producers, and cinematographers should have a better idea of what to do with it!
So that was Discovery’s swansong. The show’s final season doubled-down on many of the mistakes that have been present since the beginning, and told a cookie-cutter story that was basically the same as all the others. There was a lot of potential in the historical mystery-adventure idea, but Discovery’s writers and producers couldn’t take advantage. They retreated to the same overtrodden ground as before, and the result was a disappointment.
The final shot of the USS Discovery as she embarks on one last mission.
There was too much repetitiveness in Season 5, and that leads me to one inescapable conclusion: Discovery had run out of steam. With a production team incapable of trying something smaller-scale and genuinely different, with Burnham’s soap-opera rocky relationship, and with another “galaxy-ending threat” to defeat, Season 5 felt no different from Seasons 1 through 4, albeit with a new coat of paint and a deep cut to a random episode of The Next Generation that was better left forgotten. There were some interesting ideas in the mix, some fun new locales to visit, and some creative moments… but they came in a bland, overused, repetitive story that demonstrated to me why it was the right time for Discovery to be cancelled.
I’m pleased that Paramount allowed the show’s production team to go back and craft an epilogue – even if it wasn’t perfect. Getting some kind of closure on Burnham’s story and the series as a whole was important, and with Discovery having been part of our lives for seven years at this point, I’m glad that it got an epilogue to bring closure to her character and the story – as well as a cheeky tie-in with the Short Treks episode Calypso!
The Discovery cast – plus Alex Kurtzman, Rod Roddenberry, and others – at the dedication of Paramount’s “Star Trek Stage.”
In the weeks or months ahead I will take a broader, big-picture look at Discovery as a whole. That piece will consider what the show got right, where it went wrong, and what we should consider its legacy to be as a piece of the Star Trek franchise. So I hope you’ll stay tuned for that! It’s possible that I’ll revisit Season 5, its storylines, or some of its individual episodes in the future, too.
For now, I hope this has been interesting! While I wasn’t impressed with Season 5 on the whole, there were definitely highlights in practically every episode; moments that made me crack a smile, roll my eyes, feel anxious, or just that kept me entertained and enjoying the ride. The season was nowhere near as bad as, say, Picard Season 2 – and while that may be a low bar, it’s one that Discovery cleared on this occasion! I’ll be curious to see what comes next for Admiral Vance, Tilly, and Reno – who will be jumping ship and joining the cast of Starfleet Academy. And I’ll keep my ear to the ground for any more news about upcoming Star Trek productions that could tie in with Discovery. But until then, this is the end.
Farewell, Discovery. I think we can be grateful to the series and its creative team for keeping Star Trek alive and bringing it back to its small screen home.
Star Trek: Discovery Seasons 1-5 are available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. The Star Trek franchise – including Discovery, The Next Generation, and all other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This review contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for practically the entire Star Wars franchise.
I don’t know who first came up with the format, but I really like the way tier lists work. Instead of trying to rank every film or episode in a series in perfect order, we can just give them a grade – which is a nice and easy way of expressing how we feel! So today, I thought it could be fun to make The Official* Star Wars Tier List… of all the shows and films that I’ve seen, at any rate.
I first came to Star Wars in the early 1990s, when I watched the original trilogy at the insistence of a schoolfriend. He had just bought the films on VHS, and even though I’d been getting into sci-fi with TV shows Star Trek: The Next Generation, Space 1999, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons, and films like Flight of the Navigator, E.T., and Back to the Future, somehow Star Wars had completely passed me by. I might’ve seen a few toys in the shops, but that was all. I grew up in a rural part of England in the ’80s and ’90s – but I was too young to have seen any of the Star Wars films at the cinema, so I just hadn’t engaged with the franchise at all.
I first watched the Star Wars trilogy on VHS in the early ’90s.
I was aware of the Star Trek-versus-Star Wars rivalry that fans at the time were still battling out, and as such I recall being unimpressed with Star Wars on that very first viewing. I felt it was somehow in opposition to “my” fandom – Star Trek: The Next Generation – and that some of its storylines were pretty basic and violent compared to what I guess I considered to be the more sophisticated and “grown-up” Star Trek. But that attitude didn’t last long – and after watching the films a couple more times and playing Super Star Wars on the SNES, as well as spending more time with my Star Wars-loving chum, I was officially a convert! I was a Star Wars fan!
And a Star Wars fan I remain to this day – even if I haven’t loved everything that the franchise has put out in the thirty-plus years I’ve been following it. But that’s a brief summary of my history with Star Wars to give you a bit of background as we put this tier list together.
Let’s fill out this tier list together!
Before we jump into the list, a couple of important caveats. As I always say, all of this is the entirely subjective opinion of just one fan. If you hate all of my rankings, if I put a film you hate way too high, or a series you adore way too low… that’s okay! Nothing about this is in any way “objective,” and while I will try to justify my rankings and explain why I placed each production in its tier, you are free to disagree vehemently. There should be enough room in the Star Wars fan community for civil discussion and polite disagreement.
Secondly, I will be ranking a number of Star Wars films, television shows, and – perhaps somewhat controversially – video games. I don’t know about you, but speaking for myself some of the best Star Wars stories have come from interactive media, and there are a couple of Star Wars games that I genuinely believe surpass the films and TV shows in terms of the quality of their storytelling, characterisation, and so on. It wouldn’t feel right to exclude those stories from this tier list… so I’m not!
We won’t be including every single Star Wars production this time!
Finally, I won’t be including any production that I haven’t seen for myself. What would be the point in pretending to rank a series or film I haven’t seen, after all? At the end I’ll make a note of these, but for reasons that I hope are obvious they aren’t going on the list.
I will be giving each Star Wars production one of the following grades: S, A, B, C, D, and F. These work like grades you might remember from school: F-tier is reserved for the worst of the worst, D-tier is pretty bad but a step up, C-tier is mediocre but not terrible, B-tier is generally good, A-tier is pretty great, and S-tier is the absolute cream of the crop! I will rank each production that I’ve seen/played in release order, beginning with the original Star Wars in 1977 and going through to 2024’s The Acolyte – which is the most recent Star Wars production at time of writing.
Phew! With all of that out of the way, let’s jump into the list.
Star Wars (Episode IV: A New Hope) 1977 Tier: A
I think we have to rank the original Star Wars pretty highly, right? This is the film that created the entire franchise; without it, Star Wars wouldn’t exist. It introduced us to some great characters, established a setting that was crying out to be expanded upon, and above all told a really engaging story about the Rebel Alliance, the evil Empire, and a young man caught in the middle of it all. Luke Skywalker is a wonderful protagonist, point-of-view character, and introduction to this world.
The Death Star trench run has become iconic, as have the designs of ships like the X-Wing and Millennium Falcon. The characters of Ben Kenobi, Princess Leia, and Han Solo all felt like they had their own personalities and motivations, seeming to be real people inhabiting this fictional setting. The villainous duo of Darth Vader and Grand Moff Tarkin had weight, meaning our heroes felt like they were in constant danger. All in all, a wonderful start to the franchise and a film I’m always happy to revisit.
Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back 1980 Tier: S
I’m not alone in considering The Empire Strikes Back to be Star Wars’ high-water mark, and I think you’ll see it right at the top of many folks’ ranked lists! And it’s easy to see why: this is a fantastic film. The opening scenes on Hoth set the tone for a story where the villains are on the march, and everything our heroes accomplished last time is at risk of being undone. Luke is able to follow in his father’s footsteps and pick up his Jedi training with the absolutely iconic Yoda, while Han and Leia are betrayed on Cloud City.
The Empire Strikes Back also contains one of the most iconic scenes in all of cinema: when Luke finds out that Darth Vader is his father. This was a pretty shocking twist, and one that reframed much of the story. Lightsaber duelling stepped up about ten notches in this film, and we were also introduced – albeit briefly – to Darth Vader’s master: the Emperor. Iconic designs like the AT-AT and Snowspeeder debuted here, and the Battle of Hoth is still one of the most tense and exciting that the franchise has ever produced. No doubt that The Empire Strikes Back is a top-tier Star Wars production.
Episode VI: Return of the Jedi 1983 Tier: C
On that first viewing of the Star Wars films that I told you about, my friend’s father insisted that Return of the Jedi was a crap film and a poor way for the trilogy to end. And this was not an uncommon view at the time: a second Death Star already feels pretty derivative, the conflict at Jabba’s palace drags on too long, and the Ewoks were an army of teddy bears that disrupted the Emperor’s carefully-laid plans! I wouldn’t say Return of the Jedi is “bad,” but I would say it’s nowhere near as good as its predecessors.
Return of the Jedi also retconned the relationship between Luke and Leia. I maintain that this decision was a mistake, one that’s been compounded by subsequent productions. Having Luke be Vader’s son was a shocking twist that worked; having Leia be Luke’s sister was an attempt to replicate that… but it didn’t live up to what had come before and doesn’t make a ton of sense, either. Return of the Jedi is also the film that introduced “from a certain point of view;” an overly complicated work of semantic gymnastics to justify the retcon in The Empire Strikes Back – and something that was not only entirely unnecessary, but that has also proven damaging to other stories as the franchise has doubled-down.
The Super Star Wars trilogy 1992-1994 Tier: B
The first part of this trio of SNES games was my first introduction to Star Wars in the video game realm – and it was a lot of fun. These games are challenging 2D platformers, and they don’t always succeed at faithfully adapting the story of the films! In order to make some Star Wars scenes and settings fit the 2D platforming mould, some pretty big liberties were taken and the games diverge from those stories in a significant way. However, there’s plenty of enjoyment to be had jumping and blasting your way across a variety of Star Wars environments… or at least there was in the early ’90s!
X-Wing and TIE Fighter 1993/1994 Tier: B
Although undeniably dated by today’s standards, I loved playing TIE Fighter in the mid-90s. I didn’t go back to play X-Wing for several years (I didn’t own a copy at the time), but when I did I enjoyed that game, too. Both of these titles really let players feel like they were genuine starfighter pilots in a galaxy far away – even more so if you played with a joystick! These games were tremendous fun… but also pretty difficult! I imagine returning to them nowadays would be pretty hard, and I admit that I’m definitely cruising on my gamer nostalgia here!
Shadows of the Empire 1996 Tier: A
Shadows of the Empire was one of the first games I bought after getting a Nintendo 64 for Christmas in 1997, and I had a blast going on my very own Star Wars adventure. Shadows of the Empire introduced a brand-new character – Dash Rendar – and dropped him into the story of The Empire Strikes Back. After playing through the Battle of Hoth, Dash has his own adjacent adventure that sees him team up with all of the heroes of the original trilogy while battling against the likes of Boba Fett and IG-88.
This was the first game to really give me the sense of being part of the Star Wars galaxy on my own terms, and I think that’s because of how well-written Dash is as a protagonist. He feels like a real character with his own story to tell, and unlike in games like Super Star Wars, where you’d play as Luke and other characters, introducing someone brand-new really expanded the story. It was a ton of fun to go on this adventure through some wonderfully diverse levels – and the combination of gameplay in space and on the ground was neat, too.
Rogue Squadron 1998 Tier: B
Another classic from the Nintendo 64, Rogue Squadron felt like a huge step up from TIE Fighter thanks to its 3D models and more diverse levels. It was also a lot easier than those other titles, with a better control scheme and more forgiving gameplay. There were also different spaceships to pilot: the X-Wing, of course, but also the A-Wing, Y-Wing, and Snowspeeder, each of which had different weapons that could be useful in different missions.
Episode I: The Phantom Menace 1999 Tier: F
I went back and forth on this, trying to decide if The Phantom Menace does enough to scrape its way into D-tier. But unfortunately it doesn’t, and the film remains one of the low points of the Star Wars franchise for me. I remember the buzz and excitement The Phantom Menace generated on its release in cinemas… and I also remember the controversy and disappointment it caused.
I’ve addressed this before, but the short version is that The Phantom Menace kick-started a story that just didn’t need to be told. We knew everything we needed to know about Anakin, Palpatine, and Obi-Wan Kenobi from the original trilogy, and seeing the rise and fall of Anakin Skywalker just wasn’t necessary. The Phantom Menace also contained some poorly-written dialogue, a convoluted storyline, some questionable character inclusions, and more. However, I will give the film credit for successfully bringing a whole new generation of Star Wars fans on board – and that, more so than anything else, was its objective.
Episode I: Jedi Power Battles 2000 Tier: B
Although less well-remembered than Episode I: Racer these days, Jedi Power Battles was a surprisingly fun action-platformer. The film it was based on may have been a disappointment, but Jedi Power Battles turned out to be a genuinely good time. I picked it up on the Dreamcast, and playing it co-op with a friend on the couch was a lot of fun (especially after a few drinks!)
Jedi Power Battles expanded the roster of characters, with some minor and background Jedi from the film becoming playable. As with Shadows of the Empire above, taking on different roles and playing as new and unknown characters felt pretty good, and the additional characters played well with the game’s expanded story. All in all, a fun romp – albeit held back by the source material’s weak story.
Episode II: Attack of the Clones 2002 Tier: D
Attack of the Clones was Star Wars’ chance to redeem itself after The Phantom Menace… and if that was its objective, the film failed miserably. The writing and dialogue could be shockingly bad (“I don’t like sand,” anyone?) and the film’s overreliance on green screens and CGI that just wasn’t at the level it needed to be has meant it’s aged incredibly poorly. Seriously: the original trilogy, made more than two decades earlier, looks a heck of a lot better than Attack of the Clones, which looks like a Dreamcast-era cut-scene in places.
Attack of the Clones also continued Star Wars’ annoying trend of making every major and minor character related to someone else. In this case we meet Jango Fett – father of Boba Fett and the “template” for the Kaminoans’ clone army. I like watching Palpatine’s scheme unfold, and Count Dooku – played by the late great Christopher Lee – is a fine addition as a villain. But overall, the film still struggles. Attack of the Clones also has characters and story beats that were either set up or expanded upon in comics or other spin-off media, and this left it feeling somewhat incomplete when the credits rolled.
Knights of the Old Republic 2003 Tier: A
Now we’re getting somewhere! Knights of the Old Republic helped me to fall in love with Star Wars all over again and put the disappointment of the first two prequel films to bed. There are prequel-era references throughout, of course, but KOtoR told a story that stood on its own two feet, fully separate from the characters of both the original films and prequels for the very first time. I absolutely adored this adventure, and creating my own character and taking them across the galaxy was just fantastic.
KOtoR’s innovative light side-dark side system was a blast, giving the game more replayability. The companion characters and villains were all absolutely incredible, and the variety of levels and missions on offer was outstanding, too. And the twist! I genuinely did not see the game’s big revelation coming until almost the last second, and when it was revealed I can vividly remember sitting on my couch, holding my Xbox control pad with my mouth just hanging open in shock. After the Vader-Luke reveal in The Empire Strikes Back, KOtoR’s twist is the best the franchise has ever pulled off.
Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords 2004 Tier: S
As great as the first KOtoR had been, its sequel was even better. Despite being a rushed game with some content having to be cut, the story is just absolutely phenomenal, with stunning planets to visit, a war-torn protagonist still suffering the effects of their service and choices they made, and a stellar cast of secondary characters who all feel like real people. My Star Wars love is Visas Marr, by the way, and her arc from Sith assassin to Jedi apprentice is one of the best and most touching in any Star Wars production to date.
There are some wonderful set-pieces in KOtoR II, as the Jedi Exile travels the galaxy in search of the few remaining Jedi Knights and the Sith Lords who had been hunting them. Boss fights against these Sith – and the final climactic fight against Darth Traya – are tense and a ton of fun, and the game’s story is gripping from start to finish. Twenty years later and I’d still love nothing more than to get a proper sequel to this game.
Battlefront and Battlefront II 2004-2005 Tier: B
The original Battlefront games – before EA sunk its money-tainted claws into the series – were great fun. I’m not really a multiplayer gamer, and I like games with strong narratives first and foremost, but there was a lot of enjoyment to get from both of these games. Even the levels focused on the prequel trilogy were solid, and fighting wave after wave of enemy soldiers was something that most games at the time didn’t offer – not like this, at any rate.
In multiplayer was where Battlefront and Battlefront II really excelled, though, and if you could find three friends to play with on the couch, you were definitely in for a fun night!
Episode III: Revenge of the Sith 2005 Tier: C
The final part of the prequel trilogy went some way to redeeming the story, and was certainly a cut above what had come before. There are still issues with visuals and CGI as well as some clumsily-written dialogue, but there are also some tense and exciting moments as the Jedi Order falls and Anakin loses himself to the dark side. The main lightsaber duel between Anakin and Obi-Wan runs way too long for me, but other fights earlier in the film – including against Grievous and Count Dooku – were pretty great.
A critic far smarter than I am once suggested that an extended Revenge of the Sith could have replaced the prequel trilogy, and I don’t think that’s a bad idea on the whole. There would’ve been more time for Anakin’s premonitions and slide to darkness to be shown, and for Palpatine’s manipulation of the situation to play out. All in all, though, Revenge of the Sith may not be perfect, but it’s by far the best part of the prequel trilogy.
Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga 2007 Tier: A
I wasn’t sure whether to include this game, but it’s a ton of fun so why not? This compilation brought together the two earlier Lego Star Wars titles into one package – and with Star Wars apparently complete as a six-film series, it took a comedic romp through the entire story. Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga was just overstuffed with content – so many characters to unlock, things to collect, and areas of levels that weren’t accessible on a first run. The lack of dialogue and mumbling also made the game feel light-hearted and funny – and after the relative disappointment of the prequel trilogy, putting a different spin on Star Wars to make it fun and entertaining again was just what I needed!
Episode VII: The Force Awakens 2015 Tier: D
In 2015, I adored The Force Awakens. Returning to Star Wars’ “greatest hits” seemed to be just what the doctor ordered as a new era for the franchise got underway. However, with the benefit of hindsight the film’s weaknesses come into full view. The decision to have Luke Skywalker go missing – with no reason for why he’d disappeared being written – was a mistake, and with the death of Han Solo, any chance of reuniting the trio of heroes from the original trilogy was gone. The film is also incredibly derivative to the point of outright copying: a young Force-sensitive person from a desert planet joins a rebellion against a faction of space fascists and helps them blow up a planet-destroying super-weapon. There’s even a “trench run,” for goodness’ sake.
Unfortunately, The Force Awakens was a weak foundation upon which to build the rest of the sequel trilogy, and the decision to allow each writer/director free rein to do whatever they wanted led to a jumbled narrative mess. There were positives in The Force Awakens – the character of Finn, for instance, and his story of defecting from the First Order and overcoming his indoctrination, as well as a story that involved an older Han and Leia reuniting to try to save their son. But there were too many missteps and mistakes – and I just can’t forgive that the film squandered so many of the opportunities that a Star Wars sequel should have had.
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story 2016 Tier: S
I didn’t really have high expectations for Rogue One when I heard about it. A prequel all about stealing the Death Star plans just didn’t sound all that exciting – but I was wrong about that! Jyn Erso made for a wonderful protagonist, and her story took her from being apathetic and sitting on the sidelines to leading the mission that inspired the Rebellion. Cassian Andor was such a great character that he ended up getting his own spin-off. The decision to kill off practically all of the main characters was also incredibly bold for this franchise.
There are so many great moments and sequences in Rogue One that we’d run out of time trying to list them all! The mission to Jedha was incredible, characters like Krennic and Saw Gerrera have become iconic, and while I never felt that the destruction of the Death Star needed an in-universe explanation, learning how it came to be sabotaged was genuinely interesting. An unexpected story that expanded upon the lore of Star Wars in a really fun way.
Episode VIII: The Last Jedi 2017 Tier: A
The Last Jedi is a great film. It isn’t as great as it wants to be, and there are places where it misses the mark or where its storytelling gets too in-your-face. But it represents a brave attempt to take the franchise in a different direction, far away from the copycat narrative of its predecessor. Some of the things introduced here really work well and expand our understanding of the Star Wars galaxy. I really like the Holdo manoeuvre, for example, and how the film took a look at the galaxy’s mega-rich citizens who are content to sit out the war, knowing that whichever side wins they’ll still come out on top.
Moreover, the film puts two big twists on the story of the sequels. First, Rey turned out not to be descended from a known character. For me, this made her far more interesting and set her up as a protagonist in her own right. Secondly, Kylo rejected any pull to the light side and tried to seize power for himself, setting himself up as the ruler of the First Order. Both of these twists worked exceptionally well… before they were immediately undone in the final instalment of the trilogy.
Solo: A Star Wars Story 2018 Tier: C
There’s nothing wrong with the main thrust of the plot in Solo: A Star Wars Story… but nothing about the film feels all that special or interesting, either. The story basically doubles down on Star Wars’ prequel problem; we just didn’t need to see this chapter of Han Solo’s life to understand who he is or what his priorities are. We’d already been able to infer all of that from his earlier appearances, and while we learned a bit more about Han in a strictly factual sense… none of that really mattered.
I also loathe the resurrection of the obviously-dead Darth Maul and his insertion into Disney-era canon. Star Wars has continually struggled to let go of characters – even relatively minor and unsuccessful ones – and to see Maul popping up as a “crime lord” of all things was just… ugh. I hated it. The central heist at the film’s core was good enough and there were some solid moments of characterisation. But the film was let down by its fundamental premise.
The Mandalorian 2019-Present Tier: C
The Mandalorian has some fun scenes and great design elements, introduces some creative new characters, takes us to new worlds, and tells a story that dives deeply into a little-known faction. But for me, The Mandalorian didn’t really hit the mark. Its premise of following “the adventures of a gunslinger beyond the reach of the New Republic” sounded spectacular… but within two episodes the show brought the Force back into play. Things only got worse from there, with Luke Skywalker eventually showing up in person to hammer home that this series can’t escape the clutches of nostalgia.
Worse, though, was the protagonist himself – who seemed, for the first season-and-a-half at least, to have no understandable motivation for doing… anything. Mandy seemed to act at the behest of a room full of TV writers, and it showed, with massive story points like betraying his client to save Baby Yoda coming from nowhere. The series is also too short, with Seasons 1 and 2 barely amounting to the runtime of just one season of television – and sharing two halves of a story that would’ve been a lot better if it had played out in a single season instead of two. Things have improved and the series has grown on me, but I can’t escape the feeling that there’s some wasted potential here.
Jedi: Fallen Order 2019 Tier: A
I had a great time with Jedi: Fallen Order. After the disappointments of both The Mandalorian and The Rise of Skywalker (which I watched before playing the game), I was glad to see that I hadn’t entirely fallen out of love with Star Wars. Cal’s story of re-establishing his connection to the Force, rediscovering his Jedi side, and going on a rip-roaring adventure across the galaxy was great, and I felt like I was right there with him thanks to some outstanding voice acting and animation work.
Jedi: Fallen Order also gave me what is probably my favourite Star Wars video game moment: piloting an AT-AT! This sequence is one of the best in the game and is just perfectly-paced. There are a few points that come together to deny Fallen Order S-tier status, though: overuse of Super Mario 64′s sliding mechanic, having to both re-play levels and backtrack through them after finishing an objective, and a confusing false choice early in the game all took some of the shine off of what was an otherwise fantastic experience.
Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker 2019 Tier: F
What an atrocious film. The Rise of Skywalker jumps around, barely spending more than a few seconds per scene, desperately trying to undo the big story points from The Last Jedi. It basically tries to cram two films’ worth of plot into the runtime of a single title, and so many of the storylines it tries to include just fall flat on their face. The clumsy insertion of Palpatine into a story that was never meant to be his not only ruins this film, but manages to make the rest of the sequel trilogy and even the original trilogy feel worse in retrospect.
The Rise of Skywalker betrays or completely misunderstands most of the characters it includes, like Kylo, Rey, and General Hux, undoing key parts of their stories and characterisations. It ignores altogether major characters like Rose and Finn, relegating them to the sidelines and having no idea how to use them. And finally, it contains probably the single worst line of dialogue in the entire Star Wars franchise: “Somehow Palpatine returned.” I don’t like to single out individual writers or creatives for criticism, but I genuinely hope that the people who wrote that line, approved it, and got it into the film never work in the entertainment industry again.
Star Wars Squadrons 2020 Tier: B
Squadrons feels like an updated TIE Fighter or Rogue Squadron – and yes, those are compliments! Thanks to major advances in graphics, sitting in the pilot seat of a starfighter has never looked more beautiful, and the game really succeeds at capturing that sensation in a way few titles ever have. Narratively there wasn’t a lot to say, but the story was worth following to its conclusion, and the side characters were solid in their own ways. I haven’t fired up Squadrons for a while, but I really should jump back in and have another go – it really is the best Star Wars simulator out there right now.
The Disney+ Lego Star Wars Specials 2020-Present Tier: A
There have been three Lego Star Wars specials made for Disney+ at time of writing – though a fourth is arriving imminently. And all of them have been great fun! I like the less serious tone of these specials, and how each one so far has had a seasonal theme. Terrifying Tales also did more to give backstory to Ben Solo and the Knights of Ren than the entire sequel trilogy had done, and it was quite cathartic to see that!
Star Wars shouldn’t be taken too seriously all the time, and these Lego specials really lean into the more fun, light-hearted, and casual side of the franchise. At the end of the day, Star Wars is supposed to be entertaining – and if there’s one thing I can say about the Lego Star Wars specials it’s that they absolutely entertained me!
The Book of Boba Fett 2021 Tier: A
I really did not expect to like The Book of Boba Fett. Boba himself always felt like a non-entity to me; a minor character elevated, somehow, through high sales of his action figure, but who did nothing of consequence in the original films and who died incredibly easily in his only big fight! The series also had a huge hurdle to overcome: how did Boba survive dying in Return of the Jedi? I wouldn’t have chosen to greenlight The Book of Boba Fett if I’d been in charge!
But I was wrong, and I found a surprisingly entertaining series with heart. Boba’s adventure on Tatooine was just plain fun in a way that I really hadn’t been expecting, and this miniseries about a character I’d always been underwhelmed by was much, much better than I could have expected. It wasn’t perfect, of course, and in some ways it felt closer to The Mandalorian Season 3 than a standalone project. But I had fun with The Book of Boba Fett for what it was, and I enjoyed its contribution to the Star Wars galaxy.
Obi-Wan Kenobi 2022 Tier: F
Obi-Wan Kenobi has done the impossible: it has eclipsed both The Phantom Menace and The Rise of Skywalker to become my least-favourite Star Wars project of all time. The series was already going to tell the least-interesting chapter in Obi-Wan’s life, but it ended up completely ruining his character and undermining one of the most powerful moments in A New Hope. It’s the textbook example of why prequels and mid-quels have to be handled with care, and honestly I could write a book about all the things this series got wrong.
In principle, the idea of Obi-Wan leaving Tatooine to rescue Leia could have worked, but it would’ve needed to be a completely different story, one that kept Darth Vader completely out of it. Bringing back Vader for yet more lightsaber duelling with Obi-Wan just felt desperate and tacky, and the entire series fell apart. It was unnecessary in the first place, poorly-written, and with a central premise that completely undermines Ben Kenobi’s role in A New Hope.
Jedi: Survivor 2023 Tier: D
I was properly excited to get a sequel to Fallen Order and to get back out in the Star Wars galaxy with Cal and the crew of the Stinger Mantis. But the story Jedi: Survivor told was pretty weak and convoluted by comparison. The sheer randomness of parts of the story – like Greez just accidentally building his cantina atop ancient Jedi ruins – went a long way to undermining it, the surprise return of Master Cordova completely fell flat, an ancient Jedi sealed in a bacta tank for centuries was kind of silly, and a “lost” planet that no one could reach just felt like a boring macguffin. Fallen Order gave Cal a quest that I could follow and that seemed to flow naturally from point to point. Survivor felt much more artificial and constructed.
The game was also let down, in my view, by a reliance on open-world level design that just didn’t fit the story. The supposedly hidden, off-the-beaten-path settlement of Ramblers Reach was located a stone’s throw from two huge Imperial bases and the headquarters of a pirate warlord, and the Jedi outpost on Jedha was walking distance from two massively important areas, too. And of course, there was a traitor in Cal’s group who was so incredibly obvious from his first second on screen that he might as well have had the words “secret bad guy” tattooed across his forehead. The game being released way too early while unfinished and full of glitches didn’t help matters, either.
The Acolyte 2024 Tier: B
So we come to The Acolyte – the latest Star Wars series at time of writing! Although it proved to be controversial, I generally liked what I saw in this one-and-done series. Stepping away from the “Skywalker saga” to tell a story in a different time period is something I’d been wanting to see on the big or small screen for a long time, and a focus on the Sith was also something interesting. I don’t think The Acolyte hit all of the high notes it was aiming for, but it was decent nevertheless.
If Star Wars is going to survive long-term, stepping away from familiar characters and the time period of the Empire will be necessary, and The Acolyte is the franchise’s first real attempt to do so. That is admirable, even if it comes a bit late in the day! The story also framed the Jedi Order in somewhat of a negative way, showing how it can fall prey to internal politicking, emotion, and disagreement – all of which were themes that were present in the prequel and sequel trilogies.
So that’s it!
It’s Old Ben Kenobi!
I’m pretty sure that those are all of the Star Wars films, games, and TV shows that I’ve spent enough time with to place on this list. You’ll note some absences: the animated Star Wars shows of the 2000s/2010s, as well as Andor, Ahsoka, and the Force Unleashed games, to name but a few. I haven’t watched or played everything in the Star Wars franchise – and I probably won’t get around to all of them. That’s why they’re not part of this list.
Let’s take a look at how the final tier list looks:
You can open this image in a new tab if you want a closer look!
Putting this tier list together has been great fun, and it’s been interesting to revisit some of these Star Wars projects. It’s been a long time since I so much as thought about the TIE Fighter game, and I haven’t re-watched the likes of The Mandalorian Season 1 since it premiered, so going back to them has certainly been something different.
I hope none of these opinions proved to be too controversial! At the end of the day, I’m a Star Wars fan – but I don’t enjoy every single thing that has been produced for the franchise. Still, whether we agree or disagree on what the highlights are, I think you can see that there are more positives than negatives in this wonderful space epic!
All that remains to say is this: May the Force be with you! And I hope you’ll check back soon for more Star Wars discussion here on Trekking with Dennis.
*Obviously this list is not official in any way. The title is a joke!
Most films and TV shows in the Star Wars franchise can be streamed on Disney+ or purchased on DVD, Blu-ray, or digitally. Some games discussed above are out-of-print, others may be available on PC, Xbox, PlayStation, and/or Nintendo consoles. The Star Wars franchise – including all films, games, and television shows discussed above – is the copyright of Lucasfilm and The Walt Disney Company. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Last year, I put all ninety-six of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe’s racetracks into a tier list! Since then, I’ve kind of taken a break from writing about Nintendo’s premiere kart racing series; with no new tracks being added and with Mario Kart Tour also on its last legs, there hasn’t been a lot to say. But with Nintendo planning to launch its next console within the next year-ish, it’s quite possible that a new Mario Kart game could be closer than we think! With that in mind, I thought it could be a bit of fun to predict which racetracks from previous games might be in Mario Kart 9 at launch.
Those last two words – “at launch” – are critical here, because I believe that Nintendo will see Mario Kart 9 as a kind of live-service title, building on what was accomplished with Mario Kart 8′s DLC, Tour, and finally the Booster Course Pass. Across Mario Kart 9′s lifetime, I expect to see new racetracks added periodically – and perhaps new and different variants of tracks as well. So I guess that’s my first prediction about Mario Kart 9: the game will be an ongoing “live-service” type of experience, perhaps with some kind of additional charge to download all of the new racetracks as they’re created… or god forbid, a monthly subscription and microtransactions!
This is my full Mario Kart 8 Deluxe + Booster Course Pass tier list, in case you missed it last year!
For this list, I’m going to assume that Mario Kart 9 will launch with the same number of racetracks as Mario Kart 8 did in 2014. I was one of about seventeen people who owned a Wii U at the time, so in case you weren’t – or in case you’ve forgotten because it was literally a decade ago – Mario Kart 8 arrived with 32 racetracks. Sixteen were brand-new and sixteen retro tracks returned from earlier games in the series. I’ll be picking sixteen retro tracks today that either seem very likely to be part of the next Mario Kart game or that I’d really like to see included.
As always, an important caveat: this list is the entirely subjective opinion of one Mario Kart fan. Nothing I say is in any way “objective,” so if you hate all of my choices or I exclude a racetrack that seems blindingly obvious to you… that’s okay! There’s enough room in the Nintendo fan community for polite discussion and differences of opinion. Secondly, I don’t have any “insider information,” and I’m not trying to claim that any of these racetracks will be part of the next Mario Kart game. I’m not even certain that Mario Kart 9 is in development – and a port of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe + The Booster Course Pass could be just as likely to be part of the launch lineup for Nintendo’s next console.
Dry Bones racing on SNES Mario Circuit 3.
I’ve placed my sixteen retro racetracks in four “cups” – just like they would appear in a real Mario Kart game. I’ve tried not to pick too many tracks from the same game, nor exclude any of the games in the Mario Kart series. While I’ve prioritised racetracks that didn’t appear in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass, there will undoubtedly be some retro racetracks from that game and its expansion pack, so I haven’t excluded them.
Phew! With all of that out of the way, let’s take a look at my predictions!
The Dennis Cup
Track #1: SNES Vanilla Lake 1
I genuinely thought we’d get a Vanilla Lake track in the Booster Course Pass – but we didn’t! This snow and ice track was part of Super Mario Kart way back when, and it provided a bit of variety thanks to its slippery surface and wintery theme. Of the two Vanilla Lake tracks in Super Mario Kart, the first one actually has a little more variety with a narrow section near the finish line and a couple of patches of melted/broken ice as hazards to avoid. I think there’s a lot that Nintendo could do with this track, in spite of its pretty boring circular layout, as we’ve seen with other recreated SNES and GBA tracks.
Track #2: 3DS Wuhu Mountain Loop/Maka Wuhu
Mario Kart 7 was the first game in the series to have racetracks split into sections instead of laps – and Wuhu Mountain Loop was an incredibly fun and diverse racetrack as a result! Based on the island setting of Wii Sports Resort, Wuhu Mountain Loop takes racers on a real journey right across the island, and includes beach scenes, a road, a town, a cave, an underwater section, and a long glide to the finish line. Unlike most racetracks – which only use one or two themes – Wuhu Mountain Loop has basically everything that Mario Kart 7 had to offer.
Track #3 Wii Toad’s Factory
I know this is a minority opinion… but I really don’t enjoy Toad’s Factory. Its layout isn’t anything special, there are a couple of awkward pinch points, and its musical accompaniment is one of the worst in Mario Kart Wii in my opinion. All that being said, Toad’s Factory is probably the most memorable and unique Wii racetrack that hasn’t yet made a return. Speculation was rife that it would be part of the Booster Course Pass, and it feels all but certain to join the roster of the next Mario Kart game… even if I wish it wouldn’t!
Track #4: Tour Piranha Plant Pipeline
Not to be confused with the 3DS track Piranha Plant Pipeway, this Tour track is the only one from the game not to have been brought into the Booster Course Pass. As such, I feel it’s a dead cert to join the next Mario Kart game. I haven’t played this one for myself, but from the gameplay I’ve seen online it looks like a fun romp through some of the Mushroom Kingdom’s famous warp pipes. There are a couple of different variants, so this could be one that has a different layout for each lap as we’ve seen with other Tour tracks.
The Chris Pratt Cup
Track #1: N64 Luigi Raceway
Every Mario Kart game needs one or two relatively straightforward racetracks to ease newbies into the experience, and Luigi Raceway from Mario Kart 64 fits the bill. When I first played it on the N64 I remember being blown away by the big screen above the tunnel that showed my driver in action – that was an incredibly cool feature at the time! This racetrack returned in Mario Kart 7 and Tour, so I think it’s a pretty good candidate for a full-scale remake.
Track #2: DS Luigi’s Mansion
There have been plenty of dark, spooky, ghostly racetracks across the Mario Kart series… but none are as unique as Luigi’s Mansion. Based on the GameCube game of the same name, this racetrack takes the haunted house theme in a really fun direction. There’s a swamp and part of a forest outside, and the race through the mansion passes by several locations from the first game in a series that’s now established itself as one of Nintendo’s best-sellers. If a fourth Luigi’s Mansion game is in the offing, bringing this racetrack back could be a great decision.
Track #3: Wii U Animal Crossing
I just adore this racetrack. I love how there are four different versions for different times of year, the music is beautiful, and the racetrack is overstuffed with characters, buildings, and other references from the Animal Crossing series. New Horizons is the second-best-selling Switch game, and a new entry in the series is surely coming, so adding this racetrack into the next Mario Kart game is a great way to keep the series in players’ minds. The only reason I could see Nintendo opting not to include this racetrack is if the developers of Mario Kart 9 wanted to create a four-track Animal Crossing cup, with different racetracks based on different parts of the Animal Crossing island.
Track #4: Tour New York Minute
I would argue that there were probably too many Mario Kart Tour city racetracks in the Booster Course Pass, and by the end the novelty of racing through real-life locations had begun to wear off. With that in mind, I doubt that all or even most of the cities will return when Mario Kart 9 launches – though they may be added later, if my theory of regular racetrack additions proves accurate! If Nintendo picks only one of these to bring back at the beginning, though, I hope it’s New York Minute. I adore the jazz soundtrack, the city and its locations feel really great, and I even recognised some of the places from my own visit to New York City some years ago.
The “Why Does Pink Gold Peach Exist?” Cup
Track #1: GBA Lakeside Park
I love this track’s primaeval feel, with a jungle and volcanoes in the background. The volcanoes also begin to erupt once the race reaches lap 2 – something pretty creative for the Game Boy Advance! Though it doesn’t have a ton of Mario or Nintendo theming, there’s a lot to love about this track’s aesthetic and design. It’s also been brought back in Tour – but a proper remake, perhaps incorporating new features like gliding or underwater racing, could be an absolute blast.
Track #2: Switch Squeaky Clean Sprint
Shrinking down Mario and the gang for a race around a bathroom was a surprising amount of fun in the Booster Course Pass! The race down the plughole, complete with muck and grime, felt truly icky the first few times I raced on this track, and there’s just something humourous about a bathroom setting that makes Squeaky Clean Sprint feel… well, fun! There are a few ways that I could see it being adapted for new styles of play, too, perhaps with some way of shrinking and growing racers through different sections of the track, for example.
Track #3: N64 Bowser’s Castle
Every Mario Kart needs at least one retro Bowser’s Castle track… right? For me, the Nintendo 64 version of this Mario Kart staple is still the high-water mark that others have yet to reach. Giving it a full remake, perhaps adding in a couple of new features or places where gliding or anti-gravity are present, could work wonders. This track’s theming, music, obstacles, and layout are damn near perfect, though, so I hope the developers don’t change it too much!
Track #4: GCN Mushroom City
Mushroom City is one of a handful of racetracks from the GameCube to have never returned – and I think it’s time to change that! Moving vehicles always make for interesting obstacles in Mario Kart, keeping races on the same track feeling different and perhaps a bit more tense! Mushroom City is certainly a good example of how well this can work, and its night time setting in an urban cityscape is something a bit different for the series, too.
The Mario’s Moustache Cup
Track #1: Switch/Tour Merry Mountain
I adore Merry Mountain’s Christmas village theming, and the musical accompaniment is perfect, too. Maybe the final downhill portion could be worked on to make it a bit more interesting, but I really can’t fault this wonderful Christmassy track. Both Mario Kart Tour and the Booster Course Pass can lay claim to this one; it was released for both games at about the same time. It’s always a blast to see Mario and the crew racing through Santa’s village, past a flying Christmas train, and down the mountain to the finish line!
Track #2: 3DS Shy Guy Bazaar
Desert racetracks in Mario Kart are seldom my favourites. They tend to be a bit too one-note and bland – but Shy Guy Bazaar put a totally different spin on the theme. Set at an Arabian Knights-style marketplace after sunset, the track just has a really nice vibe to it that’s totally different from any other desert track in the series. I hoped it would come back in the Booster Course Pass – but maybe Nintendo has been saving this one for Mario Kart 9!
Track #3: SNES Ghost Valley 1
Boo Lake’s remake in the Booster Course Pass showed what Nintendo can do with a retro ghost-themed track, and I think we need to see more racetracks from the first game in the series! Ghost Valley 1 has a fun shortcut that, with a little bit of work, could be adapted in all sorts of fun and interesting ways. I like the boardwalk and the creepy yet understated music as well as a fun layout. Ghost Valley 1 could be the perfect track to race through next Halloween!
Track #4: GCN Rainbow Road
My heart says that Nintendo should take another crack at recreating N64’s Rainbow Road because that’s my favourite, and my head says that SNES Rainbow Road will be back for the fifth game in a row because of how popular it is – but this time I hope Nintendo revisits one of the only Rainbow Road tracks that has never been recreated. This version, from the GameCube, has some really fun features in its own right, as well as a cool design and a great soundtrack. Bringing back tracks that haven’t been seen in a while should be part of the next game – and there’s room for at least one Rainbow Road in the lineup!
So that’s it!
Did your favourite make the list?
Those are my totally-not-official predictions for the racetracks that Nintendo could choose to include in the launch version of Mario Kart 9 – or whatever the next game in the series will be called!
I’m in two minds about when we could see a new Mario Kart game. On the one hand, the upcoming launch of a new Nintendo console and the fact that Mario Kart 8 is now more than ten years old should surely mean that a new entry in the series is imminent – perhaps even as a launch title for the new console. On the other, the Booster Course Pass only wrapped up a few months back, and there’s a case to be made that porting Mario Kart 8 Deluxe to the new console instead of creating a brand-new game is the way to go. Players are still enjoying the Booster Course Pass – and I’ve only played some of the tracks in the final couple of waves a few times apiece. So… I genuinely couldn’t tell you whether Mario Kart 9 is going to arrive next year or not for several years!
Dry Bones using a super horn to overtake Baby Daisy at Sunshine Airport.
That being said, I hope this has been a bit of fun. I tried to concentrate on racetracks that haven’t had a lot of attention in recent years, as well as a few of my personal favourites. It’s amazing how often those two categories overlap, now that I come to think of it! I had a blast going back to revisit some of these racetracks while putting together this list, at any rate.
Whether we get a brand-new Mario Kart game in the next few months or whether we’ll have to make do with a port, I hope you’ll stay tuned here on the website. When we eventually get news about Nintendo’s next console and its launch lineup, I’ll do my best to take a look and share my thoughts.
Until then… see you on the racetrack!
Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass DLC are available now for Nintendo Switch. Mario Kart Tour is available for iOS and Android devices. The Mario Kart series – including all titles and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Nintendo. Some screenshots courtesy of the Super Mario Wiki. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
We’ve just seen one of the biggest and most expensive failures in the history of video games. That isn’t hyperbole: Sony’s hero-shooter Concord is now one of the worst flops of all time. Whole books could be written on this topic, with Concord becoming a case study in how not to develop and launch a game – but for now, I’ll try my best to break down what happened, what went wrong for Sony… and most curiously of all, why it won’t actually matter to the company or its PlayStation brand.
The tl;dr is this: Concord was launched years too late into a massively competitive genre, one that has already seen high-profile flops from big studios and developers. Its art style was generic, it didn’t stand out from the pack, and it offered prospective players no reason to switch from other, better-established titles in the hero-shooter genre. But worst of all, Sony was demanding $40/£35 for a game in a genre where the most successful titles are free-to-play. There was no way players were gonna take a punt on an expensive new game when there are so many free ones with huge, established playerbases.
Everything about Concord just screams “generic.”
But that isn’t all there is to say. Concord caught criticism for “being woke,” finding itself on the wrong side of the culture war in the video games arena. Releasing at the same time as both Dustborn – which was also highly criticised for its social justice narrative – and Black Myth Wukong, which the “anti-woke” crowd have rallied around thanks to dubious claims surrounding its development and supposed rejection of “interference” by companies allegedly pushing “an agenda.” Concord was harmed by these comparisons, no doubt.
There’s also the fact that the live service/games-as-a-service marketplace is oversaturated. There are only so many players who want always-online competitive multiplayer titles, and most of them are already committed to one or two games. If Concord had been free-to-play, more people might’ve been willing to at least fire it up and give it a try. But for the stupidly high price that Sony demanded? It’s really no surprise that Concord failed to make a dent in this very difficult market.
Concord promised to let players “battle across the galaxy!”
Shortly before I started to write this article, Sony announced that everyone who bought Concord would be given a full refund and the game would be pulled from sale. The game was only released at the end of August; Concord didn’t even last two weeks before Sony pulled the plug. And unlike in the past when some publishers have killed their live-service games… I completely understand why Sony did it and I can even say without a hint of irony that it was the right call. If no one is playing your live service game – and Concord, at least on PC, was seeing player counts of well below 100 concurrent users – then keeping it online is only going to cost money. And Concord has already proven to be a huge expense for Sony.
The claim that Concord had been in development for “eight years” seems to stem from a single quote from one of the developers and hasn’t been fully confirmed. But at the very least, the game was in full development for well over five years, and Sony even pulled resources away from other titles to support Concord. The game has cost Sony well over $100 million, not even counting the money spent on marketing it over the last couple of months. This is certainly one of the most expensive failures that the video games industry has ever seen.
Concord’s player count on the 3rd of September 2024. Image Credit: SteamDB.info
But the strange thing is that Concord’s failure really won’t have much of an impact on Sony. The company doesn’t have all of its eggs in one basket, and both its hardware and software divisions are making money hand over fist elsewhere. Sony may even be able to write off Concord’s development costs – or a large portion of them, at any rate – as a loss against its tax bill, further reducing the impact of the game’s catastrophic launch.
This is something that’s increasingly happening in the video games industry. The few massive corporations that dominate the gaming landscape are quite happy to spend vast sums of money on creating new games, because they only need to find one successful title out of a whole bunch. Sony can write off Concord without doing much harm to its broader business model. Would the company have preferred it if Concord had been the next big thing, dethroning Overwatch and Grand Theft Auto V to become the best-selling multiplayer game of the decade? Sure! But you can bet that no Sony executive will lose any sleep over its failure. They have many more titles coming along across a range of genres – and they only need one or two to become big hits.
Sony’s profits from the first quarter of 2022. The company absolutely will not care or even notice Concord’s failure.
If developer Firewalk Studios had been working independently, Concord’s failure would have undoubtedly ruined the company and its leadership team. And while it’s still quite possible – likely, even – that Firewalk will be shut down by Sony as a result of this situation, Sony itself will carry on virtually unscathed. Such is the nature of the business now that gaming has gone down this corporate path.
Concord was created to be Sony’s answer to Overwatch, Apex Legends, and Valorant. The company saw the potential in the hero-shooter genre and thought it could find a way in, hoping to print money on the scale of some of those other games. But nothing about Concord stood out – the game itself looked like a cheap copy of more successful titles. Which is what it was, at the end of the day.
Concord was supposed to be a competitor to the likes of Overwatch and Apex Legends.
Games need something to get players interested. The first thing many players notice – consciously or subconsciously – is the way a game looks. And everything I’ve seen of Concord from its level design, weapons, and characters just looked derivative and unimpressive. There’s nothing wrong with games taking inspiration from successful titles – remember when first-person shooters were literally known as “Doom clones?” But in the current highly-competitive market, a new title trying to garner attention and support from players who are already immersed in other titles needs something to stand out. And Concord had nothing.
I feel for the developers who poured years of work into Concord. I spent a decade working in the games industry, and I know that developers are passionate people who genuinely care about making the best, most creative titles they can. Concord’s failure will be a crushing blow to the people who worked hard to bring it to life, and we mustn’t forget the human element in this story. The game could also be damaging to people’s careers and future prospects in the industry – particularly if Firewalk Studios is shut down, as seems likely.
Will Sony keep Firewalk Studios around after this flop?
Because Concord’s potential failure was built into Sony’s plans, nothing will happen to the company. The situation is embarrassing for Sony, sure – no one wants to win the gold medal for “worst-selling game of all-time.” But Sony has the money and the market share to walk it off, and when Concord is completely forgotten in a few weeks’ time, there genuinely won’t be any consequences for the company or for the executives who pushed for this game to be created, marketed, and sold in the way that it was. Sony will refocus its efforts on its next live service, always-online multiplayer title… and then the next one after that, if it also ends up like Concord.
We are firmly in an era of “live service spirals,” and the industry’s big corporations can afford to keep sharting out games like Concord every few months, if necessary. They’re all just hoping to either create or buy the “next big thing,” and they’re willing to waste as much money as necessary to ultimately make as much money as possible. This is why Microsoft bought Activision and why Sony shelled out to buy Bungie, just to pick on two recent developments.
The “important update” turned out to be the game’s imminent shutdown and de-listing.
Concord was dead on arrival. Asking for £35 in a marketplace where other games are free-to-play while offering nothing interesting-looking or unique would have doomed it regardless of other factors. Releasing alongside the popular and successful Black Myth Wukong and the derided Dustborn didn’t help by comparison, but the fundamental premise of the game was really what killed it. For a game that took five-plus years to make and cost well over $100 million, that’s appalling. These corporations need people, somewhere in the chain of command, who know the industry and its trends and will pull the plug or restart development way before release. Concord should have been shut down or completely changed months if not years ago – and it’s on Sony’s leadership that that didn’t happen.
Sony is capable of doing that: remember when the Knights of the Old Republic remake was almost killed? That was, at least in part, Sony’s doing – the company saw a “vertical slice” of the game and hated it so much that the development studio that had been working on it was removed and production completely re-started. If they could do that to the KotOR remake – a title that should be a guaranteed hit – why was no one stepping in to insist on changes to Concord?
The playable characters from Concord.
It’s a shame. I never like to see a big game fail in this way, and I really feel sympathy for the development team who undeniably worked their socks off to make Concord. But this failure is a consequence of the way modern games are created – Concord wasn’t an organic idea that a passionate developer had. It was a corporate product, designed from day one to make as much money as possible by piggybacking on successful trends. Sony won’t care that it didn’t work, because the company has other upcoming titles that its executives hope will succeed.
So farewell, Concord. Despite Sony’s ambiguous wording leaving open the possibility of the game returning one day, perhaps in a free-to-play form, I suspect that won’t happen. The embarrassment associated with the name “Concord” has hardened hearts against it, and wasting even more money trying to convert it to a freemium title honestly won’t be worth it. Even if Concord re-launched in a few months’ time as a free title, I don’t see it getting off the ground, so the least bad option is to just quietly kill it off. I hope that Firewalk Studios and its developers will be able to move on to other, more successful projects.
Unfortunately, Concord’s failure was all but inevitable.
Concord is in the process of being de-listed with refunds offered to all players. Concord will be fully shut down on the 6th of September 2024. Concord remains the copyright of Firewalk Studios and Sony Interactive Entertainment. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
A few weeks ago, Nintendo broke the news that we’ve all been waiting for: they plan to release a new console sometime in the next fiscal year. The company did so in an incredibly barebones, investor-focused Twitter/X post, but that was enough to get the rumour mill going and to send Nintendo fans into a frenzy! It’s gotten to the point where Nintendo had to say that it won’t be talking about its new console ahead of the latest Nintendo Direct broadcast just to avoid fans and spectators getting upset.
Although no details about the console have been announced – and its release window is any time from April 2025 to March 2026 – today I thought it could be interesting to look ahead and speculate about what the console might be… as well as what it might not be! My usual caveat applies: I have no “insider information.” All I’m doing is speculating and perhaps taking a look at a couple of prominent rumours.
This Tweet/X post officially confirmed that a new Nintendo console is in the works.
First of all, let’s talk about the name. Thus far, when communicating in English, Nintendo has referred to its next machine as “the Nintendo Switch successor console.” Some fans have taken to using the names “Switch 2” or “Switch Pro” basically as placeholder titles whenever the console is being discussed – but I’m confident that Nintendo won’t use either of those names! In fact, I doubt very much whether Nintendo will re-use the “Switch” branding at all, and I expect the new console to have a brand-new monicker.
Although the Switch has been a successful console that has sold incredibly well for Nintendo, it’s not the company’s core identity. Sony has PlayStation and Microsoft has Xbox – and those gaming brands have become well-known for those corporations. But Nintendo is Nintendo – and its consoles have always been known by their names or nicknames. Furthermore, the only time Nintendo has tried to capitalise on the well-known branding of a console to help popularise its successor, it failed spectacularly!
The Wii U did not succeed at replicating the Wii’s success.
The Wii U tried to recycle or retain the “Wii” branding, with Nintendo incorrectly assuming that it would be a selling-point. It turned out not to be, in part because the confused naming and branding led many casual players and parents – a core part of Nintendo’s audience over the past couple of decades – not to fully understand what the Wii U was. Even as late as 2014, two full years after the console’s underwhelming launch, I was still encountering players who believed that the Wii U was nothing more than an accessory for the original Wii.
Nintendo will have learned a lesson from that, and that leads me to beleive the new console will have a new name, and that the company will fully break with the “Switch” branding. As Nintendo has done in the past, a new colour is even likely to come along to help visually brand the new machine. The GameCube had indigo, the Wii had white, the Wii U had a kind of aqua-blue, and the Switch has had bright red. I don’t know what the new colour will be – but I think we can safely assume it won’t be Xbox green or PlayStation blue!
Every Nintendo console (of the past twenty years, at least) has had its own distinct colour scheme.
As for the console itself… I’m in two minds at this point. Will Nintendo stick with the handheld-home console hybrid format that has worked so well for them with the Switch? That seems to be the prevailing wisdom; why change something that’s clearly working and that gamers clearly want, after all? But on the other hand, for the past twenty years Nintendo has been focused on innovating and trying out new and different ways to play. We saw that with the Wii’s motion controls, with the Wii U’s gamepad and asymmetrical multiplayer, and with the Switch’s hybrid system. Will the company be content to simply build a more powerful version of the Switch… or will this desire to innovate mean that Nintendo’s new console will look completely different?
We’ve seen in recent years other companies trying to replicate Nintendo’s hybrid success. PlayStation has a handheld accessory for the PlayStation 5, allowing players to take their favourite PS5 games on the go… at least within their own house. And handheld PCs like the Steam Deck and the ROG Ally are taking the handheld gaming console to new heights of performance. These devices and others are all, I would argue, firmly inspired by Nintendo… but they also surpass what the Switch is capable of in different ways. They also offer players who were unimpressed with the Switch a more powerful handheld experience.
Other companies have jumped on the hybrid model that the Nintendo Switch pioneered.
Perhaps the next Nintendo console might look more like the PlayStation 5 and less like the Switch, with a home console for players who want to play on the couch and a handheld accessory for gaming on the go. If the two systems were linked, sharing a single account, players could have both and get the “best of both worlds.” Or maybe it will look like a beefier, more powerful Switch – a handheld console with a dock to connect it to a TV or bigger screen. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Nintendo follow Xbox and PlayStation in releasing two models – one that has a slot for game cartridges and one that’s digital/download only.
Beyond those ideas, though, I really do wonder whether Nintendo’s desire for innovation will lead to a very unpredictable console! Having experimented with motion controls, could the new Nintendo machine have a more refined and accurate motion controller, for example? Or could it ditch the controller altogether, opting for a gesture-based interface like Microsoft tried to achieve with Kinect? Maybe Nintendo will ditch physical buttons and analogue sticks in favour of a touch-screen interface, reaching out to players who are used to gaming on phones and tablets. Any of these things – and many more that I can’t even think of – seem plausible right now!
Nintendo has never been afraid of innovating – like when they released the bazooka-looking Super Scope for the SNES!
Then there’s the question of games. Nintendo is already working with other companies in the games industry to bring third-party titles to the new console. Development kits have been sent out to some of the industry’s biggest names, so we can expect to see some popular titles and upcoming games join the system on release. As for first-party games, though… I’m not sure what to expect.
There has only just been a new Zelda title – Tears of the Kingdom was released in mid-2023. And Mario just got his latest 2D platformer a few months ago, too. Both of those games could be ported to the new console – and I expect they will be if for no other reason than to pad out the launch lineup. But Nintendo will have to do more than that; the company needs a “killer app” to really get players excited on launch day.
Mario has just had another 2D adventure on the Switch.
There are a couple of games that I think Nintendo might be planning on releasing alongside the new console. The first is a new 3D Mario game – Odyssey was almost seven years ago already, so surely the next game in that series has to be in development. As with the name “Switch 2,” don’t expect to see Mario Odyssey 2 – I’m confident that Nintendo will have a new adventure planned for its mascot! But a new 3D Mario title could build on the success of Odyssey in many ways, and take 3D platforming to new heights.
The second game that I increasingly feel Nintendo will be planning to launch either alongside the new console or within its first few months is Animal Crossing. Now, I’ve been critical of Animal Crossing: New Horizons on the Switch… but the game sold incredibly well, and is the best-selling Switch-exclusive game. No, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe doesn’t count: that’s a port! So with Animal Crossing having exploded in popularity, Nintendo would be well-advised to get the next entry in the series ready in time to launch alongside its new console!
A new Animal Crossing game could be on the cards.
I mentioned Mario Kart 8 Deluxe there… and while I truly believe a new Mario Kart game is coming some time soon, I wouldn’t be shocked at all if Mario Kart 8 Deluxe ended up being ported to the new console, too. Perhaps it would be bundled with the Booster Course Pass – as Mario Kart 8 was bundled with its Wii U DLC packs when it was ported to the Switch. But in lieu of Mario Kart 9 and with the Booster Course Pass having only recently finished adding new racetracks and characters, I wouldn’t be shocked to see Nintendo choosing to double- or triple-down on that game as a relatively easy money-maker on its new console.
So that’s where we’re at, at least as I see it. The name “Switch” is almost certainly going away, and I fully expect to see a brand-new console with a new name, new design, new colour scheme, and so on. Nintendo will surely seek to take advantage of more online features, more live-service/recurring revenue ideas, and the like… but I still believe we’ll get a machine that can be used like a regular old home console. I’m not convinced we won’t see some brand-new gimmick, too – perhaps something that’s not on anyone’s radar right now!
If Nintendo plans to launch its new console next spring – say in April or May – then we could see a full announcement as soon as next month. Regardless, as and when that happens I’ll do my best to take a look at it here on the website – so I hope you’ll check in for that! Until then, I hope this has been an interesting look ahead.
The new Nintendo console is currently scheduled for release between April 2025 and March 2026 to coincide with Nintendo’s next fiscal year. All properties, games, and other titles discussed above are the copyright of Nintendo. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.Minor spoilers are also present for Star Trek: Strange New Worlds Season 2.
We’re marking a very strange anniversary today! See, the 30th of August 2024 is when the Deep Space Nine Season 3 two-part episode Past Tense is set! Well alright, parts of it take place over the next couple of days, too. The episode featured a time travel story that saw Commander Sisko and the crew of the Defiant thrown back in time to the early 21st Century, accidentally taking part in a major historical event. I thought it could be fun to mark this unusual occasion by revisiting the episode and its mid-90s vision of what today might’ve looked like.
Although Star Trek has done time travel episodes in practically every season going all the way back to The Original Series, moments like this one are rare. The franchise’s time travel stories tend to fall into one of three categories: they visit an older time period, like the classic episode The City on the Edge of Forever or The Next Generation’s Time’s Arrow. Then there are stories that visit part of Star Trek’s own fictional timeline – such as when characters from Lower Decks crossed over to visit Captain Pike’s ship, or the Deep Space Nine episode Trials and Tribble-ations, which was created to mark the franchise’s 30th anniversary. Finally, there are stories like Tomorrow is Yesterday, The Voyage Home, Voyager’s two-parter Future’s End, and the Strange New Worlds episode Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow – all of these episodes see characters visit modern-day Earth (i.e. Earth in the year the episodes were written).
Kirk and La’an in the 21st Century.
Past Tense is unusual for a Star Trek episode in that the story took its characters to a time period thirty-odd years after it was made; it’s a unique look at what the franchise’s writers thought 2024 could look like in 1995, based on their own beliefs but also, at least in part, on other stories that referenced the 21st Century. This is almost certainly the only chance I’m gonna get to talk about a Star Trek story on the day it was set; the next such opportunity won’t come until April 2063 – First Contact’s anniversary. And I’m reasonably confident that I won’t still be around by then!
One of the themes of Past Tense, according to the episode’s producers, was an examination of how society reached Gene Roddenberry’s “utopia.” Star Trek’s future has always been presented as a goal that should be within reach; a society which has overcome war, poverty, disease, and division thanks in no small part to technological progress. As Star Trek was continuing to expand, Past Tense was one of the first episodes to ask the questions “how did we get here?” and “what hardships and disasters did humanity have to overcome on the way to this utopia?”
The Sanctuary District seen in the episode.
The biggest issues that the episode’s writers saw were homelessness, poverty, the government’s abdication of responsibility, overcrowding/overpopulation, and wealth inequality. Those factors led their vision of America in the 21st Century to create Sanctuary Districts – areas in which impoverished and homeless citizens could be essentially dumped and ignored by the rest of society. The real world doesn’t have such rigidly-defined, legally-mandated districts… but when you look at many big cities in America and across the western world, there are encampments of homeless people that bear striking resemblance to what we’ve seen in Past Tense.
In addition, people with mental health problems – referred to as “dims” by the characters in Past Tense – are often unable to access the help and support that they need. Many of the “tent cities” that have sprung up in towns and cities around the world are inhabited by people with mental health struggles, addictions, and so on. At least on that front, Past Tense wasn’t far off the mark in its depiction of groups of people ignored and left behind by society.
Dr Bashir and Commander Sisko in the past.
Parts of Past Tense are undeniably bleak; a deliberate choice that might seem antithetical to Star Trek’s depiction of a utopian, enlightened future. But this was intentional on the part of the writers – there was a desire to expand the franchise’s story and look at how that future came to exist in the form that we’re more familiar with. This is something I’d argue that Past Tense didn’t create from nothing – it borrows from The Next Generation’s brief glimpses of an illusory 21st Century as well as comments from Kirk and Spock in episodes like Space Seed from The Original Series. The idea that the late 20th and/or early 21st Centuries were rough times for Earth and humankind is something that has always been a part of Star Trek!
What Past Tense does that those earlier stories didn’t is take a deeper dive into what that might’ve looked like – taking advantage of Paramount’s extensive backlot filming location. The Sanctuary District was created from the “New York Street” portion of the backlot – which had previously been seen in The Next Generation both on the holodeck and in Time’s Arrow. It would reappear multiple times in Deep Space Nine, representing both San Fransisco and New Orleans, as well as appearing in Voyager and Enterprise.
The Bell Riots erupt.
The episode’s story revolves around a major historical event in Star Trek’s fictional timeline: the Bell Riots. Named for Gabriel Bell, the riots changed the course of history. The United States abolished its Sanctuary Districts and was forced to confront the issues that led to their creation in the first place – and if the Bell Riots were removed from the timeline, the alternate future that was created didn’t even have the Federation in it.
There’s a really interesting parallel to The City on the Edge of Forever. In that story, Kirk fell for a woman from 1930, but later learned that her death was essential to preserving the timeline. Sisko, already aware of the importance of the Bell Riots, has to be the one to trigger them – knowing full well what the consequences will be and that many lives will be lost. There’s an element of “fate” to this in some ways, but the way it’s presented in both stories feels a little more scientific. We could argue the toss about whether the Bell Riots should be so influential given that World War III – which broke out a few years later – was surely a more significant factor in driving societal change… but that’s not really the point of the story!
Gabriel Bell… a.k.a. Benjamin Sisko.
Past Tense succeeds because it throws Sisko into this incredibly difficult situation, forcing him to assume the role of Gabriel Bell after Bell is killed. Sisko has to act to preserve the timeline and ensure that the course of history proceeds as it should – even though doing so sparks a riot that leads to many casualties. And this isn’t something abstract for Sisko, either: he’s right there in the Sanctuary District in 2024, face-to-face with the people who will be impacted. It makes for a powerful story.
While we’re mainly focused on Sisko, Dax gets to see 21st Century society from the other side – she ended up materialising on the literal other side of town, and finds herself in the company of one of the city’s more well-off individuals. The contrast between how she and her host live with what Dr Bashir and Sisko find in the Sanctuary District really hammers home the episode’s point about wealth inequality and the need to do something about it.
Dax got to see how the other side of 21st Century society operates.
This is one of many episodes we can point to when some Star Trek viewers try to claim that “everything is politicised nowadays” and that “Star Trek never used to be political!” Can you imagine the reaction in some quarters if an episode like Past Tense was made today as part of a series like Discovery? There would have been an outcry with plenty of allegations of the franchise “going woke” – whatever that even means any more!
Because of its place in the timeline, Past Tense doesn’t feel as dated as, say, Voyager’s two-parter Future’s End or even The Voyage Home – stories set in the year they were produced. It’s still a ’90s production – but in some ways it’s more interesting to look at an imagined near-future than to look at characters simply visiting the modern day. There’s humour in the latter setting, as some of Star Trek’s time travel stories have shown, but there’s more to Past Tense because of its choice of setting.
The USS Defiant in orbit of Earth.
What started with a typical “the transporter done goofed” setup turned into one of the more interesting time travel stories in Star Trek’s back catalogue. Past Tense is an exploration of what was then the near-future – and as of today, our present day. It took on the challenge of explaining how society had developed and how incremental steps were made that led to the idealistic presentation of Earth and the Federation in the 23rd and 24th Centuries. And looking at it today, on the date it was set, parts of Past Tense feel unnervingly accurate.
The legacy of the episode is still present in the Star Trek franchise – a couple of years ago, during the second season of Picard, Sanctuary Districts were mentioned, albeit in a slightly different context. I think this shows how Star Trek grows and incorporates different pieces of its fictional universe into one cohesive setting. Several clips from Past Tense were also remastered for What We Left Behind – the crowdfunded Deep Space Nine documentary that was released back in 2018, where the episode briefly features.
A sign referencing a Sanctuary District from Picard Season 2.
So as we mark this strange anniversary, looking back at an episode and a story that tried to predict the future, there are things the writers of Past Tense got wrong and some they got right. I guess that means that the warning the episode tried to give about poverty, homelessness, and how society should respond to those challenges wasn’t entirely heeded – which is a pretty depressing thought. But in other ways, we haven’t gone to quite such extremes as Past Tense’s writers might have feared. So there is a glimmer of hope, perhaps.
I hope that this has been an interesting look back. As far back as 2022 – when Picard’s second season was on the air – I had in mind that Past Tense’s anniversary was coming, and I wanted to do something to mark the occasion. As I said, it’s quite unlikely that I’ll be here for the next one! Though it would be neat to see First Contact Day for myself. If there’s still a Star Trek fan community in 2063, I wonder what they’ll do to mark the occasion? If, by some miracle, I’m still around by then – and still blogging away here on the website – maybe you’d like to check back and find out.
Until then, I hope you have a very happy Past Tense Day! And do us both a favour: don’t start a riot!
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine is available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. The series is also available on DVD. The Star Trek franchise – including Deep Space Nine and every other property discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
The first part of this review is free from major story spoilers. The end of the spoiler-free section is clearly marked.
Civil War is a film I’d been looking forward to in 2024. It seemed like a picture that had the potential to be serious and timely – and perhaps the kind of film that could’ve ended up as a dark horse when awards season rolls around! While I’m not sure that Alex Garland’s tale of a fractured America quite reached that level, it was an interesting watch nevertheless.
War films can often be brutal in their depictions of violence, as can post-apocalyptic fiction. Civil War leaned into both of these genres at different times, using established tropes of both – while occasionally putting its own spin on some of them. By presenting the violent nature of a dystopian world and the harsh realities of war through the lenses of unarmed journalists, Civil War could feel tense, frightening, and dark. Its four principal characters could often feel vulnerable; caught in an environment where survival was the most important thing – but without any kind of weapon save their press badges.
A cropped poster for Civil War.
Civil War was also a film that didn’t have the political edge that I was expecting. Given the events of the past few years in the United States – deepening political polarisation, the January 6th insurrection, and so on – I was worried that Civil War might come across as preachy; arguing in favour of one party or candidate over another. Instead, the film basically ignored the president, the causes of the war, and even the soldiers fighting in it for the most part, keeping a tight focus on its journalist protagonists. I can see both sides of this argument, and when we get into spoilers we’ll talk a bit more about politics and possible analogies to current events. But for now, suffice to say that the film was far more interested in the journeys of individual characters rather than taking a wider look at societal divisions and the potential causes of a civil war in the United States.
In fact, one character in particular was front-and-centre, even when the story wasn’t being told from her perspective. Golden Globe-nominated actress Cailee Spaeny took on the role of Jessie, a young photographer who tags along with the more experienced journalists in the group. And to me, Civil War feels like her story – a tale of a young person experiencing the brutal realities of a world torn apart by war, losing her naivety or innocence as she journeys deeper into the warzone. The concept of a character’s growth and changes being reflected in a real-world journey from one place to another is something war films like Apocalypse Now have used to great effect. Civil War does something similar as Jessie’s transformation from fresh-faced wannabe to battle-hardened veteran journalist plays out.
Civil War is really Jessie’s story.
Civil War feels like a modern film thanks in part to its soundtrack. Silence is used to great effect at a couple of key moments, but the juxtaposition of upbeat pop tracks with some of the imagery of war – or the eeriness of locales unaffected by the conflict – is something we’ve seen other modern titles do. There’s something unsettling about hearing some of these tracks playing as the film is rolling on – and that was exactly the director’s intention.
So I think that’s all I can say for now without getting into story spoilers. If you haven’t seen the film and don’t want to know what happens – including at the very end – then this is your chance to jump ship! If you’re ready to get into narrative spoilers, though, stick with me and we’ll dissect Civil War in more depth.
This is the end of the spoiler-free section of the review. There are story spoilers from here on out!
First of all, I’m surprised at how little attention Civil War paid to the conflict at its core. Perhaps this is a result of the film’s marketing emphasising the secession of certain states and the fictional backdrop to the war, but I really expected to get a lot more about the different factions involved, some indication of the root cause or causes of these apparently separate breakaway states, and what led to all-out war being declared. There was very little about this in the film itself, yet that side of it was definitely hyped up in pre-release marketing material.
Such a storyline could easily descend into arguments about modern politics, and from that point of view I can see why writer and director Alex Garland may have chosen to side-step the issue. Civil War is ambiguous enough that both sides of the aisle in American politics could project themselves onto the rebels and their opponents onto the seemingly corrupt and unpopular president – and that may have been the intention. However, it also opens up the film to a different kind of criticism – that it isn’t political enough. If there’s a message about the danger of corrupt politicians, or a politician attempting to usurp democracy for their own ends, why not be bold and call them out – if not by name then with a more obvious analogy?
Kirsten Dunst and director Alex Garland at the film’s premiere. Image Credit: IMDB
That being said, I personally read Civil War’s president as being based on or inspired by Donald Trump. The brief mention of the president having sought a third term, the way in which he was made up to look – for want of a better term – more orange and with more fake tan, the way he spoke in such exaggerated terms at the beginning of the film, and actor Nick Offerman’s mannerisms all led me to that conclusion. The president was not a major figure in the film, appearing briefly at the beginning and the end only, but he was an important character and seemingly the main cause or at least a major contributor to what had gone wrong in America.
Despite the president’s death at the end of the film not being presented as a particularly heroic moment – from our protagonists’ perspective, at any rate – I can’t help but wonder if there’s a degree of fantasising or wish-casting in the way those final moments unfolded. Some politicians – Trump in particular – evoke incredibly strong feelings, and I daresay that Alex Garland wouldn’t be the first person to fantasise about storming the White House and having him killed.
Civil War’s unnamed president at the end of the film.
Let’s stick with this idea of the film as a “fantasy,” because I think the backstory of Civil War speaks to a curiously American kind of narrative. The idea of a “rag-tag” group of rebels being able to take on and defeat the incumbent government is a trope of American filmmaking and American storytelling in general. And it’s easy to see why: the United States was founded in such circumstances, when a group of colonists fought against the biggest and most powerful empire of their time to win their independence. Ever since, this notion of the virtuous rebel fighting against the corrupt establishment has been a core foundation of storytelling in America.
We see this theme in cinema – from the earliest films like 1916’s The Crisis through Star Wars’ Rebel Alliance and beyond, continuing into the present day. The conflict in the background of Civil War is very much in this American tradition of rebellion, and underdogs taking the fight to the powers that be. In the 18th Century that might’ve worked… but it’s a total fantasy in today’s world, where UAVs can drop bombs on even the most well-organised militia at a second’s notice. Civil War tried to sidestep what is a pretty glaring narrative flaw for any story that wishes to appear realistic. It does so by ignoring the buildup to the conflict and its early days, showing only the final, climactic battle as rebel forces storm Washington DC. Does that work? Does that contrivance overcome the inherent impossibility of the film’s premise? I’m not convinced – but I’m also not convinced that it matters all that much in a story that’s primarily about a handful of characters and their response to the war. The war itself is the catalyst, not the focus – if it were, this premise would trip up the story a whole lot more.
Director Alex Garland with Kirsten Dunst in a behind-the-scenes photo.
We talked about Jessie’s journey in the spoiler-free section, and how she changed over the course of the film. Even though Civil War wasn’t always shot from her point of view, I see it as really being her story. The other journalists in the group were more or less fixed characters – they saw horrible things, including the death of their friends – but they didn’t undergo the same transformation as Jessie did. In that sense, Civil War is her story more than anyone else’s.
The character of Lee was interesting – but I would argue that Civil War didn’t give her the in-depth look that it really needed to. Lee’s story seemed to be one of post-traumatic stress, and how a character that everyone thought was emotionless and detached was actually suffering on the inside, but struggling to tell anyone. Her interactions with Jessie came closest to hinting at that, but no one else really picked up on what was going on inside Lee’s mind. As the audience, we got to see it – literally, through the use of some creative camera work and sound design that pulled Lee out of the action at a few key moments, and that used stretched-out colours to symbolise the damage that trauma was doing to her. But the film didn’t really expand upon this; we saw it, but Lee’s travelling companions never did. Right up to the moment of her death, Lee was left alone with her struggle.
The topic of Lee’s mental health was raised but never really addressed by other characters in the film.
And perhaps that’s part of the point: Lee represents the kind of person Jessie is becoming. Through her, we catch a glimpse of Jessie’s future – one of trauma and silent struggle. She wanted to be a war photographer no matter what, and Lee shows us what Jessie will become at the end of that road.
One thing I didn’t like, speaking of photography, was how Jessie used an old film camera. Film might be the preference of a few hipsters and artists, but in a fast-paced medium like journalism, it really doesn’t have much of a place any more. As Lee remarks to Jessie at one point in Civil War, only one photo out of every few dozen is a keeper – and when a roll of film might let Jessie take 32 photographs… that’s one usable picture per roll. There’s also the process of developing the negatives and so on… and it just felt like an unrealistic and unnecessary inclusion. Civil War itself was shot on digital cameras, which I think is worth noting. If the director had a preference for film or wanted to make a point about film being somehow “better” than digital… well, it starts to look a bit silly. It doesn’t make a lot of sense in-universe for a character intent on becoming a war photographer to rely on film in a world where digital cameras exist, and the story didn’t have much to say about it, either. It’s not like the film-versus-digital debate even really came up, nor served as a metaphor for something else.
Jessie used a film camera for seemingly no real reason.
Parts of Civil War felt like a road trip – and indeed the film’s working title was “Road Trip” when it first entered production. We caught little glimpses of the film’s post-apocalyptic-inspired world as our characters drove from place to place, with things like random fires, furniture dragged outdoors, and abandoned vehicles on the highway all having become tropes of post-apocalyptic fiction. Civil War leaned into this with some of its secondary characters – the group at the gas station and the racist soldiers in particular. There was a lawlessness to the world that these characters successfully embodied, and the occasional moments of light-heartedness that Civil War gave to its main characters were ripped away in brutal fashion as the reality of the world they now inhabited hit them.
Even when there were moments of joy, playfulness, or a visit to a town that the war seemed to have passed by, there was still a distinct eerie sensation in the air that things weren’t right and our characters were in danger. Civil War used this quite well, meaning that even when the main characters let their hair down or found themselves relaxed, the feeling of danger was never very far away. Even the moments where nothing bad happened – such as at the refugee encampment or in the quaint little town – that sensation was always present. In a way, parts of Civil War almost developed a psychological horror tone, where the sense of danger never fully let up. Any background character, shopkeeper, driver, soldier, or whoever felt like they could be a potential risk.
Visiting this town, untouched by the conflict, still felt tense and even a little creepy.
It’s relatively unusual for a film to make photographers and journalists into its protagonists. All four main characters expressed different degrees of detachment from the conflict they were documenting, as if they had no real political leanings or views on the war. There was some initial criticism of the president – particularly from Sammy at the beginning of the film – but the others mostly avoided sharing their thoughts or opinions. We tend to see journalists in this way, as being impartial observers – even though many of them aren’t! But it made for an interesting viewpoint for a war film to take – particularly for a film that, as mentioned above, didn’t really go into much detail about what had happened or why this conflict was raging.
Civil War had some creative cinematography and camera work that leaned into quite an artistic style. Shots would linger over things like a sprinkler spraying water or an empty road, as well as use exaggerated or faded-out colours to depict Lee’s mental state. The camera would also fade to a grainy black-and-white at times, representing the way Jessie’s photographs would look. I liked most of these, and they felt tasteful and creative without being overused. The long shot of Jessie falling into the mass grave was also particularly well done.
Abandoned vehicles on the highway.
So that was Civil War. It was an intense, brutal film – but one that didn’t have the political edge I’d been expecting. That made it more interesting in some ways as a work of characterisation and a road trip movie through an interesting series of war-torn environments, but it rendered much of the potential social commentary rather impotent. However, by leaving the causes of its war ambiguous, Civil War allows its audience to reflect on the consequences of such a conflict regardless of who may have been “right,” which is arguably a more important message given the political polarisation that has been present for years in the United States.
For my part, I enjoyed Civil War. It’s rare these days for a film to stick in my mind for hours and days after I’ve watched it, but I found a few of Civil War’s most intense sequences playing in my head on repeat after only watching it a single time.
There were some great acting performances from the entire main cast, special effects that hit the mark and didn’t get in the way, creative cinematography and sound design, and all in all, an interesting narrative that hooked me in and kept me engaged throughout. Definitely one to watch if you haven’t seen it already!
Civil War is available now on video-on-demand on Apple TV and Amazon Prime. Civil War will be available for streaming on Max in September 2024 and may also be released on DVD/Blu-ray at a later date. This review contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Wars – The Acolyte. Minor spoilers are also present for other Star Wars productions.
I recently got around to watching The Acolyte – the latest made-for-streaming series in the Star Wars franchise – so it’s time for a review! Before The Acolyte premiered, I had the show on my radar as one of the more interesting-sounding Star Wars projects. For the first time on the big or small screen, here was a project that promised to step away from the familiar characters and time period that have anchored every other Star Wars project to date. With a focus on the Sith, too, I felt that The Acolyte had a lot of potential.
Because I came late to The Acolyte, I’m aware that the series has proven to be controversial in some quarters of the Star Wars fan community. I always like to review a film or show without having been exposed to other people’s thoughts and opinions, but the volume of criticism that has been flung in the direction of The Acolyte has proven to be inescapable over the last few weeks. To be honest, that’s part of why I decided to watch it and review it for myself; a sense of “surely it can’t be that bad” ended up combining with my earlier interest in the show’s setting and time period!
Promo poster for The Acolyte.
As you might expect when the criticism and hatred reaches that kind of fever-pitch: no, The Acolyte was nowhere near as bad as some fans and “influencers” were trying to paint it as being. That’s not to say it was a perfect production by any stretch – there were a couple of pretty in-your-face narrative flaws, some underdeveloped secondary characters, and despite the show’s promise of accessibility to new viewers, a lot of the density of “lore” that can make a franchise like Star Wars offputting to folks who are unfamiliar with its galaxy, factions, and technologies.
I will let you know right off the bat that I am not a stickler for the minutiae of “canon,” nor someone who insists that stories within a franchise must be constrained by every little detail that came before. It’s fine if you feel that way, but this review isn’t going to pick on the very minor appearances of a couple of prequel-era characters and dive into their fictional backstories! Some of the nitpicking I’ve seen online about The Acolyte felt just plain silly to me, and I think the series did a good enough job of avoiding stepping on the toes of the mainline Star Wars films in a big way. The biggest secret to keep in that regard was the existence of the Sith in this time period – and when the series ended with every Jedi who’d seen the Sith assassin dead, and the only survivors believing him to be a “fallen Jedi,” I think we can say that that particular “plot hole” simply isn’t a thing. As the credits rolled on what I assume will be the only season that The Acolyte will get, its story’s loosest ends were tied up.
Master Sol confronts the Sith assassin.
At time of writing, Disney and Lucasfilm haven’t confirmed or denied that The Acolyte will be cancelled, but given the fan reaction and the show’s relatively low viewership – according to reports, The Acolyte was doing a lot worse than The Mandalorian, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and even the maligned Book of Boba Fett – it’s hard to see it being renewed as things stand. Although Disney is keen on this High Republic time period in some spin-off media, I’m not sure that alone will save The Acolyte. Disney’s biggest event of the year – the D23 expo – has just come and gone at time of writing, as has the year’s biggest Comic-Con event, and no announcement of a renewal was made. The first season’s story left things deliberately open, but also wrapped up the main events we’d been following – so it’s not like there’s a cliffhanger desperately waiting to be resolved. All things considered, I’d say cancellation feels likely.
So let’s talk about the series itself. On the whole, I had a pretty good time with The Acolyte – and even though that may be a minority position, I’ll do my best to explain what I enjoyed, as well as criticise what I didn’t.
A couple of main characters and some Jedi redshirts. Should that be “Jedshirts?”
Stepping away from the “Skywalker Saga” is something I’ve argued that the Star Wars franchise has needed to do for a long time, and while some recent productions have taken steps in that direction, The Acolyte is the first time we’ve seen Star Wars move so far away from that story on the small screen. There were a couple of crossover characters – but their appearances were so minor as to barely even count as cameos. Speaking for myself, I was pleased that The Acolyte went down this road, and that after relying on the crutch of nostalgia and familiar characters for such a long time, Disney and Lucasfilm have finally been bold enough to try something a little different.
That being said, there’s still a lot of familiarity in The Acolyte. For brand-new viewers, a group that The Acolyte’s producers claimed to be targeting, I think there was still quite a lot of fairly dense lore and background to wade through in order to fully understand what was going on, which faction was which, and so on. There was an admirable attempt to open up Star Wars to new fans – which is something the franchise was going to have to do sooner or later – but for me, at least some of that seemed not to stick the landing. My impression is that this was a series that new fans could approach a bit more easily than, say, Obi-Wan Kenobi or The Book of Boba Fett, but still not the softest of landings for someone totally unfamiliar with Star Wars. The first couple of episodes in particular throw a lot at the audience with the Jedi Order, droids, hyperspace, and other elements that weren’t really explained.
The Jedi Temple on Coruscant.
And this is actually a trend that continued across all eight episodes – and extended to other plot points, too. The Acolyte didn’t always take the time to fully lay out what was going on in an easy-to-follow way, leaving some scenes and sequences feeling cut short. More time was needed in some of these moments to either add context or an explanation of what was going on. Occasionally the series would revisit events through a flashback that added to something we’d seen earlier – but not always.
This is a problem I’ve had with many made-for-streaming shows over the last few years: they’re too short. The Acolyte, for instance, across its eight episodes runs to a scant five hours, and when several plot-crucial scenes and sequences felt curtailed or in need of additional framing and context, I can’t help but feel that Disney and Lucasfilm have repeated a mistake they’ve already made with other Star Wars shows. Streaming isn’t like broadcast television – there’s no need to stick to rigid schedules. Episode runtimes can be expanded, and even whole new episodes can be added to a season if necessary. Sure, there are budgetary constraints – but when we’re talking about moments that can make the difference between a scene being easily understood and just plain confusing… it’s gotta be worth it, right?
Osha firing her blaster pistol.
To give one example from The Acolyte: at one moment in the second episode, Osha draws her blaster pistol to shoot at Mae – her twin – while she’s trying to make her escape. Osha misses, and the way the scene was framed left it totally unclear as to whether she missed on purpose or by accident. The difference that makes to the tone of the rest of the episode – and to how we are meant to perceive Osha as a character as she deals with Master Sol and other Jedi – is massive. Not knowing how to read that moment made subsequent scenes and sequences feel muddled and confused – and it’s all because The Acolyte’s director, editors, and producers failed to add the necessary context to make that moment easy to follow.
While we’re talking about confusing moments, I felt that it wasn’t always easy to tell which twin was Osha and which was Mae during some of the flashback scenes. Identical twins dressed in identical costumes made it difficult to keep track of who was who – something not helped by the editing and camera angles. Perhaps this was deliberate… but if that’s the case, I struggle to see why. Knowing that Mae was the one who wanted to stay with her coven and learn Force magic while Osha was the one who wanted to leave was essential to both of their character journeys.
Young Mae and Osha (or Osha and Mae).
Since we’re talking about the twins, I find it odd that The Acolyte’s production team didn’t cast a real set of identical twins in the lead role. The younger versions of Osha and Mae were played by twins, but the adult characters were both played by the same actress. This isn’t to criticise Amandla Stenberg’s performance, by the way, as I felt she did a solid job with both Osha and Mae. But rather that it’s worth pointing out that there are relatively few high-profile roles for twins, and just like how casting an able-bodied person to play someone with a disability (or worse, having someone made up to appear to be from a different race) is something most mainstream productions now try to avoid, it’s a bit of an oddity – and one I haven’t really seen mentioned in the conversations surrounding the show.
The Acolyte’s story portrayed the Jedi Order in arguably the most negative way we’ve ever seen on screen – showing how the organisation and its members easily fell prey to internal politicking, arrogance, and self-righteousness. This is a narrative thread that links up with the prequel trilogy – though the prequels were arguably less extreme and still painted the Jedi as the “good guys” in a relatively black-and-white story. It also connects with something Luke Skywalker said in The Last Jedi about the hubris of the Jedi Order.
Master Sol in a flashback sequence.
Moreover, there was a distinct creepiness to some of the Jedi – Master Sol in particular. Think about it: he spied on two eight-year-old girls from the bushes, followed them back to their home, formed an instant, one-sided “emotional connection” with one of them, and then insisted on taking her away from her family to be his apprentice. That has undertones that are genuinely uncomfortable, and contributes to the sense of the Jedi Order as being a strange, almost corrupt organisation. I mean, we’ve known for a long time that the Jedi would “recruit” children at a very young age – and we caught a glimpse of how this worked with Anakin Skywalker in The Phantom Menace – but there was something about seeing Sol so… interested in Osha that made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.
That’s to say nothing of the Jedi’s attack on the Force-witches. Does that organisation/coven have a name in canon, by the way? Perhaps I missed it in The Acolyte, but either way, I felt it was really interesting to see how other Force-sensitive people and groups might behave and how they exist outside of the Jedi/Sith dynamic. These witches clearly used the Force, but they weren’t Jedi or Sith, and that gives us a look at a part of the Star Wars galaxy that we really hadn’t seen much of before. Other Force-sensitive groups have been glimpsed in spin-off media, of course, but this was a deeper dive into an unknown organisation and I appreciated the attempt to expand the Star Wars galaxy beyond what we’ve already seen on screen.
The Force-witches are new to Star Wars (at least as far as I’m aware).
During the flashback depicting the Jedi’s attack on the Force-witches’ compound, The Acolyte gave us perhaps its weakest narrative moment. Torbin, the youngest Jedi padawan in the group, fell completely flat for me. His one-note “I hate it here and I wanna go home” was so unbelievable and childish that it seriously put a downer on the entire sequence, as this was such a pathetically weak way to set up his involvement. The concept of individual Jedi making bad decisions when confronted with the witches is a good one, and I think other elements worked as intended. But the series clearly didn’t have enough time to properly develop Torbin or give him a proper reason for his actions. When the actions he and Sol took are key to the entire rest of the plot… that’s an issue.
The idea of a “vergence” in the Force is something that Star Wars has delved into before. Most significantly, The Phantom Menace set up the idea of Anakin as being either a vergence himself or perhaps having been conceived by one. Mae and Osha seem to follow suit in The Acolyte, with the witches’ coven having somehow created them through the Force. While I’m not concerned about matters of “canon” all that much, and I don’t feel The Acolyte really overwrites or invalidates what we know of Anakin from the earlier films, I would’ve liked to see more explanation of both the vergence and the twins’ conception. Both were left pretty open-ended – which could be great if the show gets picked up for more episodes, but as already discussed, I doubt that’s gonna happen. It could be that this part of the story is never resolved, and that would be a bit of a shame because it seemed interesting.
Will we learn more about the vergence and the “creation” of Osha and Mae?
The decision to include cameos from the prequel trilogy has been a source of some controversy. Speaking for myself, I think these cameos were handled quite well – and there’s more than enough wiggle-room for both the minor character of Ki-Adi-Mundi and the more significant character of Yoda to have been present at the Jedi Temple without being too involved in the events we saw unfolding on screen. For me, it doesn’t tread on the toes of what we knew about either character, and what they have to say in the prequel films and beyond doesn’t seem to be contradicted by their very brief appearances in The Acolyte. The same is true of a character many are assuming to be Darth Plageius – glimpsed toward the end of the series at the Sith base.
As fans, I think all of us can fall prey to nitpicking and to prioritising minor things – throwaway lines of dialogue, secondary characters, or non-canon resources like books or comics – over and above everything else. And from what I’ve seen based on my admittedly limited engagement with the discourse around The Acolyte, I think that’s what’s been happening in some cases. Having heard of the drama before watching the series, I seriously expected Ki-Adi-Mundi in particular to have a massive role – but he was on screen in one episode for a matter of seconds, had no noticeable impact on the plot, and as far as I can tell wasn’t necessarily aware of what transpired. The controversy that some fans have tried to stir up (perhaps because their social media income has become increasingly dependent on the “anti-Star Wars” crowd) feels overblown at best. A storm in a teacup!
Ki-Adi-Mundi – a character first introduced in the prequel trilogy – made a small cameo appearance in The Acolyte.
In terms of production values, I thought that The Acolyte was decent – but there were a couple of missteps. On a couple of occasions the way real actors interacted with fully-CGI environments was sub-par and strayed into the dreaded uncanny valley. Musically, the series was fine – in line with other Star Wars projects, perhaps, but by no means exceptional. My rule of thumb for any film or TV show is that the music shouldn’t be a distraction, and in that sense The Acolyte did okay. But nothing from its soundtrack was particularly original or memorable, and if you played it for me right now, I’d struggle to remember what production it was from or even whether I’d heard it before.
Acting performances were generally pretty good. I particularly enjoyed Lee Jung-Jae’s take on the conflicted Master Sol, and Dafne Keen gave a solid performance as the young Jedi Padawan Jecki Lon. Amandla Stenberg had the challenge of playing two very different characters – but rose to the occasion. The only performance I felt didn’t reach the heights it should’ve was Harry Trevaldwyn’s – he played the role of Mog, a junior Jedi aide-de-camp to Master Vernestra. Playing Jedi roles can be tricky; they have deliberately stifled emotions, making it difficult for some performers to really know what to do. Mog was, thankfully, a minor character who wasn’t on screen all that much. Still, there are far better Jedi performances out there!
Master Vernestra and Mog.
Speaking of performers, I felt that Carrie-Ann Moss was almost wasted in the role of Master Indara. Moss’ role in the series played a big part in The Acolyte’s early marketing material, yet she was only present in a big way in a couple of episodes, with her character having been killed off right at the beginning of the story. I could’ve happily spent more time with Master Indara; compared with the broken Torbin, emotional Sol, and politicking Vernestra, she was the closest the series got to having a Jedi Master in the more heroic style we’ve come to expect.
Stepping away from the rise and fall of the Empire to look at a different era in the Star Wars galaxy is something that the franchise has needed to do for a long time. I’m happy that we finally got to see some of this High Republic era on screen, and I liked some of the subtle changes made to things like Jedi robes. Setting the scene in a different – but still familiar enough – way helped The Acolyte stand out, even if its basic Jedi-versus-Sith idea didn’t feel all that fresh.
A lightsabre battle.
There were standout moments in the series, and I feel the criticism it’s received in some quarters has been unnecessarily harsh. Personally, I’d like to see Disney and Lucasfilm greenlight more projects set in different locales and different time periods, and I hope that the backlash to parts of The Acolyte won’t dissuade them from doing so. There’s only so many times I can see Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, or their descendants saving the day – and if Star Wars is to survive long-term, we’ll need to see more projects like this one. That’s not to say The Acolyte was perfect – it wasn’t. But it was a step in the right direction for a franchise that has felt increasingly stale.
Despite claims made in the run-up to its broadcast, I didn’t feel that The Acolyte would be the easiest and smoothest way into Star Wars for someone brand-new to the franchise. It has the advantage of not relying on familiar characters, but it’s still got some deep cuts to parts of the Star Wars franchise that, I would argue, weren’t particularly well-explained within the series itself. That’s nothing new for Star Wars, of course!
Mae at the end of the story.
The Acolyte held my attention and got me invested in its main characters and storyline. Some of the secondary characters and sub-plots felt under-developed, and I think the series as a whole might’ve benefitted from being ten episodes long instead of eight. This would’ve allowed for scenes and sequences to be extended, for some additional character development, and for some of the show’s B-plots to be expanded upon. This isn’t an issue unique to The Acolyte by any means – but some producers and directors are clearly better at making the most out of eight episodes than others!
At the end of the day, though, I can’t say I didn’t enjoy The Acolyte. Its focus on a Sith assassin was intriguing, its portrayal of the Jedi Order as out-of-touch and arrogant lined up with both the prequels and sequels, and its core story of human characters making decidedly human mistakes was one that was, in a way, relatable. The Acolyte may have done more than any other Star Wars project to date to really humanise the Jedi Order and make some of its members feel like real people. Whether that’s something every fan wanted to see from Star Wars, or whether they prefer to think of Jedi Knights as flawless paragons of virtue… well, I think the backlash in some parts of the fan community answers that particular question!
Of the Disney+ Star Wars shows I’ve seen so far, I’d put The Acolyte in second place – behind The Book of Boba Fett but ahead of The Mandalorian. And light-years away from the awful Obi-Wan Kenobi series!
Star Wars: The Acolyte is available to stream now on Disney+. The series will also be released on DVD/Blu-ray at a later date. The Star Wars franchise – including The Acolyte and all other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Lucasfilm and The Walt Disney Company. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for upcoming and recent seasons of Star Trek: Prodigy, Star Trek: Strange New Worlds, Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, Star Trek: Lower Decks, and Star Trek: Section 31. Minor spoilers may also be present for other parts of the Star Trek franchise.
The Star Trek franchise recently made a splash at San Diego Comic-Con – one of the biggest such events in the world. With a couple of new trailers and several interesting announcements, I thought it could be a bit of fun to talk about what was discussed and shown off at the event. I’ll try to cover all of the biggest pieces of news as well as share my thoughts on what we learned and saw.
First of all, a couple of caveats. I’ve been feeling unenthusiastic and pretty burned out on Star Trek lately, and I still have some catching-up to do on some of the franchise’s recent outings. That doesn’t mean I’m not still a Trekkie or that I’m not still interested in these latest announcements; far from it. But as Star Trek has added more and more series and films to its lineup, I admit that I’ve struggled to keep up. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, everything we’re going to talk about today is the subjective opinion of one person only! If I’m excited about something that sounds awful to you, or sceptical about something you couldn’t be happier about… that’s okay! There should be enough room in the Star Trek fan community for polite discussion and disagreement.
With that out of the way, let’s take a look at what’s been going on at Comic-Con!
Alex Kurtzman and writer Noga Landau at the Starfleet Academy panel at Comic-Con 2024.
The biggest announcement is one that took me by surprise: a new Star Trek series is in development. Though its announcement was haphazard during one of the panels, it has subsequently been confirmed by Paramount (and franchise head Alex Kurtzman) that it is officially in development. With Tawny Newsome (Beckett Mariner in Lower Decks and one of the writers attached to Starfleet Academy) taking a leading role in its creation, the series has been described as Star Trek’s “first live-action comedy series.”
Paramount later released the show’s one-sentence pitch: “Federation outsiders serving a gleaming resort planet find out their day-to-day exploits are being broadcast to the entire quadrant.”
I’ve long argued that Star Trek and comedy go hand-in-hand, with humour having been a big part of the franchise going all the way back to The Original Series. Not everyone was sold on Lower Decks at first, but I think over time the general consensus is that it’s a solid addition to the franchise, and one that didn’t sacrifice its sense of “Star Trek-ness” at the altar of comedy. That was certainly my takeaway from its first couple of seasons.
This announcement was brief and short on detail!
Paramount’s pitch does leave me a little confused, though. Are we going to be getting something like The Truman Show, with hidden holo-cameras on this resort planet? I can see the idea working well as a one-off story; an individual episode in a longer season. But it feels like a premise that might have its limits, especially when the main characters realise that they’re being recorded. Look at the Futurama episode Fry and Leela’s Big Fling as an example, perhaps.
That being said, it’s nice to hear that Paramount hasn’t given up on Star Trek, despite financial issues. The corporation is soon to merge with Skydance, and that could lead to a shake-up in the longer term, including a proposal that would see Paramount+ and fellow streaming service Peacock join forces. It’s good to see that Paramount – at least in its current form – remains committed to making more Star Trek. Would I have rather seen an announcement for Legacy, or another Picard-era series? Well… sure. But that’s no reason to be negative about this comedy series! With it still untitled and clearly very early in its development, I doubt we’ll see it on our screens before 2027.
Co-creators of the new untitled Star Trek series Justin Simien and Tawny Newsome.
There have been a couple of announcements of cast members joining Starfleet Academy over the last few months. The most interesting prior to Comic-Con had been the inclusion of Paul Giamatti, Emmy and Golden Globe winner and multiple Academy Award nominee. Giamatti will play the season’s villain – a concept I’m still not sold on, for reasons I’ve already discussed – but Paramount could hardly have selected a better, more seasoned actor for the part. At Comic-Con we learned that Oded Fehr and Mary Wiseman will join the series, reprising their roles as Admiral Vance and Tilly respectively on a recurring basis. This was something that, at least as of Season 4 of Discovery, made a lot of sense, as both characters were strongly linked to Federation HQ and Starfleet Academy. Tig Notaro will also join the series, reprising her role as Jett Reno from Discovery.
The most surprising announcement for Starfleet Academy, though, has to be Robert Picardo returning to Star Trek as the Doctor! I talked about this years ago, prior to Discovery’s third season, and how the Doctor (or at least a version of him) could still be active in the 32nd Century. It seems that idea was valid after all, and the Doctor will have a role to play in Starfleet Academy. Whether this will be the original version of the character or a future version seen in the Voyager episode Living Witness isn’t clear – I’d guess the former, but modern Star Trek hasn’t been afraid to make deeper cuts to individual episodes, so we’ll have to see! It’s worth noting that the Doctor has recently appeared in Prodigy, so his return in Starfleet Academy doesn’t come entirely out of nowhere.
The Doctor in Prodigy’s second season.
So Starfleet Academy really sounds like it’s taking shape, with its main characters having seemingly been cast and its first season’s story written. There are some interesting announcements and ideas in the mix, though I confess I remain unconvinced at the series’ apparent direction of having an overarching villain and a serialised main story. For me, a series like Starfleet Academy felt like it could’ve been perfect for a return to a more episodic format, akin to what Strange New Worlds has been doing, with different planets to visit week-to-week. Still, the inclusion of the Doctor and the return of characters from Discovery is good news in my book!
Starfleet Academy has also seemingly gotten its official logo/typeface, which you can see below.
The Starfleet Academy logo.
Though I could be reading too much into this, I feel like the font used is a slightly softer, more child-friendly version of the Original Series film-era typeface that we’d often see on starships. The refit USS Enterprise, the Excelsior, and other ships in those films and through the early part of The Next Generation era used a similar font. This seems to carry the same outline, but in a slightly softer and more rounded form, and with a curve to the text that wouldn’t seem out-of-place on a university/college sweatshirt. First impressions are positive, at any rate!
Just prior to Comic-Con there were comments from Prodigy’s co-creators and some of the voice actors about a potential third season for the show. Since we’re doing Star Trek news I’ll share my thoughts on that, and in a word I’d say a third season of Prodigy feels unlikely. It’s clear that the series didn’t do much for Paramount or Paramount+, hence its cancellation and sale to Netflix and other broadcasters. Re-starting production at this stage would be complicated, with question-marks over the rights to the show and how proceeds would be divided. As nice as it would be to think a third season is possible… my gut feeling is that it won’t happen, despite some enthusiasm for the series since it landed on a more accessible, kid-friendly streaming platform.
Prodigy’s second season found a new home on Netflix.
Returning to Comic-Con, we got our first trailer for Section 31. In terms of style, the trailer was undoubtedly the most energetic and modern that the Star Trek franchise has done in a long time; it wouldn’t have felt out-of-place at the cinema in between trailers for big-budget superhero films and summer blockbusters. As a piece of marketing material, I think it was excellent. It had a great soundtrack, clips that looked exciting and entertaining without giving too much away, and it genuinely felt like a project that could open up Star Trek to new fans and especially younger fans. All of that is positive!
However, I do have a couple of notes that are a tad more negative. Firstly, in just the few clips in the Section 31 trailer, I saw several barely-redressed sets from Discovery. I would have hoped that a project like Section 31 would’ve had new sets built, or at least that redresses would have been less obvious. Maybe there are in-universe reasons for that – such as Georgiou and her crew commandeering another Crossfield-class ship, perhaps. But I wasn’t blown away by seeing the same sets and, at one point, the same special effect as I’ve already seen elsewhere in Star Trek.
Section 31 looks explosive… and maybe a little familiar.
Secondly, although the tone of the trailer was positive and modern, I didn’t get a real sense of “Star Trek” from what we saw. The nature of Section 31 as a black ops division always meant that this story would have more freedom to step away from typical Starfleet officers and missions, and that’s something I’m generally supportive of. And as mentioned, I feel that Section 31 having a more modern identity could entice new viewers to the franchise – something that Star Trek needs if it is to survive.
But there should be a balance between telling this kind of one-off story with Star Trek’s core identity. The Kelvin films went in a more action-heavy direction but still managed to retain at least some of what made Star Trek feel like Star Trek, as have other productions post-2017. I don’t want to pre-judge Section 31 based on a few carefully-edited clips, but if one character hadn’t mentioned Starfleet during the trailer, there really wouldn’t have been much else in there to tie in with the wider franchise.
Michelle Yeoh is reprising her role as Empress Georgiou.
I like the idea of exploring more of Georgiou’s background… up to a point. As I’ve said before, prior to discovering her humanity in Discovery’s third season, Georgiou could feel quite one-dimensional. In the trailer, she seemed at her most interesting, I would argue, in what must be a flashback to her ascent to the Terran throne in the Mirror Universe; present-day Georgiou seemed to be back to her old tricks. This leaves me conflicted. I don’t think Section 31 would benefit from being “Star Trek does Suicide Squad,” where a gang of criminals and murderers without much nuance are the only main characters. That would conflict a little too much with what we know of Section 31 from its earlier appearances.
But at the same time, pushing the boat out and doing new things with Star Trek is a good thing. Reintroducing Georgiou to a more casual audience is also going to be necessary, given that it will have been five years since her last appearance by the time Section 31 lands on our screens next year. Flashing back to her time as Empress could be a great way to set up the character – as well as show how much she’s grown.
Is this the moment Georgiou assumed control of the Terran Empire?
The trailer didn’t tell us much about the plot or who the central villain(s) might be – and again, I think that’s probably a smart move. There was enough action and excitement to tease fans and get us invested without revealing too much or spoiling big story beats ahead of time. I’m sure we’ll get to see more in a second trailer before Section 31 arrives – and that trailer could introduce the main villain or show us a glimpse of what Georgiou and her crew are up against.
I will say that I’m a little disappointed that Ash Tyler, played by Shazad Latif in Discovery’s first two seasons, isn’t going to be part of Section 31. Tyler was an interesting character, and he could have been a moderating influence on Georgiou’s more violent methods. We didn’t get to see much of the new characters, but one is reportedly a chameloid – the shape-shifting species introduced in The Undiscovered Country. That could be a fun inclusion, and actor Sam Richardson is a fine addition to the cast. We’ll also get to know a younger Rachel Garrett – the captain of the Enterprise-C who we met in The Next Generation third season episode Yesterday’s Enterprise. There’s definitely a lot going on in Section 31!
Section 31 is scheduled to arrive next year.
There were also trailers for the third season of Strange New Worlds and the fifth and final season of Lower Decks. Despite not being fully up to speed on either series yet, I braced myself for spoilers and decided to take a look! Generally, I liked what I saw from the trailers, and while we didn’t get any massive news about either series, it seems like their upcoming seasons are in good hands. As with Discovery, I’m a little concerned that cancellation came too late for Lower Decks’ writers and producers to have written a conclusive ending to the series… but that may be a blessing in disguise if a revival could be on the cards one day! Perhaps that’s clutching at straws… but you never know. These things happen in animation – just ask Futurama!
The Strange New Worlds teaser was really an extended scene from one of the upcoming Season 3 episodes, and it was genuinely hilarious. We talked before about comedy in Star Trek… well, look no further! The crew are turned into Vulcans for reasons unknown, and the entire sequence was just a ton of fun. There were callbacks to events in The Original Series, as well as to Spock’s half-human heritage. Seeing several main characters dressed up as – and acting like – Vulcans was a blast. I hope the rest of the episode can live up to the scene we just got to see!
Captain Pike and his crew are transformed into Vulcans!
The Lower Decks trailer emulated a commercial that I vaguely remember from the ’90s or early 2000s promoting one or other of the Star Trek films. I wish I could remember which one – but clearly the Lower Decks crew are geekier than I am. It was a neat callback, at any rate, and one that definitely plucked a nostalgic note for this old Trekkie!
We got to see a few clips from the upcoming season, including one that seems to feature a crossover with an alternate USS Cerritos from another timeline. That could be fun, and exploring alternate versions of our favourite characters is something that Lower Decks’ comedic style could be perfect for. There were also scenes showing Klingons, an undercover mission, a decontamination chamber, and more. Though I still need to fully catch up with Lower Decks, I liked what I saw and it seems like the show’s final outing will be a blast.
Getting sticky in a decon chamber!
So to recap: we got big news about returning characters in Strange New Worlds, and I’m especially keen to catch up with the Doctor almost a millennium after we last saw him! A new live-action series is in early development, and it has a comedic focus. Section 31 looks like it’s going to take Star Trek in a different direction. And Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks will be returning in style.
All in all, I’d say that Star Trek had a pretty successful outing at Comic-Con this year. There were enough teases and trailers to keep fans engaged, but nothing went overboard. Maybe the untitled series’ announcement was a tad premature, as we really don’t have much to go on, but given the recent cancellations and the confusion over Paramount’s merger, taking the time to confirm that more Star Trek will be produced after Section 31 and Starfleet Academy is a good thing – it’s reassuring to both fans and investors that the brand isn’t going anywhere until at least 2027 or 2028!
Robert Picardo will be returning to live-action Star Trek.
I think my favourite announcement was the return of the Doctor. Ever since Discovery headed into the far future at the end of Season 2 back in 2019 – more than five years ago now – I’ve wondered whether the Doctor could still be around in that time period and if he might make an appearance. Although technobabble magic could have, in theory, brought back any character, as a hologram the Doctor had an easier explanation than most for his survival into the far future. I’ll be interested to see what role he might have in Starfleet Academy… as well as whether he might have some connection to the villain of the season!
So I hope this has been a fun look ahead. Some of the teases and announcements seem all but certain to keep Star Trek in production and on our screens for several years to come, and at a time when Paramount has been struggling and its flagship streaming platform has seemed to be in trouble, that’s good news in my book. Now all I have to do is catch up on the episodes and seasons I’ve missed before all of this new stuff arrives!
The Star Trek franchise – including all films, series, and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. Lower Decks Season 5 will be broadcast on Paramount+ in October 2024, Section 31 and Strange New Worlds Season 3 are scheduled to be broadcast on Paramount+ in 2025, and Starfleet Academy may follow in 2026. The untitled live-action series has no release date on the schedule. All broadcast dates are tentative and subject to change. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Trek: Picard Seasons 1-3.
It’s been more than a year since Star Trek: Picard finished its run, but the series has been on my mind again. With Paramount seemingly focused on more Star Trek prequels in the immediate term, and the Legacy spin-off idea dead and buried in its original form, Picard could be our only live-action look at the early 25th Century for a long time. That got me thinking about the show’s successes… but also a few places where I would have made changes if I’d been in charge!
See, Picard was far from the perfect production – at least in my subjective opinion. I’ve already drawn attention to several places where storylines and plot points seemed to overwrite one another – which is strange, particularly in a series that only ran to thirty episodes across three seasons. You can find that article by clicking or tapping here, by the way! But today I wanted to consider five changes I’d have made that I believe would’ve improved the series.
Jean-Luc Picard in Season 3.
As always, a couple of important caveats! A couple of these points are contradictory, meaning one idea or the other might’ve worked in the series, but probably not both! That’s okay, and I’m happy to consider the merits of both as standalone ideas. I’m not trying to claim that Picard’s writers should have implemented all of these changes exactly as I’m proposing them! For a variety of reasons, both in-universe and on the production side of things, it may not have been possible to do some or all of these things even if the writers’ room had wanted to. So to re-emphasise that last point: I know that some or all of these ideas may not have been practical. This is all a moot point now anyway; the series is over. This list is a mix of fantasy and speculation from an old Trekkie – and nothing more!
I also want to say that, while I had some issues with the way Picard was written, by and large I’m a supporter of the series. In fact, I’d like to see more Star Trek set in the time period that Picard introduced us to – and one of the reasons why I think continuing to talk about the show is important is to make that point to Paramount. It also can’t hurt to point out some inconsistencies and other points that future writers and producers might be able to learn from! So that’s my mindset as I put together this list.
With all of that out of the way, let’s get started!
Change #1: Replace Dr Benayoun with Dr Pulaski in Season 1.
Picard with Dr Benayoun in Season 1.
The second episode of Season 1 saw Picard consulting a doctor who was also an old friend as he prepared to return to space for the first time in several years. The character we ultimately got was someone brand-new: Dr Benayoun. In a way, this character could have been interesting if his role had been expanded upon; he served on the USS Stargazer with Picard, presumably prior to the events of The Next Generation, and I’m always going to be interested in storylines that expand upon the backstories of our favourite characters! But Dr Benayoun’s role was pretty small and he didn’t really give us any new information about Picard’s life prior to assuming command of the Enterprise-D, unfortunately.
If I had been writing this scene, I’d have moved heaven and earth to bring back Diana Muldaur as Dr Pulaski. At this point in the series, we’ve only seen Picard himself and a dream version of Data, so there’s absolutely a case to be made that bringing back a legacy character would have been perfect for this moment. There could have been a slightly extended conversation between the two, perhaps with Dr Pulaski commenting on how she saved Picard’s life when she performed surgery on him, or recounting another of their shared adventures in Season 2 of The Next Generation.
Diana Muldaur, who played Dr Pulaski in Season 2 of The Next Generation.
I said before Picard premiered that I didn’t want the series to try to be The Next Generation Season 8, but moments like this would have been perfect for small cameos from established characters. With Dr Crusher being held in reserve for a possible future role, Dr Pulaski would have been the perfect fit for this sequence. We could have learned a little about why she left the Enterprise-D, with that perhaps having been a sore spot in her relationship with Picard. Or we could’ve learned what she’s been up to in the intervening years – did she return to work at Starfleet Medical, perhaps, or take another assignment on a starship?
I’ve been a fan of Dr Pulaski for a long time, and I think this sequence could’ve been an opportunity to right a thirty-year wrong and give the character the closure and send-off she never got. Diana Muldaur has still been active as an actress in recent years – despite being well into her eighties at time of writing – appearing in the trailer for a film called Finding Hannah in 2022. Despite some negative feelings on both sides, it may have been possible to bring her back during production on Picard’s first season in 2018 and 2019. I think it could have added a fun extra dimension to the sequence in that second episode, especially for older Trekkies.
Change #2: Leave Data dead after Season 1.
Data in the “digital afterlife.”
One of the few redeeming features of an otherwise disappointing finale to Season 1 was the storyline involving Data. Data had been killed years earlier during the events of Star Trek: Nemesis, but that film arguably didn’t take enough time to give the character the send-off he deserved. As I wrote when reviewing Picard’s first season, the scenes involving Picard laying Data to rest were beautiful, emotional, and just what the episode needed – and I could finally see why, eighteen years on from Data’s first death, they were necessary for the character.
Season 3, however, undid all of that. Not only did that decision detract from one of the only decent parts of the Season 1 finale, but it was actually a pretty convoluted plot point that was difficult to follow and relied on a lot of technobabble and “magic.” It never really found a narrative justification beyond showrunner Terry Matalas’ desire to reunite all of the main characters from The Next Generation – no matter the cost.
Data at his post in Season 3.
In Star Trek’s universe, Data was as dead as it was possible to be. His body had been destroyed years earlier, and Season 1 saw the final shutdown of the residual part of his mind that had been preserved – at Data’s own request. With both body and mind gone, there should have been absolutely no way back for Data. But thanks to the magical deus ex machina of a backup body and a backup mind… Data was resurrected in Season 3. That never sat right with me, but if there had been a significant narrative role for the character in those final episodes, perhaps I could’ve come to terms with it. There really wasn’t, though, and aside from one scene in which Data technobabbled his way to regaining control of the Titan, we didn’t really get a lot more from him for the rest of his time on screen.
I believe Data would have been better-served in Season 3 by being memorialised by his friends. Leaving alone the touching moments between he and Picard in what I termed the “digital afterlife” in Season 1 would have made those moments more powerful to revisit… instead of feeling like a storyline that’s been overwritten. Of all the dead characters in Star Trek, Data was the hardest to bring back because he’d “died” twice, both in body and soul. I don’t think the decision to resurrect him just a few episodes after that intensely emotional send-off was the right one, and I don’t think it was done for the right reasons, sadly.
Change #3: Either leave Elnor dead or include him in Season 3.
Elnor in a promo photo for Season 2.
This is a storyline that I’ve said several times that I genuinely do not understand. Let’s keep in mind that Seasons 2 and 3 went into production back-to-back, with the same creative team in control. Early in Season 2, Elnor was killed – and while I wasn’t thrilled with that at first, as the season unfolded, the way in which Raffi came to terms with his loss made it matter. In fact, I’d go so far as to call the Raffi-Elnor storyline in Season 2 one of the few high points of a season that had relatively few of those.
It was always going to feel strange, then, when Elnor was resurrected at the last second by Q. The fact that Elnor didn’t get much to do in the second half of the Season 2 finale hammered that feeling home; a sight gag showing Elnor disgusted by a beverage was basically his only moment of note after his return. Was it worth undoing that powerful story for an overdone bit of slapstick? He barely got any screen time nor even a proper reunion with Raffi. But nevertheless, as the credits rolled on Season 2 I thought Elnor’s return could find a narrative justification in Season 3.
Elnor at the end of Season 2.
Elnor, however, was totally absent from Season 3 and wasn’t even mentioned. If I was writing the season, I’d have dropped one of the La Forge sisters and included Elnor instead, having him aboard the Titan in a secondary role and ultimately becoming one of the young officers who gets assimilated. That moment could’ve actually felt stronger and more powerful with Elnor’s inclusion, as we’d be confronting a threat to a character we’d been with for three seasons instead of someone brand-new.
However… given Elnor’s absence from Season 3, I can’t help but feel that leaving him dead would have been the least-bad option. At least that way Raffi’s story of coming to terms with her grief would have meant something, and we could’ve talked about the bold decision to kill off a new, young character in a Star Trek series – something that the franchise isn’t really known for doing. While I absolutely feel that there could have been room for Elnor in Season 3, his death was such a big part of the story of Season 2 that I think undoing it would have probably been a mistake regardless.
Change #4: Connect the anomaly in Season 2 to either Season 1’s “super-synths” or Season 3’s Borg incursion.
The Borg-Federation fleet defends the Alpha Quadrant against the mysterious anomaly.
One thing that modern Star Trek has never managed to get quite right is serialisation. This will have to be the subject of a longer article one day, but for now suffice to say that Discovery, Picard, and to a lesser extent Strange New Worlds too all rely on season-long storylines that don’t carry over from one season to the next. There are reasons for this in Discovery’s case – the series flirted with cancellation more than once. But, as I understand it, Picard was planned from day one as a three-season show… so why were none of its storylines picked up in subsequent seasons?
There are two choices here, and they’re probably mutually-exclusive (without some major rewriting) so realistically we’d have to settle on one or the other! But I think the Season 2 anomaly is an interesting narrative idea that could have connected with either the super-synths from Season 1 or the Borg incursion in Season 3. Either of these powerful factions could have been responsible for the attempted attack on the Alpha Quadrant that Picard and co. prevented at the climax of Season 2 – and I think it would have been far better than just leaving this incredibly important event without a proper explanation.
The mechanical noodles of the Season 1 super-synths.
The mysterious anomaly bookended the story of Season 2, and connected to Picard, his friends, and the adventure they had in the intervening episodes. Unlike in many Star Trek stories, the anomaly was explicitly identified as an “attack,” meaning that there must be some faction or powerful force behind it. The Borg and the super-synths from Season 1 would fit the bill as being powerful enough to launch an attack of that magnitude.
Tying one of these factions into the anomaly story would have helped Picard feel a bit more cohesive. Given the abundance of overwritten plot points, dropped characters, and abrupt changes in direction across the series, having something to tie disparate story threads together would be a good thing. If I had to pick one, I’d say that the super-synths would be the ideal faction to include here, simply because we know relatively little about them, and a super-synth attack could set up a future Star Trek series or film. But given that the Borg would return in Season 3, dropping a hint or two that they could be responsible could have been a great cliffhanger to end on at the end of Season 2.
Change #5: Have the Enterprise-A and Enterprise-D fighting alongside one another at the end of Season 3.
The Enterprise-A’s final voyage.
Season 3 introduced us to the Fleet Museum, which is a really interesting idea that I enjoyed. It was also a Trekkie’s dream, as multiple vessels from past iterations of the franchise were present. Along with Geordi’s pride and joy – the restored Enterprise-D – was the Enterprise-A, Captain Kirk’s ship that we saw in The Final Frontier and The Undiscovered Country. How cool would it have been if, along with the Enterprise-D, Picard and co. found some friends or allies to crew the Enterprise-A and join them as they took the battle to the Borg?
I know that Picard’s third season was a “love letter” to The Next Generation, and I can absolutely understand not wanting to detract from seeing the Enterprise-D and her crew back in action. But as a Trekkie, one of the fantasies that I’ve always had has been to see different crews and different ships standing shoulder-to-shoulder – especially in a story like this one, where the battle lines have been drawn and the Federation seems to be on the cusp of defeat!
Wouldn’t it have been cool to have the Enterprise-A here for this moment?
Bringing the Enterprise-A along would fit narratively, too. Part of the story was about older people still having something to offer; stepping back into the fray to save their younger colleagues. The Enterprise-D and her crew were one way to embody that storyline, but including the Enterprise-A would have been in the same narrative ballpark. There could have even been some technobabble about how the Borg wouldn’t know what to do with a ship that old, making the Enterprise-A a useful addition to the battle. If this point in the story had been reached a little earlier – say with three episodes left instead of one-and-a-bit – I’d have absolutely found a way to include the Enterprise-A.
A digital model had already been created – albeit a static one for the Fleet Museum – but I’m sure with relatively little work it could have been transformed into a moving, flying model. And as for the bridge… I don’t think an entire set would need to be built. For brief scenes shown on the Enterprise-D’s viewscreen, perhaps a redress of the Strange New Worlds or Discovery sets would have sufficed. This would’ve also been a great way to include a character or two from The Next Generation era – perhaps someone like Ezri Dax or Captain Jellico – to take command. Seeing two Enterprises riding into battle side by side… I can’t think of anything more exciting in that kind of story.
What might have been, eh?
So that’s it!
Picard and his crew.
We’ve looked at five changes I’d have made to Star Trek: Picard.
I’m still holding out hope that a new series, film, or other project set in the Picard era will be announced, but with Paramount’s financial troubles and other Star Trek shows being cancelled… I’m not sure when or even if that’ll happen. If it does, though, I hope lessons can be learned from Picard, both in terms of narrative and on the production side of things. As good as the series could be when everything was working right, there are some definite low points that detract from its successes.
The points on this list are pure fantasy at this stage, of course! But as Picard was being broadcast, I couldn’t help but feel that a few tweaks or changes here and there might’ve improved things – so I’m glad to finally put metaphorical pen to paper and make a few of my suggestions. I hope these ideas have been interesting, at any rate – and not something to get too worked up or upset over! If you hate all of these ideas, you can take solace in the fact that none of them were or ever will be included in Star Trek: Picard!
I still have a few pieces about Picard in the pipeline, including a longer retrospective/post-mortem of the series as a whole. I don’t know when I’ll get around to writing all of those, but I hope you’ll stay tuned. It’s bound to happen eventually! Until next time… live long and prosper!
Star Trek: Picard is available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. The series is also available to purchase on DVD/Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including Picard and all other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
As part of Xbox’s Summer Showcase event last month, we got some big news about Bethesda’s failing space game Starfield… and it isn’t good. In fact, I’m beyond disappointed in the latest updates about the game, and I now feel incredibly sceptical about Bethesda’s longer-term future and its upcoming titles in the Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises. Today, I’d like to talk about what it is that I don’t like – and why it should matter to fans of Starfield, haters of Starfield, and even folks who’ve never played a single Bethesda Game Studios title.
Last year, I had pretty high hopes for Starfield. But as you may already know if you’ve read my first impressions of the game – and my other post-launch articles – I didn’t enjoy what was on offer. The world-building and setting just didn’t grab me in any way, and I progressed through some pretty boring missions and bland environments not really giving a shit about the galaxy that Bethesda had created or the characters who inhabited it. After spending as much time with the game as I reasonably could, I put Starfield down and haven’t returned to it – save for taking a few screenshots here and there to use on the website.
Screenshots like this one!
But what we’re going to talk about today doesn’t come from a place of “hate.” I’m not blindly attacking these decisions from Bethesda and Xbox because Starfield left me disappointed and I want to twist the knife even more. On the contrary: it’s precisely because I’ve enjoyed other Bethesda titles and because I had hoped to enjoy new ones in the future that I feel compelled to share my criticisms.
In short, Starfield is being catastrophically over-monetised. Bethesda and Microsoft seem desperate to wring every last penny out of the game, no matter what. Not content with making a lot of money from sales and subscriptions to Game Pass, Xbox and Bethesda are greedily grabbing every penny they can using every dirty trick from the games industry playbook. Having already charged £35 extra to players who wanted to play the game on its real release date, Bethesda and Xbox have now set up an in-game marketplace that wouldn’t look out of place in a crappy free-to-play mobile game, one that charges players for basic items and even fan-made mods.
What the fuck is this shit?
Shattered Space is going to be one of several larger pieces of DLC, and I’ve always given big expansion packs a lot of leeway when it comes to criticisms like this. But the fact that Shattered Space was planned during development of the base game – and appears to contain a faction that I would argue should have been part of the main game given its prominence and relevance to the plot and to major characters – even that starts to feel shady. The fact that Bethesda and Xbox were selling pre-orders for Shattered Space before Starfield even launched last year is just more proof of that. This is basically cut content: storylines and missions developed alongside the game’s main content that were carved out to be sold separately later on.
Whether you love or loathe Starfield, you have to admit that this is a poor way to run a single-player game. Look around at some of Starfield’s biggest competitors in the single-player action-RPG space. Baldur’s Gate 3 was complete at launch, with no major DLC and only one small content pack being sold separately. Cyberpunk 2077 comes with a single piece of DLC – and it’s a massive, game-changing one. Elden Ring likewise only has the one piece of DLC, too. None of these games paywall their fan-made mods, either.
Comparable games – like Elden Ring – aren’t subject to this ridiculous level of monetisation.
If this is the route Bethesda wants to go down – and it clearly is, as we’ve already seen with Fallout 76′s microtransactions and expensive add-ons – then I don’t think I want them to make The Elder Scrolls VI any more. Or Fallout 5. The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind is one of my favourite games of all-time, and even though it’s been a while since I last played Skyrim or Oblivion, I still felt a sense of excitement knowing that a return to the world of Tamriel was on the cards. But now? Fuck it, I’m out.
Gamers have become desensitised to this kind of over-monetisation, but for a single-player title Starfield’s in-game marketplace is one of the worst and most egregious I’ve ever seen. We’re looking at a single mission that costs $10, item packs containing a scant handful of items for £10 or more, and much more besides. Players also need to buy an in-game currency – at the usual awkward exchange rate – before they can buy any of these microtransactions. More games industry bullshit from Bethesda there.
The in-game currency packs at time of writing.
I get that developers need to be paid for their time and work. But this isn’t the way to do it. If Larian Studios and FromSoftware can release profitable games that don’t need to rely on this kind of shocking in-game marketplace, surely Bethesda can too. And if CD Projekt Red can recover from Cyberpunk 2077′s shockingly poor launch (and even the game’s removal from an entire platform for months) to turn a huge profit from a game that only has a single piece of DLC, why can’t Bethesda? I don’t buy the excuse that Starfield wouldn’t be profitable without this microtransaction storefront – especially given that many of the offerings are fan-made mods that didn’t cost Bethesda a penny to create.
Maybe I’m too old and times have changed, but I’ve always believed that fan-made mods should be free. They’re a passion project, something players do for a bit of fun or to tweak a game they enjoy to be more to their liking. The idea of paying for mods has never sat right with me, and while I love the idea of up-and-coming or budding developers viewing modding as a way into the industry… they shouldn’t be expecting to make modding someone else’s game their full-time job. So paid mods are already a no-no for me, but knowing that Bethesda and Xbox are taking a cut of the proceeds for something they didn’t even make? It’s sickening.
Another expensive cosmetic add-on.
I said months ago that, with Shattered Space just being the first of several pieces of planned DLC, the total cost of Starfield could soar well past the £200 mark – but I didn’t expect that warning to come true so quickly. At time of writing, just to pick up the microtransactions in the “featured” category you’ll need to spend over £50 – on top of buying the base game for £60 and Shattered Space for £35. With more microtransactions being added all the time, it won’t be long before Starfield will be asking for north of £500 or even £1,000 for the complete package. That’s completely unacceptable to me for a single-player title.
It’s not wrong to want good, high-quality, complete games from studios. Other developers are capable of turning a profit by making and releasing games, so there’s no justification for this cash-grab from Bethesda and Xbox. And if this is how the company plans to make and monetise its games, then quite frankly I hope Bethesda Game Studios goes the way of Tango Gameworks and Arkane Austin. Given the abject failure of Starfield already, and the controversy that these microtransactions are bound to cause, maybe Microsoft ought to consider taking The Elder Scrolls VI and the Fallout license away from Bethesda. The corporation has enough other studios under its umbrella at this point that it would be quite feasible to pass these titles to someone else.
Maybe someone else should make The Elder Scrolls VI.
I’ve lost all interest in The Elder Scrolls VI now, anyway. And unless Microsoft were to announce a massive change in that game’s development, I doubt I’ll pick it up. It’s clear to me now how Bethesda sees its games – less as complete experiences than as platforms for monetisation, microtransactions, and expensive in-game purchases. Rather than creating games to be published and sold, Bethesda is going all-in on live services and “recurring revenue,” hoping to monetise its titles for years after release. If the company was making multiplayer games, where this business model has worked, I’d leave them to it. But in the single-player space I find it objectionable… actually no, I find it disgusting.
This time last year, coming out of Bethesda’s big Starfield presentation, I could hardly have been more excited about the game and its prospects. A friend of mine said to me that they genuinely felt Starfield “could be the best game either of us will ever play” – such was the level of hype and excitement that Bethesda and Xbox had successfully built up. But it wasn’t meant to be.
Pre-release concept art for Starfield.
Instead, Starfield was a game that was mediocre at best; a title comprised entirely of systems and mechanics that other titles have been doing better for years. As I wrote once, Bethesda should have been less focused on turning Starfield into a “ten-year experience” and instead ought to have been spending time catching up on a decade’s worth of improvements in game design and development. The company’s executives were entirely focused on the wrong ten years!
At the end of the day, I could have overlooked bland gameplay, uninspired mission design, and even a lack of decorative and cosmetic options if the world-building and narratives present in Starfield had been up to scratch. But they weren’t – and all of this lacklustre gameplay was taking place in a boring, small-scale world that I couldn’t find a way to get invested in or care about.
Starfield’s world-building was disappointing.
All of this leads to one question: why on earth is Starfield – with its bland, uninteresting, small world and outdated, mediocre, often-buggy gameplay – worth spending more money on? The kinds of things that these microtransactions are adding should be free – and given the crap state that the game remains in almost a year after its underwhelming launch, Bethesda should be continually adding new features, new missions, new cosmetic items and the like. And if there are going to be paid-for expansion packs like Shattered Space, then realistically they need to be as big and as transformative for Starfieldas Phantom Liberty was for Cyberpunk 2077.
Without that kind of large-scale change to the game, I don’t see Starfield surviving. Many of the players who picked it up on launch day or in the latter part of 2023 have already drifted away and are finding new gaming experiences to get stuck into. It’s already a tough sell to win back disappointed ex-players, and adding microtransactions – including a single mission for $10 – is categorically not the way to do it. It would be bad enough if Starfield was a popular title with a large playerbase… but it isn’t. And this kind of egregious in-game shop isn’t going to do anything to bring players back.
Starfield’s first $10 mission. Expect to see more like it.
So I guess I really am done with Starfield. I held out hope for a while that there might be an update or DLC pack that would genuinely transform the game, bringing it closer to the original promises that Bethesda made and making it a title I might actually enjoy playing. But with the company seemingly wedded to this microtransaction and paid mods approach that wouldn’t feel out of place in a free-to-play mobile game… I’m out. This game isn’t worth it, and even if it had been a title with a fun story and great world-building, I think I’d still be so turned off by the over-monetisation that I’d walk away.
On the one hand I get it: I’m a dinosaur in a gaming marketplace that’s changed. Morrowind, with its two expansion packs, was more than twenty years ago, and many developers nowadays go down the route of microtransactions, “gold editions,” paid early access, and so on. But there are still games that don’t, especially in the single-player space, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask for a game that I play alone and offline to be basically feature-complete and not try to grab every penny out of my wallet every time I want to change my character’s outfit or decorate their living space.
I’ll finish this piece with a warning for Xbox and Bethesda: players will remember what you tried to pull with Starfield when the next Fallout game or The Elder Scrolls VI are being readied for launch.
Starfield is out now for PC and Xbox Series S/X consoles. The Shattered Space DLC pack will be released in autumn 2024. Starfield is the copyright of Bethesda Game Studios, Xbox Game Studios, and Microsoft. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Beware minor spoilers for some of the titles below.
Although I can scarcely believe I’m writing these words… 2024 is officially halfway over! The summer solstice has passed, the nights are getting longer, and before you know it the leaves will be falling from the trees and we’ll be thinking about getting the Christmas decorations out of storage! Maybe that’s a depressing thought for some of you, but I gotta be honest: I love the autumn and winter seasons!
The last day of June marks the halfway point of the year, and I think that makes it a good opportunity not to look behind, but ahead. In late December I’ll dish out my annual End-of-Year Awards, but today is about looking forward to some of the entertainment experiences we might enjoy between now and Christmas. I’ve picked six films, six video games, and six television shows that I think could be fun to watch or play in the second half of 2024.
Have you started making plans for New Year’s Eve yet?
As always, a couple of caveats! This list is just one person’s subjective opinion, so if I highlight a production that looks just awful to you, or if I miss something that you think is super obvious… that’s okay! There are loads of things to get excited about and I can’t cover all of them. Secondly, with strikes, pandemics, and other possible issues, it’s possible that some or all of these titles will miss their intended release dates or even slip back into 2025. Everything listed below is scheduled for 2024 at time of writing, but things can change!
With all of that out of the way, let’s look ahead to some of the entertainment experiences we might be enjoying between now and New Year’s Eve.
Films:
Shall we go to the movies?
I have to be honest: I haven’t seen any brand-new films so far this year! There are a couple on my radar from the first six months of 2024: Civil War, for instance, and the two-part Rebel Moon, but I just haven’t made time for any of them yet. Hopefully that’ll change… I’d love to get a review or two written in the weeks ahead!
Film #1: The Lord of the Rings: War of the Rohirrim
Promo image for War of the Rohirrim.
2024 is shaping up to be an interesting year for Tolkien fans. The Rings of Power is returning for its second season, but we’re also getting the first of several brand-new projects: War of the Rohirrim. Set a hundred years before the events of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, War of the Rohirrim will focus on the “Riders of Rohan” and the King of Rohan Helm Hammerhand. Helm and his men will defend their kingdom… and presumably establish the legendary fortress of Helm’s Deep.
One interesting thing about this film is that it’s animated rather than live-action, and its success could pave the way for more animated Middle-earth projects, perhaps. Director Kenji Kamiyama is well-known in Japan for his work on anime titles like Ghost in the Shell and Eden of the East. As someone who doesn’t know the first thing about anime… I’ll be very curious to see what comes of this fusion of Tolkien’s world with a uniquely Japanese filmmaking style.
Film #2: Megalopolis
Title card for Megalopolis.
Francis Ford Coppola’s epic film has been decades in the making, and the legendary director has poured a lot of his time, effort, and talent into creating it – and no small amount of his own money, too. I genuinely don’t know what the result will be; are we going to get a picture comparable to the likes of Coppola’s own Apocalypse Now… or a truly spectacular flop? Some folks seem to have already decided that Megalopolis will be the latter, but until I’ve seen it for myself I don’t want to pass judgement!
The film is set against the backdrop of a New York-inspired city having been destroyed, and the attempts to rebuild it being hampered by a corrupt elite. There could be an interesting message there, perhaps, given events out here in the real world. Either way, I’ll be curious to see what this long-awaited film actually looks like when the dust settles.
Film #3: Horizon: An American Saga Parts 1 & 2
Kevin Costner wrote, produced, directed, and stars in Horizon: An American Saga.
Some folks will tell you that the western died a long time ago… but I don’t think that’s really true! There have been fewer westerns produced in recent years than there were at the genre’s peak, but new titles are still making their way to the big screen. Kevin Costner’s Horizon: An American Saga is one of them – and the first two of a purported four-part series are slated to be released this year. I love a good western, and some recent titles in the space have done very different things, from gritty realism to flipping traditional narrative archetypes on their head.
Horizon: An American Saga is set before and after the American Civil War, and all we really know at this stage is that it will depict different characters and families as they settle the western portion of the United States. There are some good actors in the ensemble cast, including Kevin Costner himself, Avatar’s Sam Worthington, Will Patton, and Michael Rooker from The Walking Dead.
Film #4: Moana 2
Maui and Moana (and a bioluminescent whale) in a promo image for Moana 2.
I felt it was a tad unfortunate that the original Moana was released the same year as Zootopia, as the latter film seemed – for a time, anyway – to have really captured the attention of a younger audience! Over time, however, I think Moana has done very well for Disney, and is arguably one of the corporation’s last animated feature films to have been a major success in its own right. Disney has since pivoted to sequels and live-action remakes… which is why we’re getting not only Moana 2 but a new adaptation of the original film!
Disney’s sequels have always struggled with one problem: what comes after “happily ever after?” For most of the company’s animated films, the answer has been “not much,” with the resultant pictures going straight-to-video or being worked into Disney Channel series! But Frozen II showed that Disney can do high-quality sequels on the big screen… so there’s hope for Moana 2, at least.
Film #5: Red One
Ho ho ho…
Santa Claus gets kidnapped? And his chief of security, The Rock, has to rescue him? That sounds like the setup for a film that could be absolutely awful… or maybe brilliant! Truth be told, I love a good Christmas story, and Red One seems to be putting an action-comedy spin on the whole “Christmas is in danger” concept that’s become a timeless holiday staple.
Red One features a stellar cast, including Chris Evans, J.K. Simmons, and Lucy Liu alongside Dwayne Johnson. A couple of years ago I was hearing talk of the film being the first part of a kind of “expanded universe” of holiday-related films. Not sure if that’s still going ahead, but Red One could be a fun title regardless. Whether it’ll be the kind of classic that we’ll want to return to at Christmas time every year… I’m not sure! But you never know.
Film #6: Wallace and Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl
Guess who’s back?
The most evil penguin in the world – and one of cinema’s great villains – is finally returning this Christmas! Vengeance Most Fowl will see the long-awaited return of Feathers McGraw, and he seems set on getting his revenge on those who wronged him all those years ago! I’m genuinely looking forward to this one – the Wallace and Gromit pictures have all been a ton of fun, and stop-motion with plasticine figures is something genuinely different in an animation landscape overrun by CGI.
As to the plot… I confess that I’m not entirely convinced that returning to a storyline from a previous adventure is the right move. I could certainly have entertained the idea of telling an entirely new story. But I’m definitely going to be checking out Wallace and Gromit’s latest adventure no matter what!
Television:
What’s on the haunted fishtank this year?
The first half of 2024 has seen some interesting TV shows. My current favourite has to be Netflix’s 3 Body Problem, which has belatedly been renewed for two further seasons. I have a review you can find by clicking or tapping here if you’re interested! But there’s more to come, and the next six months promise some new and exciting programmes to enjoy.
TV Show #1: Lego Star Wars: Rebuild the Galaxy
Did Disney just confirm the “Darth Jar Jar” theory?!
Here at Trekking with Dennis, we love and support the Lego Star Wars specials on Disney+! There have been three so far: one Christmas-themed, one Halloween-themed, and one set in the summertime. All have been fantastic, light-hearted takes on Star Wars… and given the bitterness and division in the Star Wars fan community, that can be just what we all need to see sometimes!
Rebuild the Galaxy sounds like it will be a time-travelling tale of undoing mistakes and restoring the correct timeline… with a few fun alternative ideas about Star Wars in the mix, too. Darth Jar Jar, anyone? Hopefully it’ll be a ton of fun, with Mark Hamill and Ahmed Best joining in to voice their iconic characters.
TV Show #2: The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power Season 2
Sauron’s tower rises…
As I said when I took a look at The Rings of Power’s upcoming second season a few weeks ago, there are reasons to be positive as the series returns after a two-year hiatus. But I also don’t see any kind of reboot or resetting of a series that, in some quarters, has proven to be controversial, which could mean that this incredibly expensive production will continue to struggle to win over both longstanding fans of Middle-earth and a wider audience.
For what it’s worth, I enjoyed what The Rings of Power did. Particularly when the series stepped away from big questions about Sauron’s reign and the shape of the world and told smaller, more character-oriented stories, I felt there were sparks of genius. And I will never not be interested in a high-budget production that expands our understanding of one of the original, foundational fantasy worlds. Maybe The Rings of Power is imperfect, and maybe Season 2 won’t be the soft reboot that it arguably needed… but I’m still looking forward to it!
TV Show #3: Phineas and Ferb Season 5
Phineas and Ferb will be back on our screens before too long!
This one is tentative, but Phineas and Ferb’s return is supposedly still on the schedule for 2024. We don’t have anything official on that, and we haven’t seen any trailers, but it would be great to see Phineas and Ferb back on our screens this autumn or winter. I felt that the TV film Candace Against the Universe was fantastic, and if the writers have found new and exciting storylines for the kids and Dr Doofenshmirtz, we should be in for a fun time!
Phineas and Ferb has become one of my “comfort shows,” and I often drift back to it on days when I’m struggling with my mental health. From my perspective, I’m really happy at the prospect of getting some new adventures with Phineas, Ferb, Perry the Platypus, and the rest of the gang. The challenge for any revived or renewed series is finding a way to recapture the magic of those earlier seasons… and finding a better justification for a return than “because money.” I’m crossing my fingers… but I’m more than happy to wait until 2025 or even 2026 if it means better episodes and stories.
TV Show #4: Those About To Die
Anthony Hopkins in Those About To Die.
Those About To Die is a series focusing on gladiators in the Roman Empire. It will star Anthony Hopkins as the Roman Emperor… and that’s about all I know at this stage! The trailer left me with echoes of Game of Thrones (and not just because of the presence of actor Iwan Rheon) with themes of politicking, backstabbing, and control of the Empire all seemingly in play.
There hasn’t been a big-budget production set in ancient Rome for quite some time, so I’ll be curious to see what director Roland Emmerich can do with this unique setting. Hopefully we’ll get some action and excitement at the very least!
TV Show #5: Star Trek: Lower Decks Season 5
The four ensigns in Season 2.
I really need to climb out of my Star Trek doldrums and watch Season 4 of Lower Decks before I can get too excited about Season 5! Unfortunately, this is set to be the final outing for Mariner, Boimler, and the rest of the crew of the Cerritos, as Paramount cancelled the series earlier this year. Hopefully we’ll get a fitting send-off for an enjoyable series and cast of characters.
Lower Decks has been an interesting experiment for the Star Trek franchise – one that would probably have worked better were it not drowned out, at times, by too many other Star Trek productions on our screens all at once. But I hope this won’t be the end for the franchise’s flirtation with animation – it’s a format that has worked well. Lower Decks also took Star Trek back to an older, more episodic style of storytelling, which is something I continue to appreciate.
TV Show #6: Leonardo da Vinci
One of da Vinci’s designs.
I’ve been a big fan of Ken Burns’ work for a long time, and Leonardo da Vinci will be the acclaimed filmmaker’s first documentary about a non-American subject. Da Vinci led a fascinating life, and I have no doubt that we’ll all learn a lot about the legendary scientist and artist through this new two-part miniseries.
Ken Burns has a unique style that makes his documentaries for PBS really stand out, so I’m looking forward to seeing what his take will be on one of the greatest polymaths of the Renaissance era.
Video Games:
There are some fun games on the horizon.
Don’t tell anyone, but I think I already know what my “game of the year” will be when I hand out some imaginary statuettes in December! Little Kitty, Big City is an adorable and incredibly fun title, but I’ve also had fun in the first half of 2024 playing EA Sports PGA Tour… a golf game. There’s a lot more to come before Christmas rolls around, though!
Video Game #1: Star Wars: Outlaws
Protagonist Kay Vess and her pet… lizard-axolotl-thing.
One of the things I’ve argued that Star Wars needs to do is step away from the Jedi, Sith, and the Force and show us more about how the regular citizens of the galaxy live. Outlaws seems poised to do just that, focusing on the criminal underworld that we’ve caught glimpses of in other productions. This is, however, a Ubisoft open-world title – and Ubisoft’s particular formula for making games like that is arguably played out at this point. Not to mention there are about a dozen different “editions” of the game, all of which offer some kind of exclusive content and cost a lot more money!
I wouldn’t say that I have sky-high expectations for Outlaws, and having come away from last year’s Jedi: Survivorfeeling pretty disappointed, this is a game I admit that I have reservations about. If it all comes together, though, I think we could finally get that personal Han Solo-inspired adventure that many Star Wars fans – myself included – have been interested in for a long time. Just please… don’t make protagonist Kay Vess another “secret Jedi in disguise!”
Video Game #2: Life By You
What a disappointment.
I was all ready to tell you about how genuinely excited I was at the prospect of a proper competitor to The Sims… only to belatedly learn that publisher Paradox cancelled Life By You just months before it was scheduled to be released. That’s disappointing – not only for those of us who might’ve wanted to play it, but for the developers who’d been working on it for over five years at this point.
The Sims has had this genre almost all to itself for a long time, and the result has been a game drowning in expensive add-ons and “content packs.” Life By You could, perhaps, have shaken up a stale genre and done things differently. We’ll never know what might have been.
Video Game #3: Star Trucker
Ready to get behind the wheel… or control stick?
Euro Truck Simulator meets science fiction! If that sounds like fun to you, maybe you’ll like Star Trucker. As the name suggests, it’s a game about piloting – or should that be driving? – cargo ships in a sci-fi setting. It looks like a ton of fun; the kind of “cozy game” that I can find myself losing hours of my life playing!
Star Trucker hadn’t been on my radar at all until I saw it at Xbox’s Summer Showcase event a few weeks ago, but now I’m definitely curious to give it a go. I’ve played a fair amount of games like Euro Truck Simulator and Train Simulator, and taking that kind of gameplay to a weirder outer space setting seems like it could be a blast.
Video Game #4: Indiana Jones and the Great Circle
Let’s punch some Nazis!
I have to be honest with you: I’m not sure about this one. Something about the marketing material for Indiana Jones and the Great Circle is just rubbing me the wrong way, and the game’s visuals feel decidedly underwhelming, too. Still, as a child of the ’80s I feel a strong connection with the Indiana Jones series… and after recent films have failed to impress, surely Indy is overdue for a hit?
The likes of Tomb Raider and Uncharted have shown that video games can do incredibly well with these kinds of historical mystery-adventures, so it could be great to give the granddaddy of the genre one more chance in the video game realm. Maybe, just maybe, I’m wrong about this one and Indiana Jones and the Great Circle will be the kind of rip-roaring adventure I’m looking for. Fingers crossed, eh?
Video Game #5: Super Mario Party Jamboree
Promo image for Super Mario Party Jamboree.
I’ve had a soft spot for the Mario Party series since I played the first entry on the Nintendo 64 way back when! It’s great to see that Nintendo is keeping this fun, family-friendly party series around, and even more so to see that a couple of game boards from those early N64 titles are being recreated this time around. It looks like there will be plenty of fun to be had for Mario and the gang!
As the Nintendo Switch begins to wind down and rumors of a new console have even been confirmed by Nintendo, Super Mario Party Jamboree could end up being one of the last big first-party titles created for the machine. With more than 100 mini-games, seven game boards, and a robust online mode, it seems like it’ll be a great send-off for the Switch.
Video Game #6: Tales of the Shire
Hobbit-holes!
Tales of the Shire feels like it could be The Hobbit meets Animal Crossing! Pitched as a life sim set in the world of Tolkien’s Middle-earth, it looks like there will be a lot of customisation for both player characters and their Hobbit-holes, and a lot of fun, cozy gameplay to get stuck into.
There’s a lot of Middle-earth content on the way, including several new films that were announced earlier in 2024. There’s definitely space for a title like Tales of the Shire… let’s just hope it fares better than Gollum did last year!
So that’s it!
What are your plans for the summer?
We’ve taken a look at a handful of films, TV series, and video games that I think are worth keeping an eye on as the second half of 2024 gets underway. Though it scarcely seems like any time has passed since we were taking down the last of the Christmas ornaments (and I still have an uneaten Christmas pudding in my cupboard), time’s marching on, and the autumn and winter seasons will be upon us before too long!
I hope I’ve given you an idea or two, at any rate. There are plenty of interesting-sounding titles that didn’t make the list this time around, and as I noted just last year, some of my favourite entertainment experiences came out of nowhere and completely surprised me! So I hope there will be some unexpected titles in the mix in the second half of 2024, too.
As the summer season gets underway, I wish you all the best.
All titles discussed above are the copyright of their respective owner, distributor, studio, broadcaster, publisher, etc. Some images and promotional artwork courtesy of IMDB and IGDB. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
In 1997 or 1998, I had a lot of fun playing Actua Golf 2 on my PC. I didn’t have a lot of PC games at the time – my platform of choice in the second half of the ’90s was a Nintendo 64 – but Actua Golf 2 was a game that ran well on a fairly limited computer that was supposed to be used primarily for school work! It’s strange that I would’ve been interested in a game like that, but having played a demo version and with the game not being particularly expensive, I didn’t mind splashing out.
I found Actua Golf 2 to be a fun and surprisingly challenging title. It was more strategic than most sports games and less about hitting fast button combos, and I found that lining up my shots, choosing which club to use, and so on was a blast – certainly way more entertaining than I would’ve expected. There was a thrill to hitting the ball just right after making all of the right choices, and landing it within touching distance of the hole.
Actua Golf 2 was released for PC and PlayStation in 1997.
When the Nintendo Wii came along in 2006, I was on a long waiting list for a console. Even in those days, manufacturers couldn’t keep up with demand! The Wii launched with Wii Sports bundled alongside, and one of the events included was golf. Tennis and bowling were fun too, don’t get me wrong – and maybe one day we’ll have to take a longer look at Wii Sports! But for now, suffice to say that I had a blast playing golf with my little Wiimote, and of the games included in the package, it was by far the most fun to play on my own. Tennis, bowling, and boxing were definitely games that benefited from having a second player!
Wii Sports was obviously a very different kind of experience from Actua Golf 2, with a much more arcadey, casual feel. Using the Wii’s motion controls felt gimmicky at first, I must admit, but even though due to my declining health I could only play while seated, I still had fun with it. Nintendo really nailed the whole “casual game” concept with the Wii, and the nature of golf makes it a great sport to use for a gentler, less intense experience. It still took full advantage of the Wii’s motion control system, but in a completely different way from the tennis or boxing games.
Wii Sports was a ton of fun!
I’ve never been a particularly sporty person in real life. Even as a kid, when I wasn’t bedevilled by health issues and disability, playing sports wasn’t something that held a great deal of appeal. I played rugby at school – but only when forced to in PE lessons – and as a kid, football was regularly played at one of the clubs I attended. But the rest of the time, I’d have my nose in a book or I’d be doing other things. One kid I knew at school had a dad who played golf regularly, but I never went to the course with them. The closest I’ve ever gotten to playing a real round was when I went to the mini-golf course!
All of this is to say that I have a weird history with golf and golf games! It’s not a sport I care about in the slightest, and if you asked me to explain what the difference is between a wedge and an iron, or who the current champions are on the world tour, I wouldn’t have the faintest idea. But as a casual gamer, and as someone who enjoys slower-paced, “cosy” gaming experiences, I find golf games fit the bill. And that’s how I came to spend much of the first half of 2024 playing EA Sports PGA Tour on my PC.
It’s true… I’m a golfer.
I’ve been a subscriber to Microsoft’s PC Game Pass service for a couple of years now, and having that subscription has felt like a pretty good deal most of the time. I got to play games I never would’ve purchased for myself – especially at full-price – thanks to Game Pass, and I’ve even tried out titles that wouldn’t have even been on my radar. Not all of them have been “my thing,” and there have been some disappointments with Game Pass along the way, too. But by and large, I’m someone who’ll speak positively about Game Pass. In my opinion, it’s a great way for players on a budget to get into current-gen gaming.
But I think we’re slightly off-topic!
Microsoft has a deal with Electronic Arts that has brought more than eighty EA games to Game Pass. I don’t think Game Pass gets the most up-to-date versions of all of EA’s sports games – the likes of EA Sports FC and the Madden American football titles don’t seem to join the service on release day. Don’t quote me on that, but I think that’s how it works. Anyway, one of the EA sports games that has recently joined the Game Pass lineup has been the aforementioned EA Sports PGA Tour. And although it had been a while since I last played much simulated golf, I thought I’d give it a whirl.
Microsoft and Electronic Arts have a deal that’s brought a number of EA Sports titles (and other EA games) to Game Pass.
I don’t play a lot of sports games or even really games published by Electronic Arts. And it’s definitely worth taking a detour to talk about just how over-monetised EA’s sports franchises have become. FIFA – or EA Sports FC as it’s now known – has become notorious for its random in-game gambling, and for selling expensive items and in-game “points,” but I confess that I was surprised to see how corrupt PGA Tour is in that regard, too. I’m not an online gamer, but even in PGA Tour’s offline mode, spending in-game currency is required to get all but the most basic golf clubs and outfits for the player character, and there are plenty of “XP boosters” and other single-use items to briefly improve your stats.
An article or essay on the shocking state of microtransactions is long overdue here on the website. But for now, suffice to say that I find these things offensive. A simple piece of clothing like a hat or a pair of shoes, or basic cosmetic equipment like different ball colours or club designs – none of which have any impact on gameplay – are not things that should be locked behind a paywall. In-game currency is “earned” at an impossibly slow rate when playing in single-player mode, and PGA Tour also employs a storefront that only carries a handful of items at a time – presumably to heighten the need for players to pay extra for in-game currency for fear of missing out. These psychological tricks are manipulative and obscene, yet they’ve become so common in modern titles that I doubt any player would even bat an eye at the state of a game like PGA Tour any more.
Part of the in-game microtransaction shop.
I enjoy a game with good customisation options, and a title like PGA Tour – where you see your character all the time from a third-person perspective – should be one where changing outfits and trying on different shirts, hats, and golf club designs simply adds to the fun. EA has chosen to monetise this as much as possible, providing a meagre selection of basic cosmetics at the start of the game and effectively locking the rest behind an expensive paywall. I get it: this isn’t The Sims or a role-playing game where outfits and costumes are a huge part of gameplay. But the fact that these basic items are unavailable except to players who are either willing to grind through a bunch of deliberately awkward challenges or pay up… it makes me angry, to be honest. And as we’re going to talk about, that’s not what I come to a golf game for!
When the Star Wars Battlefront II debacle exploded a few years ago, I really thought that the industry might be about to turn the page on microtransactions and randomised lootboxes. The backlash to that game was so intense that even governments started getting involved, and it seemed for a brief moment as if genuine change was a possibility. Slowly, though, the greedy corporations at the top of the industry have kept pushing, and microtransactions in games today are at least as bad – and in some cases, are much worse – than they ever were in Battlefront II. For me, PGA Tour is a disappointing example of this – but I’m sure you can think of a great many others.
A golf ball in flight.
However, when I step away from the microtransaction marketplace… I gotta admit that I’m having a lot of fun playing EA Sports PGA Tour. There are some things about the game that I don’t like, sure, but by and large it’s recapturing that feeling that I used to get from Actua Golf 2 almost thirty years ago. It’s gentle, more often than not relaxing, but still a game that poses a challenge and that requires some thinking. Button-mashing won’t get you very far – and that’s something I appreciate!
I’ve mentioned this before here on the website, but I suffer from arthritis that affects my hands and fingers. My dominant hand has been made worse this past year after I suffered several broken bones in a fall, and I find that my ability to make frame-perfect button presses or complicated multi-button combos is greatly diminished. I was never the world’s best gamer by any stretch, but my abilities continue to decline thanks to health-related issues. Faster-paced titles like fighting games or first-person shooters are increasingly difficult!
Swinging the golf club.
One thing I’ve enjoyed about playing PGA Tour is how few buttons I need to press and how I don’t have to continuously grip the control pad. The default control scheme when using a control pad involves pulling back and flicking one of the analogue sticks to swing the club and strike the ball, and I actually really like this method. It feels interactive; like a half-step (or a quarter-step, I guess) between the simple button presses or mouse clicks of older golf games and the full motion controls of the Wii. And most importantly from a selfish point of view: it’s something I can do without pain!
That’s not to say I’m especially good at it; my timing can still absolutely suck! But controlling a golf game this way feels surprisingly intuitive. I know I’m probably a decade late (or more) with this compliment, but I really enjoy what this control scheme has done for what was already a fun experience. After lining up my shot, I like that I can set the controller down and really focus on getting my “swing” just right!
Putting the ball.
There are a good number of golf courses in PGA Tour, and these range in terms of difficulty. I think there’s perhaps an overabundance of courses in the United States, and this comes at the expense of other parts of the world. There are no courses at all from Asia, Africa, or South/Central America, for instance, and only one each from France, Italy, New Zealand, Canada, and the Dominican Republic. If PGA Tour is still being supported and updated, adding a handful of new courses from different parts of the world would be a nice touch.
There is diversity of environments in the courses on offer, though, with courses built in desert locales, mountains, and on coastlines all being present. And all of them are rendered beautifully.
St. Andrews: the home of golf!
PGA Tour is nothing special when it comes to the way human characters look, and facial expressions in particular can be pretty lacklustre. Nothing about the way people look feels current-gen, and some of the crowds can actually feel quite outdated in terms of both appearance and their simplified, copy-and-pasted animations. Player characters look a bit better, but still unspectacular. Compared with what we know is possible on current-gen hardware, there’s a lot of work to do for the next iteration of this series!
But the courses themselves are something else. They look outstanding, with grass, trees, plants, and even water being beautifully recreated. Running on my PC, with an RTX 3070 Ti graphics card, these courses have all looked absolutely fantastic, and sometimes it’s been fun to just watch the flyover of each hole and take in the setting. I’m never gonna get invited to any of these fancy places, so seeing them digitally recreated is the closest I can hope to get! Thankfully, PGA Tour does a good job.
There are some beautiful courses in PGA Tour.
I think the beautiful and realistic courses are another reason why playing PGA Tour has been so relaxing for me over these recent months. Getting lost in a digital setting isn’t always an easy feeling for any game to conjure up, so when a title can bring its environments to life like this… it really is a thing to see. I don’t think we’re at quite the same level of graphical beauty as a title like Kena: Bridge of Spirits or Red Dead Redemption II managed… but it’s not a million miles away.
As with many other sports games, PGA Tour features commentary from real commentators. I confess that I had no idea who any of them were before playing the game, but I daresay folks who regularly watch golf events on television will, and the inclusion of familiar voices in the commentary box will be another fun addition. One thing I’ve enjoyed about the commentary in PGA Tour is how the commentators will share their knowledge of not only each course, but most of the individual holes as well; rather than just commenting on events as they unfold, that little bit of extra information at the beginning is neat.
It can be worth listening to what the commentators have to say at the beginning of each hole.
There are places where the commentary is limited, of course – as you’d expect from any sports game, really! I find that I hear a few lines repeated quite often, and in some situations the game only has a single line from the commentators, so there isn’t always a lot of variety. If, like me, you regularly miss your longer putts and end up having to take an extra shot, well… be prepared to hear the commentators take note of that. Over and over again!
Jokes aside, I’ve been having a fun time with PGA Tour. It reminds me of playing Actua Golf 2 way back when, and it’s been both an entertaining challenge and a surprisingly relaxing experience. I would never have chosen to go out and buy a golf game, but when I was browsing Game Pass it leapt out at me, and I’m glad I gave it a whirl. It’s not gonna be anyone’s “game of the year” or anything like that – not unless you’re a hardened golf fanatic! But I’ve sunk quite a few hours into the game by this point, and in spite of some limitations and a downright aggressive in-game storefront, I’ve had fun.
All titles discussed above are the copyright of their respective studio, developer, and/or publisher. Actua Golf 2 and Wii Sports are currently out of print, but second-hand copies are often available for purchase. EA Sports PGA Tour is out now for PC, PlayStation 5, and Xbox Series consoles. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for the following Star Trek productions: The Original Series, The Motion Picture, The Wrath of Khan, The Search for Spock, and The Voyage Home. Minor spoilers are also present for other parts of the Star Trek franchise.
We’re celebrating an anniversary today! Forty years ago to the day, on the 1st of June 1984, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock was released in cinemas in the United States. I thought it could be fun to look back at the film, highlight some of its successes, and assess its place in the Star Trek franchise.
The Search for Spock is a film I have kind of a weird personal history with! My “first contact” with the Star Trek franchise was The Next Generation. I’ve talked about this before here on the website, but the earliest episode I can solidly recall watching is Season 2’s The Royale, which was broadcast on terrestrial TV here in the UK in 1991. I think I’d seen episodes – or at least parts of episodes – before that, but I date my entry into the Star Trek fan community to mid-1991.
The USS Enterprise returns to Spacedock.
As I continued to watch The Next Generation over the next few months and years, including returning to Season 1 and watching all of Seasons 2 and 3, I was only dimly aware of The Original Series. My parents weren’t interested in Star Trek, and in the small rural community where I grew up, there weren’t any other Trekkies that I knew of. Growing up in the ’80s, I don’t remember watching The Original Series on TV, and I never encountered any of its films at the cinema, either. But at some point after 1991, The Search for Spock came onto terrestrial TV here in the UK – probably for the first time. And it ended up being the first Star Trek film I watched!
By that point I had actually seen a handful of episodes of The Original Series when they’d been shown on TV, but I hadn’t seen The Motion Picture or The Wrath of Khan. Still, the chance to watch more Star Trek was obviously incredibly appealing, and even though I didn’t have the full picture having missed the first part of the story, I still enjoyed what The Search for Spock had to offer. Perhaps those early memories of watching the film unexpectedly have led me to over-value it in some respects… but I still consider The Search for Spock to be a great addition to the Star Trek franchise.
The film’s opening title.
One thing I miss in films and TV shows nowadays are practical special effects – and in particular, puppets and animatronics. The Search for Spock, in my view, has some fantastic puppets that represent the rapidly evolving microbes of the Genesis Planet. Though I know the world of film and TV has moved on in leaps and bounds since then, as a child of the ’80s I feel a real nostalgia for those practical effects, physical creations, and puppets – with the accompanying cinematography that brought them to life. The Search for Spock is a great example of how well these techniques work, drawing on the likes of the Star Wars series or The Dark Crystal for inspiration.
Speaking of other films, The Search for Spock was released against some stiff competition! On its opening weekend it had to compete against some incredible titles that are rightly hailed to this day as all-time classics: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Ghostbusters, and Gremlins were all in theatres at the same time – so it’s a wonder that The Search for Spock pulled in any money at all at the box office! The film was, in fact, a financial success, bringing in more than $85 million against a budget of just $16 million, with very little extra being spent on marketing. Despite a significant decline in viewership between its opening weekend and its second, The Search for Spock proved to be a successful film for the Star Trek franchise and for Paramount Pictures.
Director Leonard Nimoy during production.
It can be difficult to assess the middle part of a trilogy entirely on its own merits. The Search for Spock is sandwiched in between the serious and rather dark The Wrath of Khan and the almost pure comedy of The Voyage Home – both of which tend to be held in high regard by Trekkies. As a result, The Search for Spock can sometimes get lost; overlooked by some, disregarded by others. Some Trekkies contend that “all the even-numbered Star Trek films are bad,” lumping The Search for Spock in with The Final Frontier and The Motion Picture as being an unimpressive addition to the franchise. I disagree with that wholeheartedly: the film, while not as epic as The Wrath of Khan or as light-hearted and fun as The Voyage Home, is a thoroughly enjoyable picture, with moments of tension, drama, and action that can absolutely go toe-to-toe with the best the Star Trek franchise has to offer.
The Search for Spock is unapologetically a science-fiction story. That might seem like an odd observation; Star Trek *is* sci-fi, after all. But compared with both The Wrath of Khan – an epic action film with a superb villain – and The Voyage Home – a comedy with some sci-fi elements – it stands apart. The film has both light-hearted and very heavy moments, but keeping it all together is a decidedly sci-fi premise about a planet ageing too quickly, a dead man being reborn through scientific magic, and two interstellar empires wrangling over the fallout. As with The Motion Picture’s story of an impossibly unknowable life-form… I think it’s easy to see why some folks who long for either more straightforward action or something less serious would take a look at The Search for Spock and come away disappointed or even confused!
Scotty, Kirk, Dr McCoy, and Sulu on the bridge of the Enterprise.
The Search for Spock is, I will admit, a bit of a narrative oddity. Spock’s death in The Wrath of Khan was arguably the most powerful and emotional moment in an already epic film, and I’ve been critical in the past of storylines that involve resurrecting a dead character. It’s something that has to be handled carefully, and while The Search for Spock may get a pass as the originator of this idea – at least in the Star Trek franchise – it can still feel odd to make a big deal of a character’s death, look at the impact it has on their friends and other characters, and then undo it all in the very next instalment. I don’t think that’s one of the main reasons why this film can be unpopular in some Trekkie circles, but it’s worth acknowledging that its entire main story basically undoes one of the most powerful moments from its immediate predecessor.
Though not as transformational for the Star Trek franchise as I’d argue The Motion Picture was – as that film’s design philosophy and aesthetic choices would carry through The Next Generation era and beyond – The Search for Spock did introduce a couple of really important elements that have gone on to be a big part of the Star Trek franchise. The Search for Spock marks the debut of both the Federation’s Excelsior-class starship and the Klingon Bird-of-Prey. Both of these ships have become iconic emblems of Star Trek, and made many appearances over the years.
The USS Excelsior model being prepared for filming. Image Credit: Excelsior – The Great Experiment
The Klingon Bird-of-Prey was a unique ship at this point in Star Trek’s history. Its movable weapon pylons – which could drop down for firing its disruptors and swoop up for flight – were unique in Star Trek, and added to the fear factor of the ship. We now consider the Bird-of-Prey to be an icon of the Star Trek franchise, and it’s even appeared in recent Star Trek projects in just the last few years.
The Search for Spock also expanded upon the Klingon language that had been created for The Motion Picture, and went a long way to defining the overall aesthetic and feel of the Klingons. Sets built to represent the interior of the Bird-of-Prey would be in continuous use for two decades after the film’s release, and along with those set designs, uniform styles that first appeared here would also be featured in a big way in Star Trek projects of The Next Generation era. The Motion Picture may have started the process of modernising the Klingons from their original presentation in the 1960s, but it was The Search for Spock that really settled on many of the designs that are now totally inseparable from Star Trek’s warrior race. Some fans even got upset when the Kelvin films and Discovery used different designs and styles for the Klingons, simply because those that debuted in The Search for Spock had become so iconic.
Director Leonard Nimoy with Christopher Lloyd (as Klingon Commander Kruge) in a behind-the-scenes photo.
In addition to how the film expanded upon and settled several key designs for the Klingons, The Search for Spock also did a lot for the Vulcan race. We come away from it with an expanded knowledge of Vulcans, their telepathic abilities, and their culture. The film visited the planet Vulcan for only the fourth time – and gave us what is arguably our first major look at the planet since Yesteryear in The Animated Series and the classic episode Amok Time from The Original Series. Some of what The Search for Spock introduced for the Vulcans – such as the idea of katras, preserving the memory or even personality of individuals – have gone on to make multiple appearances in the Star Trek franchise. The development of the Vulcans would be seen in The Next Generation, through the character of Tuvok in Voyager, and revisited greatly in Enterprise. Many of the Vulcan stories in those shows – and in Discovery, too – have their roots in The Search for Spock and the elements of Vulcan culture and the Vulcan species that were first seen here.
Although she had been fully redesigned for The Motion Picturefive years earlier, the USS Enterprise had been an absolutely essential part of Star Trek going back to 1966. Many fans have said that, in Star Trek shows, the starship is basically another character; inseparable from the rest of the crew. And as the film that “killed” the original USS Enterprise, I suspect The Search for Spock was always going to court controversy!
The Search for Spock was the film that blew up the Enterprise!
Unlike Spock’s death – which this film was dedicated to undoing – there could be no resurrection for the Enterprise after its self-destruction over the Genesis Planet. This ship had, in some form, been an integral part of Star Trek since the very first episode of The Original Series, and fans had no less of a connection to the ship as to her crew. Losing the ship became an intensely emotional moment in the film – arguably more so than the death of Kirk’s own son, David. It was a bold decision by Harve Bennett and Leonard Nimoy to go there… but it’s also proven to be a controversial one!
For me, the destruction of the Enterprise is one of those singular moments in cinema – something that can be imitated but never truly recreated. Like Darth Vader’s iconic “no, I am your father” moment in another great mid-trilogy film, it’s a feeling that simply can’t be recaptured. Star Trek has, on other occasions, destroyed hero ships – the Enterprise-D in Generations, the first USS Defiant in Deep Space Nine, the Kelvin timeline Enterprise in Beyond – but none of those moments, intense though they could be, felt the same way. This was Star Trek’s first Enterprise – *the* USS Enterprise – and there it was, a burning wreck streaking its way across the sky.
The wreck of the Enterprise in the sky above the Genesis Planet.
The Wrath of Khan’s starship battle is one of the best in the franchise – and one of the most tense and exciting space combat sequences in all of cinema. It drew on submarine films of the World War II era and aftermath for inspiration, and combined with an excellent and wonderfully-portrayed villain in Khan, it made for one of the most memorable battles not just in Star Trek, but in all of sci-fi. The Search for Spock had the frankly impossible task of living up to that – and while I’d absolutely agree that both the Klingon attack on the USS Grissom and the confrontation between the damaged Enterprise and the Bird-of-Prey aren’t on the same level… there are points where they aren’t a million miles away.
The USS Grissom is another well-designed ship. Although it doesn’t follow the typical Starfleet design that we’ve seen with the Enterprise, the Reliant, and others, it’s clearly a Starfleet vessel. Its diminutive size makes it feel vulnerable, and dialogue confirming that it’s a science vessel adds to that feeling. The Search for Spock went a long way to expanding our knowledge and understanding of Starfleet as an organisation – far from having a few identical Constitution-class ships, as seen in The Original Series, Starfleet had a broad and varied lineup of vessels, with different specialised craft designed for different purposes. We see a range in just this one film: the Enterprise as a kind of mid-tier, slightly outdated ship, Excelsior as the brand-new top-of-the-line model, and the Grissom as one of Starfleet’s smaller, arguably less important ships.
The Oberth-class USS Grissom.
As an aside, I’d happily watch an entire series set aboard a ship like that! It’s one of the ideas that the Star Trek franchise had never been bold enough to try – at least, not until Lower Decks came along. Though the Grissom’s mission is an important one in The Search for Spock, the design of the ship and the way her crew talk about her really leaves us with the impression of a relatively minor vessel in Starfleet. It wouldn’t be until Lower Decks premiered more than thirty-five years later that we’d get an extended look at the officers and crew of a ship that wasn’t on the front lines of exploration!
Kruge, played by Christopher Lloyd of Back to the Future fame, makes for a compelling villain. Again, I fear that comparisons with Khan are inevitable (and perhaps unfavourable), but bringing back the Klingons for a major antagonistic role for the first time in almost two decades was a positive thing and should be a mark in The Search for Spock’s favour. We’ve seen many Klingon stories from The Next Generation era through to the present, but at the time of the film’s premiere, the Klingons had only made one relatively minor appearance (in The Motion Picture) since The Animated Series went off the air.
The Search for Spock brought back the Klingons as major antagonists.
Kruge’s motivation is similar to Khan’s – at least insofar as control over the Genesis technology is concerned – but he’s also a very different kind of villain. We learn more about the Klingon warrior code through Kruge, as well as the organisation of the Klingon Empire and the precarious position of commanders aboard Klingon vessels. The way in which the interior of the Klingon ship was designed also ties in perfectly with this expanding Klingon philosophy that writers were creating for Star Trek. The spartan, industrial feel of the ship, with low lighting, and a bridge where the commander’s chair loomed over the other stations all match how the Klingons were portrayed on screen – and how they’d evolved from their earlier appearances.
Perhaps another reason why Kruge can feel like an overlooked Star Trek villain is that a similar idea would be used for General Chang in The Undiscovered Country. Both were commanders of a Bird-of-Prey, both had a one-on-one conflict with Kirk, and both were portrayed in a rather over-the-top, almost flamboyant style! Kruge did it first, and that should count for something… but I really do feel that he’s an interesting character in his own right, and more complex than some critics of the film give him credit for. Though Kruge would pioneer some of the features of Klingon commanders that we’ve come to see as typical, and the DNA of the likes of Martok, Gowron, and Duras is clearly present, he’s also a distinct character: his violent methods always seems to serve a purpose, rather than being present “just because.” The way he met his end – after an epic hand-to-hand fight with Kirk, also said a lot about Kirk’s character; he offered his opponent a life-saving hand before Kruge tried in vain, one last time, to drag them both to a fiery grave.
Kruge tries to drag Kirk over the ledge with him.
In terms of the main characters, there’s some apt criticism of The Motion Picture and The Wrath of Khan that not everyone was given very much to do. The Search for Spock would be the first of The Original Series films to really try and rectify this, at least in my opinion, and you’d see a trend of each of the main characters getting at least one moment in the spotlight across the remaining films. I’m thinking in particular of Uhura’s role in helping to steal the Enterprise, as well as Scotty sneaking aboard the Excelsior. Moments like that were absent from the previous couple of films, yet included here.
And I think that speaks to Leonard Nimoy’s direction. The Search for Spock was the first of two films that Nimoy directed, along with The Voyage Home, and he also contributed to the story of both pictures – receiving a writing credit for the latter. Nimoy is a Star Trek legend – but some fans can focus exclusively on his role as an actor and overlook his writing and directing. Nimoy proved himself a solid director in The Search for Spock, paving the way for other Star Trek stars – such as Jonathan Frakes, Robert Duncan McNeill, Roxann Dawson, and Alexander Siddig – to also have turns in the director’s chair.
The Search for Spock found prominent roles for Uhura and the rest of the main cast.
Saavik, who had been introduced in The Wrath of Khan, made a welcome return in The Search for Spock. Her connection with the reborn Spock, particularly as he underwent the rapid ageing and pon farr inflicted upon him by the Genesis Planet, went a long way to giving this side of the film – somewhat ironically, considering we’re dealing with Vulcans – an emotional core. Being lost and alone in a strange, harsh environment would be hard enough on anyone – let alone a young person – but to be in that situation with no knowledge of how he got there must’ve been terrifying for Spock. Saavik was able to step in and save his life.
Paramount Pictures had failed to sign Saavik’s original actor – the late Kirstie Alley – to a contract that left open the possibility of sequels, and with her star rising in Hollywood, it became apparent quite early on in the film’s production that the role would have to be recast. For my money, I think Robin Curtis actually does a fantastic job with what can be a challenging role; stoic, unemotional Vulcans aren’t always the easiest characters to portray. Both actors played Saavik well, and I don’t think the recasting harms the story. On re-watches of the entire three-film story, I don’t even think it’s especially noticeable!
Robin Curtis took over the role of Saavik from Kirstie Alley.
We should also talk about one more Vulcan: Spock himself! Leonard Nimoy would only don the iconic Vulcan ears for a few moments at the end of the film, but we also got to see a younger version of the character. Spock is an iconic emblem of the franchise, and his subsequent roles in The Next Generation and the Kelvin films really went a long way to tying disparate parts of Star Trek together. His resurrection here laid the groundwork for those future roles – and while that obviously wasn’t the intention at the time, I think it’s worth acknowledging how spectacular a decision it was to ensure that Spock remained in play!
Spock’s role in this film is relatively minor; he’s the driving force behind the story rather than an active participant in it. We’d seen across The Original Series the friendship and connection between Kirk and Spock, but The Search for Spock did a lot to frame those earlier stories and really hammer home just how deep their bond was. Spock’s “frenemy” relationship with Dr McCoy was kind of played for laughs at points, but with McCoy carrying Spock’s katra, there were other moments that could be sweet, intense, and even heavy in places.
Spock at the end of the film.
Although Spock is the film’s title character, Kirk is at the centre of the story. His friendship with Spock, his desire to cheat death and avoid the “no-win scenario,” and his attempt to correct what Sarek told him was a mistake are what kick off the plot – and we’d see the other main characters join in and contribute in their own ways. Stealing the Enterprise after being denied the opportunity to return to the Genesis Planet was the culmination of this, and the way the film reaches that point is incredibly entertaining.
In fact, the whole sequence where Kirk and the crew steal the Enterprise out from under Starfleet’s nose at Spacedock is tense, exciting, and just plain *fun*! Sulu punching a security guard, Uhura luring an officer away from his post, and Scotty sabotaging Starfleet’s “great experiment” are all really exciting, cute, and fun ideas that the film executes well. And as the Enterprise is making her escape with the space doors still closed… it’s a moment of tension that gets me every time!
This is one of my favourite moments in the film!
Although we’d only met David Marcus in The Wrath of Khan, his death is another emotional moment in The Search for Spock. As Kirk’s son, we experience this loss first and foremost through Kirk – Saavik, as a Vulcan, shows little emotion as he’s killed. And I think it’s worth acknowledging just how much of a brutal moment this was, at least by Star Trek’s standards. David wasn’t a “redshirt;” a disposable minor character. He was literally the son of Captain Kirk, and his death at the hands of the Klingons – while saving Spock and Saavik – was incredibly impactful.
The Search for Spock didn’t have enough time to really dig into the implications of David’s death, but its impact on Kirk would be revisited in The Undiscovered Country a few years later – with a log entry in which Kirk references what happened to David becoming a key plot point. I’m glad that this epilogue was added; it makes David as a character feel more important. His role in The Search for Spock was great, though, and he was brought to life beautifully by Merritt Butrick.
David with his tricorder on the Genesis Planet.
We should also talk about the unique place that The Search for Spock occupies in the Star Trek franchise. This was the final project to enter production before thoughts began to turn more seriously toward The Next Generation. By the time The Voyage Home began filming in early 1986, The Next Generation was also being worked on. As a result, we can kind of look at The Search for Spock as either a stepping stone or the beginning of the end for Star Trek’s first chapter. The Original Series and the films it spawned – The Wrath of Khan in particular – led to demands for the franchise to expand beyond its original characters, ultimately leading to Star Trek as we know it today. The Search for Spock, while the middle part of a trilogy and only the third film of six starring the original cast, was the final project to be produced while Star Trek existed in its original, singular form.
By the 1980s, Star Trek was approaching its twentieth anniversary, and with no disrespect intended, it was becoming clear that if the franchise were to continue, new actors would eventually need to be cast. I’m grateful for two things: firstly, that Gene Roddenberry and Paramount Television grasped the nettle and started working on a spin-off as early as they did. And secondly, that they didn’t abandon The Original Series and its cast in the rush to get a new series up and running. Working on two Star Trek projects at the same time – on the small screen and the big screen – must’ve been a challenge, but the franchise emerged stronger for it in the long run. All of that is incidental to The Search for Spock, of course! But the position it occupies in the history of the Star Trek franchise is an important one.
The surface of the Genesis Planet.
Star Trek has always been – and continues to be – a franchise that can tell weirder, more esoteric sci-fi stories. Though The Search for Spock is more grounded than The Motion Picture had been a few years earlier, it’s in that same camp as a film that feels like an extended episode of The Original Series. For fans who loved what The Wrath of Khan had done with a tone and theme closer to an epic space opera or action/sci-fi, I can understand why returning to a less action-heavy premise might’ve been underwhelming. And for folks who’ve only ever seen the Star Trek films as a complete box set on DVD or streaming, I guess I can appreciate why The Search for Spock is a title they’d skip or only begrudgingly watch as a bridge between The Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home. It isn’t a film that’s as intense as the former or as fun and light-hearted as the latter.
But for me, relegating The Search for Spock to that kind of position is unfair. Its emotional moments pack a punch, its action sequences and battles are intense, it has some wonderful moments of characterisation that make full use of its main cast, and it introduces us to several design, aesthetic, and thematic elements that have proven to be so popular and successful that they’re now totally inseparable from Star Trek. The Search for Spock refined the look and feel of the Klingon Empire – and the way the Klingons were presented here would carry right through The Next Generation era and beyond.
The Klingon Bird-of-Prey debuted in The Search for Spock.
The Search for Spock didn’t single-handedly set the stage for Star Trek’s future – that would be an exaggeration. At the time it was produced a sequel was all but guaranteed, and having lost creative control of the Star Trek cinematic franchise, Gene Roddenberry’s thoughts were beginning to turn toward spin-off projects. But The Search for Spock kept things on track and didn’t derail Star Trek, proving to be enough of a financial success for Paramount Pictures – and later Paramount Television – to continue to work on expanding the franchise. At a key moment, when Star Trek needed a win, The Search for Spock may not have hit it out of the park, but it delivered enough success – both critically and commercially – to shore up the franchise going into the mid-1980s.
To me, that’s a big part of the film’s legacy – but it isn’t the only thing we should think about. The story that Harve Bennett and Leonard Nimoy crafted is a fun and enjoyable one in its own right, showing the lengths friends are willing to go to when one member of the group is in peril. It’s a film that showed, arguably more than any other single story, the extent to which Captain Kirk and his crew were closer than family – and how, for that family, the needs of the one can sometimes outweigh the needs of the many. That’s an inspiring message, at least to me, and it’s what I’ve always taken away from The Search for Spock.
Most of the main cast in a promo photo.
So that’s my take as we celebrate The Search for Spock’s milestone anniversary. I went back to re-watch the film for the first time in several years, and I was reminded of just how enjoyable and entertaining it is. Star Trek has grown exponentially since The Search for Spock premiered in 1984, but even in the most recent seasons of Picard, Lower Decks, Prodigy, and Strange New Worlds, there are thematic and visual elements that made their debut here. The film’s legacy lives on!
I hope this has been a fun look back. I know that The Search for Spock isn’t everyone’s favourite Star Trek film, but when the mood takes me I’m happy to go on an adventure to the Genesis Planet with Kirk and the crew all over again. Raise a glass with me and toast the anniversary of Star Trek’s third trip to the movies!
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock is available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. The film is also available for purchase on DVD and Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including Star Trek III: The Search for Spock and all other titles and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Spoilers may be present for some of the franchises/properties discussed below.
There are a handful of “big questions” that define one’s place in geekdom – and today it’s my turn to answer some of them!
I thought it could be a bit of fun to consider some of the biggest questions that geeks like us have to wrangle with. Which fictional character is stronger? Which gaming platform is the best? These questions are contentious, especially here on the interweb – but I hope you’ll engage with this piece in the spirit of light-hearted fun! That’s how I’m choosing to present my answers, in any case.
As I always like to say, nothing we’re going to talk about today is in any way “objective!” These are my wholly subjective takes on questions that are intended to evoke strong reactions, so I hope you’ll keep that in mind! Although I’ve said that these are ten of the “biggest” geeky questions, I’m sure you can think of others – so this is by no means a definitive list.
Let’s contemplate some big questions together!
I’ve considered myself a geek – and been considered a geek by others – for basically my whole life. As a kid and a teenager, I moved in nerdy circles and friend groups where the likes of fantasy, sci-fi, horror, and video games were frequent topics of conversation. And in the ’80s and ’90s, those things were far less “mainstream” than they are nowadays! It’s actually been really cool to see the likes of The Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and Marvel become some of the biggest entertainment properties on the planet – as well as the explosion in popularity of video games. When I was at school, and even into my young adulthood, admitting to being interested in those kinds of things could lead to mockery and even bullying!
For these questions today, I’ve set myself the rule of providing an actual answer – no cop-out, fence-sitting, “I like both equally” answers here! As I’ve already said, all of this is just one person’s opinion – and at the end of the day, this is supposed to just be for fun. So please try not to take it too seriously; none of this is worth getting into an argument over!
With the introduction out of the way, let’s answer some tough geeky questions!
Question #1: Who’s the best Doctor? Doctor Who
All of the Doctors – so far!
I don’t really remember watching much Doctor Who as a kid. The original incarnation of the long-running BBC sci-fi series was coming to an end when I was younger, and by the time I was getting interested in the genre, it was Star Trek: The Next Generation that really captured my imagination. As a result, I’m going to exclude all of the pre-2005 Doctors from consideration; I simply haven’t seen enough of any of them to really have a favourite.
Of the Doctors that have been part of the revived series, the Twelfth – played by Peter Capaldi – is my favourite… but with a big caveat! Capaldi gave the best individual performance as the Doctor in the role – hands down. No disrespect meant to any of the others… but I don’t think it’s even close. He’s a performer with exactly the right style, look, and gravitas – and in my view, he played the role absolutely perfectly. That’s why I didn’t hesitate when it came to naming him as my favourite!
Peter Capaldi’s Twelfth Doctor is my personal favourite.
But there’s a catch, as I said. Capaldi’s seasons as the Doctor – Seasons 8 through 10 of the post-2005 series – were almost universally terrible. There was one decent companion (Bill, played by Pearl Mackie) but her character was treated almost as an afterthought and she met a stupid and unsatisfying end. There were hardly any decent villains or antagonists, no truly standout episodes, and really very few memorable moments at all. In fact, Capaldi’s tenure as the Doctor marked a significant decline in Doctor Who’s quality… and the series doesn’t seem to have recovered.
In terms of the best seasons of the revived Doctor Who, I’d have to give the award – somewhat begrudgingly – to Seasons 2 through 4, which starred David Tennant in the title role. The quality of the stories produced at that time was so much higher, with some truly outstanding adventures in the mix. If only there was some way to go back in time and combine Capaldi’s performance with Tennant’s storylines. Where’s a Tardis when you need one, eh?
Question #2: Who would win in a fight: Batman or Superman? DC Comics
Wasn’t there a mediocre film dedicated to answering this question?
Uh, this one should be obvious. It’s Superman, right? It has to be – if you gave any other answer then I don’t think you’ve been paying attention! Who would win in a fight between an overpowered demigod and a billionaire with some expensive gadgets? Yeah… the demigod is gonna win this one. He could launch Batman into the sun, punch him so hard that every bone in his body would shatter, use his heat-vision on him from half a mile away… the list of ways in which Superman could not just defeat but murder and utterly annihilate Batman is nearly endless!
Superman is, I would argue, increasingly difficult to depict in film because of how blatantly overpowered he is. If you read my review of Zack Snyder’s Justice League a couple of years ago, you might remember me saying that the film flopped around, desperately trying to find a way to include the rest of its cast of superheroes… but to no avail. There was no getting away from the simple fact that Superman could do it all single-handedly without even breaking a sweat.
Superman on the cover of Action Comics #19 in 1939.
At the time the character of Superman was first created, all the way back in 1938, it wasn’t a problem. In fact, creating an “all-round, all-American hero” for comic books aimed at children was exactly the point. Superman is textbook escapism – he’s the perfect hero archetype that can do it all. In context, Superman works, and when all you want is a “good guy” to save the day and stop the evil villains, he’s perfect for the part.
But any story that puts Superman in genuine danger has to come up with a reason why. The man’s basically invincible, save for the mysterious crystal known as kryptonite, and I think at least some of Superman’s big-screen and small-screen adventures suffer as a result of that. But to get back on topic: Superman would win in a fight, and he’d win incredibly quickly and incredibly easily!
Question #3: Console or PC?
A Super Nintendo – or SNES.
In the early ’90s, the first home console I ever owned was a Super Nintendo. From then on, all the way through to the middle of the last decade, console was my preference. I liked the pick-up-and-play nature of consoles, with no need to check system requirements or fiddle with settings to just get a game running. The underpowered PCs that I had in the ’90s weren’t much good for gaming, so I think that’s part of it, too. But you have to also remember that, for a long time, consoles were just better in terms of performance – and especially in terms of value – than PC.
But nowadays I’m firmly on Team PC! I built my own PC for the first time a couple of years ago, and prior to that I had a moderately-priced “gaming” PC. Since about the middle of the 2010s, PC has been my platform of choice for practically everything. I will consider picking up Nintendo’s next machine when it’s ready, but my Nintendo Switch has been gathering dust since I stopped playing Animal Crossing and Mario Kart 8… so I’m not sure how great of an investment that’ll really be!
A very pretty gaming PC setup.
PC offers the best of both worlds. Wanna play an in-depth strategy game or city-builder with loads of options and menus that really need a mouse and keyboard to navigate? PC can do that. Wanna plug in a modern control pad to play a third-person adventure title? PC can do that too. Wanna install a virtual machine and play games from the Windows 95 era? PC can do that! Wanna emulate every console from the Atari 2600 to the Dreamcast and play games that are out-of-print everywhere? PC can do that too!
With Game Pass bringing a lot of new titles to PC on launch day, and with Sony even porting over some of its previously-exclusive titles too, PC really feels like the place to be. It’s a lot more expensive to get started with – and that’s still a massive point in favour of consoles for players on a budget. But once that initial expense is out of the way, the abundance of sales on platforms like Steam means that a lot of titles – even newer ones – can be picked up at a discount. I’m really happy with my PC as my main gaming platform, and I doubt I’ll be picking up an Xbox or PlayStation this generation.
Question #4: What would be the best fictional world to live in?
There are plenty of fictional worlds to choose from!
There are loads of absolutely awful answers that people give to this question! Who’d want to live in Star Wars’ fascist-corporate dystopia, for example, which seems absolutely terrible for anyone not blessed with space magic? Or any fantasy setting with a medieval level of technology? Sure, you might have a magic elf as your buddy… but if there’s no central heating, antibiotics, or flushing toilets… you’re gonna have a bad time!
My pick is simple: Star Trek’s 24th Century. There are things to worry about, sure: the Borg, the Cardassians, and the Klingons to name but a few threats! But there are so many wonderful inventions and technologies that would make life so much better. For me, as someone with disabilities, the idea of some or all of my health issues being cured is perhaps the biggest – but there are plenty of others, too.
The USS Enterprise orbiting Earth.
Star Trek does not depict, as some have tried to claim, a “communist utopia.” As we see on multiple occasions throughout the franchise, private property still exists, and people have a great deal of freedom and autonomy. Star Trek’s future could be more accurately described as a post-scarcity society – one in which technological improvements have brought unlimited power generation, food, and other resources to the people.
There are some dark spots in Star Trek’s future – but these tend to be places outside of or separate from the Federation. Assuming I could live somewhere in the Federation, and have access to replicators, warp drive, weather-controlling satellites, and Starfleet for defence… I think it would be bliss! And so much better than anywhere else I can think of.
Question #5: Martin or Tolkien?
Who’s the superior author?
I don’t need to think too long about this one! JRR Tolkien is, for me, one of the greatest authors of all-time. George RR Martin, in contrast, can’t even finish his own story, and seems far too easily distracted by other projects – including writing TV episodes and working on video games. And c’mon… he literally copied the “RR” part of Tolkien’s name for his own pen name!
Jokes aside, I think both writers are pretty great. Tolkien could be, in places, a little too black-and-white with his protagonists and antagonists, with the goodies being pure and virtuous and the villains being corrupt and evil. Martin’s work deliberately upends many of those notions, and he places imperfect and even selfish characters at the heart of his stories. Some of George RR Martin’s characters feel more nuanced – and dare I say more human – than Tolkien’s.
The Fellowship of the Ring at Rivendell from the 2001 film adaptation.
But Tolkien was a pioneer, writing the first modern fantasy epic. Martin, and countless other writers, are simply following in his footsteps. While Martin’s work is hardly derivative, some of the choices he makes in his writing are a reaction to the way Tolkien’s worlds and characters were set up. It’s impossible to critique A Song of Ice and Fire without making multiple references to Tolkien – whereas Tolkien’s work has always stood on its own two feet.
I would love it if George RR Martin would finish his magnum opus, but as time passes I feel less and less sure that he’s even interested in doing so. Now that Game of Thrones has finished its run on television, and Martin has seen the overwhelmingly negative reaction to its ending – which will have contained at least some elements that he planned to include in the remaining books – I just don’t get the impression that his heart is in it in the same way it was a few years ago. Tolkien’s work, in contrast, is complete and has been for decades – and people are still interested in new adaptations.
Question #6: Who’s the best Star Trek captain?
Multiple captains on a promo banner for “Star Trek Day.”
I’ve always struggled with this question. But I’ve gone on record several times here on the website as saying that if you put a gun to my head and forced me to choose – as this question is metaphorically doing – I’d pick Deep Space Nine’s Captain Benjamin Sisko. So that’s gonna be my answer!
There’s a lot to be said for Captain Kirk – Star Trek’s first captain. He paved the way for all of the others, and without him, Star Trek would not be the same today – if it even existed at all. And Captain Picard was my personal first captain; it was through The Next Generation that I became a Trekkie in the early ’90s. Without him and the crew he led, there’s a chance I would never have fallen in love with Star Trek in the way that I did. And all of the other captains from Janeway and Burnham to Archer and Pike all have wonderful qualities that make Star Trek into the franchise it is today.
Captain Benjamin Sisko.
But Captain Sisko has always stuck out to me. In the first few seasons of Deep Space Nine he only held the rank of Commander, so we got to see his rise to the rank of captain as the story of that show unfolded. He was also a man with a deeply traumatic past, having to come to terms with the death of his wife while raising his son alone. He was a fantastic leader – not just of a crew, but of a community. Sisko could reach out across the cultural divide to Ferengi, Klingons, changelings, Bajorans, and more. He turned DS9 from a military outpost into a friendly place to visit and a bustling port.
Although words like “scientist” and “explorer” might not be the first ones that spring to mind when we think of Captain Sisko, he had those traditional Starfleet qualities, too. We’d see him as a pioneer of exploring the Gamma Quadrant and the wormhole, as well as interacting with the non-corporeal Prophets – the very definition of seeking out new life! Sisko could also be a soldier and a diplomat when he needed to be – and to me, he embodies the very best of Starfleet in the 24th Century.
Question #7: Marvel or DC?
The logos of both Marvel and DC.
I don’t read comic books – and I never did, even as a kid. So my limited knowledge of both of these brands comes from their cinematic outings, not the original source material! I wanted to get that caveat out of the way before we got into the weeds with this one.
If you were to ask 100 people on the street to name a superhero, I think Superman and Batman would probably be the two names you’d hear most often. So DC, at least in my opinion, has produced the two most memorable and noteworthy superheroes. But Marvel, at least on the big screen, has a bigger and stronger ensemble – as we saw when Avengers Endgame briefly became the highest-grossing film of all time.
Batman & Robin (1997).
Although I want to say that I’ve gotten roughly equal enjoyment from DC and Marvel over the years, I promised you no fence-sitting and no cop-outs! Based on the strength of characters like Batman, who have starred in some really great films over the years, I think I have to give the win to DC. Marvel’s output is becoming increasingly convoluted, and just keeping up with the franchise to know who’s who and what happened last time can feel like a full-time job! At least DC still produces some standalone or semi-standalone films and TV shows that I can dip in and out of.
Aside from Batman and Superman, though, DC hasn’t really been able to successfully capitalise on its other superheroes – let alone turn them into household names. Wonder Woman, Aquaman, the Flash, and Green Arrow have all had limited success in a single film or TV series, but others have struggled. Batman may drag DC over the finish line this time… but there’s still room for improvement!
Question #8: Star Wars or Star Trek?
The Death Star at Yavin IV in Star Wars.
If you’ve read the name of this website, I’m sure you can guess which way this one’s going to go! Thankfully the whole “Star Wars versus Star Trek” rivalry that was a big deal a few years ago has more or less died out, and fans no longer feel quite so tribal about which is the best. There’s been a lot more crossover in recent years, with Trekkies and Star Wars fans happy to enjoy both franchises.
I consider myself a Trekkie first and foremost – so I’ll answer this question by saying that I prefer Star Trek over Star Wars. But that doesn’t mean I hate or dislike Star Wars by any stretch. In fact, some of my favourite entertainment experiences of all-time have come courtesy of the Star Wars franchise: games like Knights of the Old Republic and films like Rogue One are genuinely fantastic.
The cast of Star Trek: The Next Generation Season 2.
What I like about Star Trek is that many of its stories aren’t about fighting a villain or defeating an adversary – but about exploration, science, engineering, and just what it might be like to live in space in the future. Star Wars, by its very nature, is more violent, with more of a focus on conflict. That’s fine when I’m in more of an action mood – but there are times when a story about seeking out new life or learning to communicate is what I’m looking for.
It’s also worth pointing out that there’s a heck of a lot more Star Trek than Star Wars! At the time I first encountered the franchises, it wouldn’t be totally unfair to say that there were two good Star Wars films and one okay-ish one – at least in the opinion of a lot of folks! Star Trek already had more than 100 episodes of TV and five films under its belt, so there was plenty to get stuck into as a viewer in the early ’90s! Quantity over quality is never a good argument, of course… but if I’m enjoying something I’m always going to be happy to get more of it! Star Wars is slowly catching up to Star Trek now that Disney has commissioned several made-for-streaming series, but there’s still a long way to go to reach Star Trek’s 900+ episodes!
Question #9: Sci-Fi or Fantasy?
The NeverEnding Story (1984) was one of my favourite films as a kid.
This may come as a surprise, but fantasy was my first love long before I got interested in sci-fi, space, and the “final frontier!” Among my earliest memories is reading The Hobbit – a book that was originally intended for children, lest we forget. I can even remember pointing out to my parents that there was a typo on one page; the word “wolves” had been misprinted as “wolevs.” Aside from Tolkien’s legendary novel, I read other children’s stories including Enid Blyton’s The Faraway Tree, and watched films like The Neverending Story.
But it’s not unfair to say that sci-fi became a much bigger deal for me by the time I was reaching adolescence. Inspired by Star Trek: The Next Generation I immersed myself in science fiction, reading as many books about space and the future as I could get my hands on, and watching films like Alien and the Star Wars trilogy. TV shows like Quantum Leap, Space Precinct, and Buck Rogers in the 25th Century graced my screens in the ’90s, as did more kid-friendly offerings like Captain Scarlet.
Star Trek: The Next Generation turned me into a sci-fi fan!
So while I can happily say that I enjoy both genres for what they offer, sci-fi has been my preference going back more than thirty years at this point! Star Trek opened my eyes to science fiction and remains one of my biggest fandoms to this day! But there are many other sci-fi films, shows, books, and video games that I’ve enjoyed – everything from Mass Effect and Foundation to Battlestar Galactica and Halo. Sci-fi is great escapism, and I love the feeling of being whisked away to another world or another moment in time.
Though I haven’t forgotten my roots as a fan of fantasy, and still enjoy many fantasy titles across all forms of media, if I had to choose I’d definitely say that I’m a fan of sci-fi first and foremost. Sci-fi feels broader and more varied in some respects – there are radically different presentations of humanity’s future, the kinds of aliens we might engage with, and so on. Modern fantasy tends to stick to a medieval level of technology and use the same kinds of magical spells and the same handful of races – Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, and so on – in different combinations depending on the story.
Question #10: What’s your favourite anime/cartoon series?
There’s an anime adaptation of Shenmue.
I have to confess something at this point: I’ve never seen any anime. I don’t know why exactly – I’ve never really been in friendship groups where anime was a topic of conversation, and when I was a kid, there wasn’t any anime on TV or in the cinema that I can recall. I’ve yet to encounter an anime series that felt like a must-watch – with the only exception being the adaptation of Shenmue that I really ought to get around to watching one of these days! But until I do… no anime for me.
I had to think about this question for a while, though. There are some great adult animation programmes: Lower Decks, Futurama, Rick and Morty, South Park, and The Simpsons all come to mind. The Simpsons in particular was a pioneer of adult animation, and a series I remember with fondness from its ’90s heyday here in the UK! The fact that my parents – and many others of their generation – absolutely loathed The Simpsons was a huge mark in its favour for a renegade adolescent!
Phineas and Ferb.
But on this occasion, I’m giving the award to Phineas and Ferb. Regular readers might remember me talking about this series as one of my “comfort shows;” a programme I often return to when I need a pick-me-up. I recall watching a promo for the series circa 2007-08, and although kids’ cartoons on the Disney Channel should’ve held no appeal… something about Phineas and Ferb called out to me. I tuned in and I was hooked from almost the first moment.
Phineas and Ferb’s two-and-a-half story structure – with the kids making an invention, their sister trying to bust them for it, and special agent Perry the Platypus on a mission to fight evil – felt incredibly fun and innovative, and more often than not the storylines would intersect in creative and unexpected ways. There are also some fantastic moments of characterisation in Phineas and Ferb, particularly with the breakout character of Dr Doofenshmirtz. I was thrilled to learn that the series will be returning for two new seasons and a whopping forty new episodes, and I really hope it will be as good as it was the first time around.
So that’s it!
That’s all for now!
I hope this has been a bit of fun – and maybe bolstered my geeky credentials just a little. As I said at the beginning, I don’t think any of these subjects are worth fighting about or losing friends over, but I’ve had fun sharing my thoughts and nailing my colours to a few different masts!
The great thing about sci-fi, fantasy, gaming, and the wide world of geekdom is just how much of it there is nowadays. There are so many high-budget productions on the big screen, the small screen, and in the gaming realm that we’re really spoilt for choice. As much fun as it is to play favourites and pick one series or franchise over another… more than anything else I’m just glad to be living through a moment where geekdom is having its turn in the spotlight! That may not last forever – a return to action movies, westerns, or whatever else might be on the cards one day. So we should all make the most of it and enjoy it while it lasts!
It’s been interesting to consider some of these questions, and I hope reading my answers has been entertaining for you, too!
All properties discussed above are the copyright of their respective owner, company, distributor, broadcaster, publisher, etc. Some stock photos courtesy of Unsplash. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers present for Star Trek: Discovery and Star Trek: Picard.
Alright, let’s talk about some troubling Star Trek news, I guess.
First of all, I want to say that more Star Trek on our screens is a good thing. I always like to give that caveat before I say anything even remotely negative about announcements and rumours because I know I can be misinterpreted. Given Paramount’s dire financial situation, recent Star Trek cancellations on the small screen, and the repeated failures of big-screen Star Trek projects in recent years, the fact that we’re getting announcements about new Star Trek content at all is a positive development. The franchise isn’t dead and doesn’t seem to be going away in the immediate term – and that is good news.
But – and you knew there had to be a “but” after all of that – recent Star Trek film announcements are not only not what I’d hoped to see, but I think they really represent how out-of-touch Paramount is and how far removed its executives have become from the Star Trek fan community. The kinds of projects Paramount wants to greenlight seem to be poised to repeat recent and not-so-recent mistakes, and also appear to be based on a total misread of where Trekkies – and a more casual wider audience – are right now.
Paramount Global is the corporation that owns and manages Star Trek.
Earlier in the year we talked about the announcement of a Kelvin timeline prequel film, as well as the prospects of a sequel to 2016’s Beyond. It’s recently been reported that the so-called “origin story” is moving ahead, with talks ongoing to sign Simon Kinberg – who previously worked on films like Deadpool, The Martian, and the X-Men series – as a producer. Kinberg may also have a role in guiding or producing future Star Trek films after that.
This prequel is not the kind of project I’d choose to make if I were in charge of the franchise over at Paramount – and it seems to me that Paramount is repeating and doubling-down on the same mistake that the Star Trek franchise has been making for almost a quarter of a century. Going all the way back to the announcement of Enterprise around the turn of the millennium, prequels are just not what most fans have wanted to see. You can see that from Enterprise’s lacklustre viewing figures during its original run, leading to its premature cancellation.
Enterprise – Star Trek’s first prequel – struggled with viewership throughout its four-season run.
Moreover, Discovery had the same problem when it was announced in 2016 – and that show’s place in the Star Trek timeline caused it a plethora of issues. As I said when I took a longer look at Discovery’s creation and its status as a prequel – which you can read for yourself by clicking or tapping here – the show’s writers taking Burnham and the crew out of the 23rd Century in the Season 2 finale seems to be a tacit admission of the fact that it should never have been set in that time period to begin with.
Most of Paramount’s executives and key investors are old. They’re of the baby boomer generation, and while I doubt whether any of them are or ever were Star Trek fans, when they think of the franchise their thoughts naturally turn to The Original Series – to Kirk, Spock, and Dr McCoy, and the adventures of the original Enterprise. When they consider pitches for new Star Trek projects and think about where to spend their money, that unconscious bias is present – and I would argue that it’s leading to them pushing the Star Trek franchise in very much the wrong direction.
Too many senior people at Paramount Global still think of this when they hear the name “Star Trek.”
Discovery would have always been a controversial production, I suspect, but one of the biggest problems fans had with the show was its place in the timeline. Very little about Discovery in its first two seasons would’ve needed to change if the series had been set a decade after Nemesis instead of ten years before Kirk’s voyages aboard the Enterprise. Some character details would need to be different, but the fundamentals of the show would have worked the same – and it wouldn’t have picked up the controversy and bad feelings that came with being a prequel.
The biggest request from Star Trek fans over the past year-and-a-bit has been a Picard spin-off. Originally pitched by Terry Matalas, Picard’s showrunner during its second and third seasons, the series tentatively titled Star Trek: Legacy has proven incredibly enticing to Trekkies. However, with Matalas recently being tapped by Marvel and Disney to work on new projects for them, Legacy as originally envisioned seems not to be going ahead. That was always a possibility – and for all we know, the original pitch might’ve been crap. But the point remains: if Paramount was listening to Star Trek fans, a sequel, not a prequel, would surely be the next Star Trek project.
A sequel to Star Trek: Picard would be very popular with the Star Trek fan community.
Let’s assume that this “origin story” film goes ahead. A dangerous assumption given Paramount’s breathtaking incompetence, perhaps, but for the sake of argument we’ll entertain it for a moment. What would a film like that realistically do for Star Trek? It could connect with the Kelvin films, perhaps, and call back to Enterprise in some capacity. It could perhaps harken back to First Contact, which continues to be a pretty popular film, or maybe even scrape the barrel by making reference to some of the events in Picard’s awful second season. But beyond that? What could a film in this era explore that we don’t already know or can’t reasonably infer from other Star Trek projects?
There are events in Star Trek that we’ve never seen on screen but that shows or films have made reference to. Some of these might actually be interesting to explore in more detail one day – but not as a flagship big-screen project. These are the kinds of incidental stories that might work as one-off episodes in longer seasons, or perhaps as standalone episodes of Short Treks. Committing movie-level money to a prequel set in between Star Trek’s least successful series and most controversial series… it just feels idiotic. It’s indicative of a corporation and group of executives who are too far removed from the fan community.
Behind-the-scenes during production on Season 1 of Discovery.
I can just about see the case for a Beyond sequel – a fourth Kelvin timeline film. I still don’t agree that it would be the best way for Paramount to spend money on Star Trek, but given the relative financial success of the Kelvin films and the alternate reality setting that’s a step away from the prime timeline, I can at least understand why a return to that cast and series would be appealing. But that doesn’t apply to a different prequel, one set before the events of 2009’s Star Trek and basically everything else in the franchise.
Since its inception in the ’60s – and even more so since The Next Generation premiered – Star Trek has been a franchise that looked forward and moved forward. The core of Star Trek is about the future, and representing a positive, optimistic vision of the 23rd and 24th Centuries that can be inspiring to people today. Creating a prequel that looks back at Star Trek’s own fictional history felt wrong when Enterprise did it, re-telling the stories of Kirk and co. felt strange when the Kelvin films did it, and creating yet another prequel didn’t go to plan when Discovery did it, either. Star Trek is not a franchise well-suited to prequels and it never has been. If there is to be more Star Trek in the months and years ahead – and I hope that there will be – it should continue to move the timeline forward.
One of the first promotional images revealed for Discovery in 2016.
I don’t know what might be in the script for this supposed “origin film” that sparked all of this discussion. But based on everything I’ve seen as a viewer from Enterprise through the Kelvin films to Discovery, Strange New Worlds, and beyond, I can’t imagine that it could only ever work as a prequel. With some tweaks and adaptations, I would bet the farm that this new story would work just as well – perhaps even better – if it was set in the Picard era or beyond. Making it a sequel, not a prequel, would not only give Trekkies what we’ve been asking for more of for a long time, but it would probably make for a better, more solid standalone film – and perhaps even create something that could serve as a launchpad for new films and TV shows.
If Paramount wants to set a Star Trek project in an era with few direct connections to the rest of the franchise, that option exists as well. Shooting beyond Discovery’s 32nd Century could be a possibility, but I would also advocate for a film or show set in the 26th or 27th Centuries – far removed from the events of The Next Generation era. If new characters aboard a new ship are going to have a new, disconnected adventure, why not go down that route? There would be far fewer pitfalls as there’d be basically no need to worry about the integrity of “canon” or having to avoid using certain storylines or factions.
We know practically nothing about Star Trek’s 26th Century. Pictured: The USS Enterprise-J.
I really hope that Paramount’s executives will listen to feedback. I’m sure I won’t be the only one sighing dejectedly at the announcement of another prequel and trying to make the case for more Star Trek set further along the timeline instead. I’m not asking for everything to be a direct sequel to everything else – look at the problems that approach is causing for Marvel and, to a lesser extent, Star Wars. Not everything in Star Trek has to be connected. But if you gave me a choice between a film set fifty years before The Original Series or fifty years after Picard, I wouldn’t even hesitate. And I would argue that a plurality of the fan community, if not an outright majority, is also longing to see the next Star Trek project set somewhere in the 25th Century or beyond.
Now that I’ve had my say, I’ll return to something I mentioned at the beginning. More Star Trek is always a good thing, and if it’s a choice between cancellation and this “origin story” film, well… I’ll take the origin story. I won’t support it wholeheartedly – I simply can’t do that right now. But if this film does end up going ahead in its currently-envisioned form, I will watch it, review it, and do my best to be supportive of it as the next part of Star Trek. There’s precedent here, in a sense: while I wasn’t a big fan of Enterprise during its original run and wasn’t the biggest supporter of the Kelvin films, they all had standout moments. Perhaps more importantly, Enterprise, the Kelvin films, and Discovery all carried the flag for the Star Trek franchise and eventually led to the expansion that we’ve seen in the first half of the 2020s. Better things came out of all of those projects, and without their existence Star Trek would be in a very different place today.
Although I wasn’t wild about some of the Star Trek prequels, they did eventually lead to better things. Pictured: Strange New Worlds Season 1.
Paramount continues to surprise me with some of these moves. I’m not sure that there’s much oversight or management of the Star Trek franchise at the moment, and there’s certainly no readily apparent picture of longer-term goals or ambitions emerging. Cinema and streaming projects remain totally disconnected from one another – despite Paramount’s reunification several years ago bringing them back together. I will keep my ear to the ground about this “origin story” idea, the Beyond sequel, and any other Star Trek projects… but I don’t have high hopes for any of them right now, and I remain disappointed that Legacy doesn’t seem to have been seriously considered.
Regardless, if there’s news, further announcements, or anything else about an upcoming Star Trek film, I’ll do my best to cover it and share my thoughts with you here on the website! And if any of these films ever actually enter production and end up being released – which I have my doubts about – I’ll certainly be previewing them and reviewing them as well. I hope this has been interesting – and not too depressing – as we look ahead to one possible vision of Star Trek’s future.
The Star Trek franchise – including all films, shows, and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. No release dates have been set for the sequel to Star Trek Beyond, the “origin story” film, or any other Star Trek film. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Beware spoilers for the following Star Trek productions: The Original Series, The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Enterprise, Discovery, Picard, Generations, and First Contact.
Let’s have a little bit of fun today at the expense of the Star Trek franchise! I’ve been a Trekkie for almost thirty-five years at this point, and I’ve seen a lot of Star Trek in that time! For a franchise that now runs to over 900 individual episodes of television, Star Trek’s internal consistency and the attention to detail shown by the writers and creative teams are generally incredibly good, and there aren’t many true inconsistencies or things to get worked up about. But that doesn’t mean there are zero!
If you’re a regular reader, you might’ve seen me use the expression “glorified nitpick” in some of my Star Trek episode reviews. Sometimes I’ll point out something that I felt didn’t work very well or that seemed to run counter to what we already knew about a situation or character. Well… most of what we’re going to talk about today doesn’t even rise to that level! These aren’t things that I’m cross about or that “ruined” an episode or story for me. They’re just, as the title says, little things that bug me!
The bridge of the Enterprise-D.
Before we go any further, here are my usual caveats! Firstly, all of this is my entirely subjective opinion. If you disagree with any or all of the points below, think I’m “overreacting,” or feel that I’ve totally got the wrong end of the stick… that’s okay! These are just a few stray thoughts that I have about Star Trek, and most of them are so minor that they’re not gonna be worth getting into an argument about! Secondly, this is intended as light-hearted, tongue-in-cheek fun – so I encourage you not to take me too seriously and to engage with this article in that spirit!
Finally, I’m not counting the old excuses of “it’s just a story” or “because the writers thought it worked better that way” as explanations! Sure, everything in Star Trek is “just a story,” and if the writers needed to move characters into place or kick off certain storylines in a way that opens up a minor inconsistency, that’s just the way it goes sometimes. But as a fan, and as someone engaged with this fictional setting, that excuse doesn’t really work for me – and it never has. So it’s true that “none of this is real,” but that doesn’t change anything for me!
With all of that out of the way, let’s get started!
Number 1: Why was the unfinished Enterprise-B the only ship within several light-years of Earth? Star Trek: Generations
The Enterprise-B embarks upon her ill-fated maiden voyage.
Kicking off the plot of Generations is the maiden voyage of the Enterprise-B under the command of Captain John Harriman. Joining him for the voyage are Captain Kirk, Montgomery Scott, and Pavel Chekov, but during what was supposed to be a short shakedown cruise entirely within the Sol system, a distress call was received that took the Enterprise-B right into the path of a dangerous energy ribbon called the Nexus.
But here’s my question: why did Starfleet have no other ships anywhere close to the SS Robert Fox and SS Lakul? This is Sol – the home system of the Federation and Starfleet, where Starfleet Headquarters, the Federation government, and Spacedock are all located. With the Enterprise-B on a glorified joy-ride to show her off to a gaggle of journalists, and with weapons and other essential systems still not installed… why would she be the only ship in the area?
The Enterprise-B encounters the Nexus.
Think about it: this would be like the only military unit within a hundred miles of Washington DC being a single brand-new tank without its gun barrel. If the Enterprise-B’s shakedown cruise had taken her beyond Sol, then things might feel a little better. But having no other starships anywhere close to the stricken refugee vessels always struck me as bizarre!
If Starfleet leaves its home system and institutions of government so sparsely defended, it’s a miracle that the Klingons, Romulans, or Borg haven’t been able to warp into the system and conquer Earth! Jokes aside, I think the opening of Generations is pretty great – and the film in general is one of my personal favourites. But that doesn’t mean I can just overlook what appears to be Starfleet’s atrocious planning and non-existent defences!
Number 2: What’s the United Earth Space Probe Agency? Star Trek: The Original Series
Friendship One, a probe launched by the UESPA.
Prior to settling on more familiar terms like the United Federation of Planets and Starfleet, the United Earth Space Probe Agency (or UESPA) was an organisation that was mentioned in a couple of early Star Trek stories. But what the organisation is and what its relationship is with Starfleet and the Federation was never elaborated upon, and plot points in Enterprise have further muddied the waters.
The out-of-universe explanation for this one is simple enough: as Star Trek was being created and those early episodes were being written, some titles and names were still being decided upon. It wasn’t even settled until well into production on The Original Series’ first season that the show was set in the 23rd Century – the original pitch for the series didn’t specify an exact time period, and the 27th Century was also suggested as a possibility.
But as I said at the beginning, out-of-universe explanations don’t count!
The UESPA was mentioned a handful of times in the first season of The Original Series.
Enterprise could have put this to rest, but instead the series – quite understandably – wanted to use familiar names like Starfleet, so the UESPA wasn’t included in a big way. Occasional references to it have popped up, including in Voyager where the UESPA had sent out at least one unmanned probe, but nothing to definitively explain what it was and whether it was independent of Starfleet.
To me, the “United Earth” part of the name seems to suggest that it’s a human-only organisation, but with humanity’s ships all seemingly flying under the Federation flag, what role there could be for a United Earth fleet – and where any of its ships or probes actually are – remains unknown.
Number 3: Why was Starfleet unable to detect the octonary star system? Star Trek: Picard
Eight stars in perfect gravitational harmony.
In Season 1 of Picard, the ancient super-synths that I nicknamed the “Mass Effect Reapers” literally moved eight stars to form a stable octonary star system. They did so to make their presence known, and on the planet in that system they left their beacon behind. But… how did Starfleet – with all of its sensors, missions of exploration, advanced telescopes, and stellar cartography departments – fail to notice such an apparently obvious and incredibly interesting stellar phenomenon?
Using technology that we have right now – today, in the early 21st Century – we can look not only at stars, but detect the planets orbiting them, view distant galaxies, and even find black holes. I find it impossible to believe that Starfleet hasn’t at least scanned the entire Milky Way, detecting every star and star system – so how did they miss something so obviously artificial in nature?
The symbol representing the octonary star system.
If Picard had explained that, for instance, the Romulans deployed a cloaking device to shield the octonary system, or that Starfleet did know about the system but couldn’t explore it because of its location behind the Neutral Zone, then I’d have nothing to complain about. But a fairly sizable plot point in one episode involved the crew of La Sirena finding out that this star system had been deliberately hidden from Romulan star charts… when surely the Federation, who aren’t that far away from it in the same region of the galaxy, would have been able to see it through their telescopes! Again, if this system was in a far-flung part of the Gamma or Delta Quadrants, I’d still argue that Starfleet should’ve detected it, but its distance could be its saving grace. However, the octonary star system was supposedly in or near Romulan space – meaning it’s a mere stone’s throw away from the Federation.
In The Next Generation, the Enterprise-D is transported by Q to a system that would’ve taken them years to reach at top speed. But Starfleet already had a designation for this system: J-25. To me, that implies that the Federation has already categorised at least the Alpha and Beta Quadrants, even if ships haven’t been able to explore all of these systems yet. So once again… how did Starfleet miss an entire eight-star solar system?
Number 4: How did the Enterprise-E reach Earth so quickly from its position near the Neutral Zone? Star Trek: First Contact
A map of part of the Neutral Zone.
Star Trek’s geography has always been kept vague, and I think that’s been to the franchise’s overall benefit! But there are a few places where the distance between planets and systems seems to be inconsistent. At the beginning of First Contact, for example, we have the Enterprise-E sent away from the main fleet to patrol the Neutral Zone – despite an imminent Borg incursion. But when the battle turns against the Federation fleet, Picard is able to get the Enterprise back to Sector 001 in what seems to be a matter of hours, if not minutes.
Prior Star Trek stories, including in The Original Series and The Next Generation, had seemed to depict the Romulan Empire as being on the Federation’s far border, with outlying colonies disappearing in The Neutral Zone and “Earth Outposts” in Balance of Terror all being depicted as far-flung places. Even if we assume that Romulus is relatively close to Earth, and that the Enterprise-E was very conveniently positioned at the near end of the Neutral Zone, getting back to Earth while the battle was still raging still feels like a tall order.
The Enterprise-E at the Battle of Sector 001.
Warp factors in Star Trek are kept pretty vague – so that could account for some of this apparent discrepancy, I suppose. If the Enterprise-E could travel significantly faster than the Enterprise-D, the travel time from the Neutral Zone could be reduced. Again, it still seems to rely on the ship being fortunate with its positioning, but maybe that’s something that could be accounted for by Captain Picard preparing for this eventuality!
Still, it’s always struck me as more than a little odd that the Enterprise-E was able to reach Earth in time. Not only was Picard able to follow the Borg Sphere through the portal it created, but there was even time to save the USS Defiant and Worf before destroying the main Borg Cube. A very quick turnaround indeed!
Number 5: Why wasn’t there a debate about which route to take? Star Trek: Voyager
Captain Janeway ordered her crew to take the most direct route back to Earth.
After the crew of the USS Voyager found themselves stranded on the far side of the galaxy, Captain Janeway very quickly ordered her crew to set a course for Earth. But the most direct route to Earth, through the Delta Quadrant and later the Beta Quadrant, took the ship right into the heart of Borg territory. Janeway knew this – Starfleet had at least some idea of where the Borg’s territory was located. Even if the Delta Quadrant offered the quickest way home, I’m surprised that nobody objected or tried to propose an alternative – especially when there was a good one.
Before getting transported to the Delta Quadrant, the USS Voyager made a stop at Deep Space Nine. And what’s located right next to the station? The Bajoran Wormhole! The wormhole offers a shortcut to the far side of the Gamma Quadrant – and heading in the direction of the wormhole rather than directly for Earth is something that Janeway and the crew could have considered.
The USS Voyager prepares to begin its long journey.
At this point in the timeline, the Dominion War hasn’t started – so that can’t be used as a justification for not heading that way. And while all we have to go on are non-canon sources, there’s at least some tentative evidence that the wormhole’s terminus is located roughly the same distance from the Ocampa homeworld as Earth. If that’s the case, it would be no slower to head that way. Based on the Borg threat alone, I would have argued that heading for the wormhole is actually the smarter play.
Obviously Voyager was pitched as “the Delta Quadrant show,” and we got some fantastic stories out of that premise. But given the way that Voyager’s writers handled the Borg when that time came… maybe there’s an out-of-universe argument to be made here, too! In any case, even if Janeway had ultimately made the decision to head back to Earth via the most direct route, some discussion or debate would have been an interesting inclusion as the series got going. It could’ve been a way to draw some dividing lines between Starfleet and Maquis characters – making more of the “one ship, two crews” idea that Voyager never really explored in much depth.
Number 6: Why did Michael Burnham and the USS Discovery head into the far future? Star Trek: Discovery
The USS Discovery approaches the time-wormhole.
Wait, stop! I know what you’re thinking: “this is the entire plot of Season 2 and was well-explained! They had to leave the 23rd Century to stop Control from wiping out all life in the galaxy!” And you’re correct, of course – but I’m not looking at the season as a whole or the entire plan. I’m focusing in on the final moments before Burnham opened the time-wormhole and the ship disappeared.
During the climactic battle against Control, the “assimilated” Captain Leland boarded the USS Discovery to attempt to seize control of the ship and its invaluable Sphere data. But after being cornered by Georgiou, Leland – Control’s human avatar – was defeated and killed. At that moment, the entire battle seemed to stop, and as Pike and his crew noted aboard the Enterprise, Control’s entire fleet of drone ships were simply hanging there, apparently dead or deactivated.
Control’s fleet of drone-ships.
At this moment – before Burnham had entered the time-wormhole and before Saru, aboard Discovery, had followed her – there should have been a moment’s pause. Maybe Burnham herself couldn’t see what was going on, but Saru and Pike could, and even communicated with one another confirming the death of Captain Leland. There was still time for the time-wormhole to be closed, for Discovery and Enterprise to regroup, and potentially for Discovery to remain in the 23rd Century.
Even if Pike and Saru had decided that the risk of Control re-establishing itself was too great, it’s bizarre to me that neither of them even considered the possibility for a moment. With their enemy apparently vanquished – at least temporarily – and with Discovery’s spore drive meaning the ship could’ve evaded Control by jumping to a different part of the galaxy, there was time to regroup and come up with a plan that didn’t involve stranding everyone in a totally different century.
Number 7: How could Starfleet possibly prioritise anything other than hanging onto Bajor and the wormhole? Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Deep Space Nine remastered, from the documentary What We Left Behind.
I adore Deep Space Nine’s Dominion War arc – it’s one of the best (and most under-appreciated) in the franchise, in my opinion. But as the war got started, Starfleet made what appears to be a catastrophic strategic blunder. In the episode Call to Arms, which ended the show’s spectacular fifth season, Sisko informs his crew that Starfleet won’t be sending any reinforcements to hold DS9 – their priorities lie elsewhere.
We later learn that Starfleet used the diversion of the attack on DS9 to destroy a Dominion-Cardassian shipyard… but given the strategic importance of the wormhole, and the fact that the Dominion is more than capable of producing vast quantities of ships and Jem’Hadar troops in the Gamma Quadrant, it never made sense to me that Starfleet wouldn’t have thrown every available resource at the galaxy’s most strategically vital location.
DS9 could only hold off the Dominion-Cardassian attack for a short time.
The minefield that the crew of DS9 erected bought the Federation some time (as did the subsequent intervention by the Prophets), but Starfleet must’ve known that, even with the best will in the world, the minefield wouldn’t last forever. With the Dominion in control of Bajor and DS9, they could work on shutting it down without interference. The successful attack on the Toros III shipyard may have been little more than a morale-boosting pyrrhic victory.
In war, you’d almost always rather be defending a position than having to attack – and it would have been far easier to try to hold onto DS9 while the station was still under Federation control than to try to re-capture it later after the Dominion had been given a chance to entrench. For a number of reasons, the decision to essentially abandon the station is questionable at best! If part of the story had been to show Starfleet’s admiralty as out-of-touch or incompetent, that might’ve worked. But that didn’t happen, either, so I’m just left wondering what went wrong at Starfleet Command! Still, at least we got some spectacular episodes out of this storyline.
Number 8: What happened to Dr Pulaski? Star Trek: The Next Generation
Dr Pulaski in the episode Time Squared.
Although I really liked the character of Dr Pulaski in Season 2 – you can find a longer piece about her here, if you’re interested – I think it’s fair to say that she didn’t really knock it out of the park! A letter-writing campaign from viewers and an intervention by Patrick Stewart contributed to Gates McFadden being re-hired in time for Season 3… and then Dr Pulaski was just never mentioned again.
The nature of her departure always struck me as odd, and it feels more than a little disrespectful to both an actor and a character who, for better or worse, had been a part of the series for an entire season. When Dr Crusher disappeared at the beginning of Season 2, there was at least some effort to pay lip service to her absence – it was explained that she was on another assignment at Starfleet Medical on Earth. Dr Pulaski didn’t even get that, and to the best of my knowledge has never been so much as mentioned since.
Dr Pulaski with Riker, Worf, and Troi on the bridge.
We can argue the toss about the benefits or drawbacks of keeping her around – and I go over that in a bit more detail in my character study which I’ve linked above, if you want to see my thoughts on that. But whether you think she was a fun addition to the crew, an annoyance, or whether you just liked Dr Crusher better… you gotta admit that it’s odd that she didn’t get so much as a log entry from Captain Picard to acknowledge her departure.
The second season of The Next Generation was my “first contact” with the Star Trek franchise. The first episode I can solidly remember watching is The Royale – which Dr Pulaski is barely in! But maybe that’s why I’ve always had an appreciation for her character. I like the dynamic that she brought to the crew as someone a bit older, a bit less personable, and who had history with some characters and seemed to be developing new relationships with others. There have been opportunities in recent years for Dr Pulaski to have returned – or at least to have been mentioned. But I doubt that will happen now!
Number 9: Who invented the cloaking device and when did Starfleet first encounter it? Star Trek: Enterprise
Two 22nd Century Romulan vessels de-cloaking.
This is a point that I have a personal “head canon” explanation for that I’d love to elaborate on in a full article one day! I’ll get into that in a moment, but for now, suffice to say that this is a classic example of a “prequel problem.” In short, The Original Series first season episode Balance of Terror clearly established that the Federation had never encountered a ship that could cloak, but Enterprise and Discovery – both set prior to The Original Series but produced decades later – show Romulan and Klingon ships operating under cloak and Starfleet being fully aware of this.
This raises several questions! What are cloaking devices, how do they work, and why would Starfleet not share the details of their existence with its captains, at the very least? Kirk and his crew seemed shocked that the Romulan vessel could cloak – but the Romulans had been seen cloaking and de-cloaking more than a century earlier, as had other races like the Suliban. We can debate whether the words “cloak” or “cloaking device” were spoken in those episodes – but the technology appears to be functionally the same, so semantics won’t cut it here!
A Romulan ship engaging its cloaking device in the 23rd Century.
When Enterprise was on the air I wasn’t a regular viewer, but I remember that I did catch the episode Minefield – in which a Romulan vessel is seen de-cloaking – and that led to me creating my own “head canon” explanation for this problem. I remember seeing debates on Star Trek message boards in the early 2000s about this topic, and I felt that all the producers would need to do would be to explain, somehow, that there are different types of cloaking devices. Perhaps Starfleet felt that they’d cracked the code, but the Romulans then invented a newer and better cloak. Perhaps there was even a cloaking and un-cloaking arms race between the factions.
In short, I think Star Trek can just about get away with this one by explaining that, when Starfleet figured out how to penetrate one style or type of cloaking technology, the Romulans or Klingons would refine it, re-modulate it, or invent something new. It’s not a perfect explanation, but it plugs most of the hole that Enterprise and Discovery have dug. I still think it would be nice to see something like this made official, in-universe – and let’s be honest: it would be better if these prequel-created plot holes didn’t exist in the first place!
Number 10: What’s up with the inconsistent uniform changes?
Captain Rachel Garrett of the Enterprise-C.
The series premiere of The Next Generation established that the Enterprise-D’s voyages took place almost 75 years after Kirk’s tenure in the captain’s chair, but the “monster maroon” uniforms from The Original Series films would often make appearances in flashbacks or episodes set in the past. Starfleet appeared to have stuck with that design for decades, albeit with a few minor tweaks. Using those uniforms for such a long time already felt odd, but then things started to take a turn!
The Next Generation switched uniforms at the beginning of Season 3 for its main characters, but the Season 1-2 uniform variant was still showing up on secondary characters and background characters well into Season 4. There was also a total mess in Generations, which seemed to depict a moment of transition from one uniform style to another – although Deep Space Nine seemed to have established that space stations might use different uniforms from starships? I’m still not sure about that!
Two different uniform styles seen in Lower Decks.
Deep Space Nine made an abrupt switch to the gray-shouldered uniforms midway through its run (to coincide with First Contact’s premiere), and that was okay, I guess. Far more of an instant transition than we’d seen in Generations or The Next Generation, but not necessarily a problem. But then the alternate reality films and post-2017 TV shows have really shaken things up! I’ve said before that I don’t like to get hung up on minor things like aesthetic choices, and I was generally accepting of Discovery’s all-blue look, even if it was supposedly set in between The Cage and The Original Series whose uniforms are well-known. But Lower Decks definitely complicated things by seeming to suggest that different “tiers” of starship would get different uniforms… for some reason.
In short, Star Trek hasn’t always been consistent or clear with the way Starfleet uniforms are used, how long they’re in use for, or which types of officer/crewman should wear what type of uniform. When watching an individual episode – or even a whole season of TV – this doesn’t really seem all that noticeable. But when you pick out different stories or take a big-picture look… these inconsistencies stick out.
So that’s it!
The USS Enterprise in Strange New Worlds.
We’ve nitpicked the Star Trek franchise and pulled out ten little things that have always bugged me! As I said at the beginning, none of these really spoil Star Trek for me, and I’m more than willing to overlook minor inconsistencies or small plot holes – especially in strong, otherwise entertaining stories. But when you step back and take a look at Star Trek – or any fictional world, come to that – there are always gonna be things that don’t quite make sense or that don’t seem to fit with the rest of the setting.
All of this was just for fun, and I hope it was an interesting look at a handful of minor issues that have emerged over the years. When a franchise has been running on and off for close to sixty years, that kind of thing is inevitable! Although I’ve been feeling a bit burned out on Star Trek of late, it was still enjoyable to jump back into some of these stories – several of which I hadn’t seen for years – to put together this list.
Until next time – and Live Long and Prosper!
The Star Trek franchise – including all films and series discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. Most Star Trek films and episodes are available to stream on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the service is available. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
I’m genuinely flummoxed by recent decision-making over at Xbox. I’ve said before that, while I’m a Game Pass subscriber on PC, I don’t own either of the current-gen home consoles – so I’m not coming at this from some kind of console war/fanboy perspective. But it’s pretty concerning to see Xbox flopping around like a dying fish, seemingly unable to turn its massive and ever-expanding gaming empire into anything remotely profitable.
If you haven’t heard the news, Xbox recently announced the closures of four subsidiary studios. One of those is the beleaguered Arkane Austin,developers of Redfall – which was one of the biggest flops of 2023. I’m never in favour of a studio being shut down after one failed project – especially when that studio has a previous track record of success. But I could at least understand why something like that might happen; we’ve seen it often enough with publishers like Electronic Arts, for example. Blame for a failed title gets pushed onto the developer – often unfairly, as studios are increasingly pushed to work on titles outside of their areas of expertise by publishers – and then they end up being closed down. It sucks, but it’s happened before.
Arkane Austin, the developer of the ill-fated Redfall, has been shut down.
But what I honestly cannot understand is Microsoft’s decision to close Tango Gameworks – developers of Ghostwire Tokyo and Hi-Fi Rush, both of which have been successful titles for Xbox and Game Pass, with the latter even being launched on PlayStation to great fanfare. Closing down a studio after a high-profile failure is one thing, but after releasing critically-acclaimed titles that achieved more than anyone could have expected? It makes absolutely no sense – and seems to be indicative of a company in disarray.
Microsoft and Xbox may have bitten off more than they could chew with the recent Activision-Blizzard acquisition. Although that side of the company is one of the only profitable spots for Xbox at the moment, the massive outlay to purchase the company in the first place has clearly burned a hole in the once-infinite pockets of Microsoft, and that appears to have led to some very short-term thinking on the part of some executives. They’re scrambling, looking for any and all money-saving options.
VP of Xbox Marketing Aaron Greenberg hailed the success of Hi-Fi Rush… shortly before the developer that made it was shut down.
Xbox has been running way behind PlayStation since the end of the Xbox 360 era, and that shows no signs of changing any time soon. PlayStation 5 consoles are outselling Xbox Series S and X consoles by a huge margin, and Microsoft has been struggling with that for a while. But Xbox’s ace in the hole should be Game Pass – as I’ve said more than once, subscriptions seem to be the direction of travel not only in the gaming marketplace, but in media in general, and Xbox has been first out of the gate with the biggest gaming subscription around. There have even been calls in some quarters for Xbox Game Pass to launch on PlayStation, such is the demand for the service.
But Game Pass is, as we’ve also discussed, somewhat of a double-edged sword. More people signing up naturally means fewer direct sales of games – because any player who’s joined Game Pass is incredibly unlikely to shell out extra money for a copy of a game they can already play. When some critics of Game Pass tried to spin this as a major “problem,” I pushed back on that, saying it was a silly argument. Microsoft and Xbox know what they’re doing, I argued, and a short-term hit to individual sales will have simply been an expected part of the equation as Game Pass establishes itself. But apparently I’ve over-estimated the intelligence of some of Microsoft’s executives…
Does Microsoft not know how to handle Game Pass?
Senior folks at Xbox have been seen in public expressing concern over “flat” sales, and the company doesn’t seem to know how to handle its own Game Pass subscription service – you know, the platform it set up with the explicit intention of changing the way in which Xbox and PC players pay for and engage with games. How on earth that managed to happen is just beyond me, and some of this ridiculous short-term thinking on the part of senior management at Xbox seems to run completely counter to the company’s stated longer-term goals.
Maybe Game Pass isn’t doing as well as Microsoft hoped. It seems, from publicly available data, that the service hasn’t seen a huge influx of new subscribers over the past twelve months, even with the release of major titles like Starfield. But as any film/TV streamer could tell them, building up a user base takes time, and there are bound to be bumps in the road along the way. Hitting the panic button after a few rough months and closing down studios that should be making exactly the kinds of games that Xbox claims to want to prioritise is so stupidly short-sighted that it’s almost incomprehensible.
Starfield doesn’t appear to have led to a massive influx of new Game Pass subscribers.
Not for the first time, I feel echoes of Sega’s rather unceremonious exit from the console war some twenty-plus years ago. Perhaps that’s the next step for Microsoft, with its gaggle of newly-acquired studios. Rather than becoming a gaming powerhouse like Nintendo or Sony, producing a glut of high-quality exclusive content, Microsoft is instead going to end up as another Electronic Arts – a publisher owning a number of different studios, ready to close all of them at the drop of a hat if there’s so much as a whiff of underwhelming sales numbers.
That would not be good for gaming. Whatever you may think of Xbox consoles or Game Pass, the games industry needs competition in order to innovate, grow, and provide some semblance of consumer-friendliness. With Nintendo not directly competing with PlayStation for the same audience – being off to one side carving out its own niche – it’s up to Xbox to be the competitor that the gaming landscape needs. If Xbox is indeed failing, in danger of crashing out of the market… that’s not going to be good for anyone in the longer-term.
An Xbox Series X box.
I don’t believe for a second that this will be the end of the line for Game Pass, nor for subscriptions in gaming in general. Those things are here to stay – even if Microsoft and Xbox can’t figure out how to make them work properly right now. The direction of travel in media is still toward subscriptions and away from box sets and physical discs, and I don’t see that changing in the short-to-medium term. Game Pass, while it may be struggling to attract new users right now, is still an exceptionally good deal and a great way into current-gen gaming for players on a budget… but it’s on Microsoft and Xbox to find a better way to take advantage of that. Top tip: shutting down studios that could produce brand-new titles to add to the service that would attract new subscribers is categorically not the way to do it!
On a personal level, it’s hard not to feel for the folks at Arkane Austin, Tango Gameworks, and the other studios that Microsoft has killed off this month. And for the dozens of other studios that other big publishers have shut down. The games industry in general feels quite unstable right now, with high-profile flops, studio closures, and large numbers of people being laid off left, right, and centre. Corporate greed accounts for a huge chunk of that, by the way, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. Many of these decisions are being taken to boost already record-breaking profits and to provide even more money for shareholders and investors.
There was no need to shut down Tango Gameworks.
All of this self-inflicted bad news for Xbox comes just a few weeks before the company’s big Summer Showcase event, at which several new titles are supposed to be revealed. Indiana Jones and the Great Circle, Avowed, Flight Simulator 2024, and Starfield’s Shattered Space DLC are all likely to be shown off in detail at the event, and there’s even going to be a special Call of Duty-themed presentation following Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision. But it’s hard not to see that event being totally overshadowed by recent closures and lay-offs, and the general sense that Xbox as a brand is struggling to find a direction and an identity right now.
For players who might tune into the Showcase, or who might be subscribed to gaming news publications that will cover the event… what are they to make of Xbox, when the company seems to be all over the map with its exclusives, lack of exclusives, new studios, and studios that have just been shut down? With some of Xbox’s precious few exclusive titles already making their way to competing platforms, and studios that developed popular and successful titles being unceremoniously killed off, how can any player have faith in Xbox and the upcoming titles it wants to highlight?
The Xbox Games Showcase is just a few weeks away.
Suppose Shattered Space doesn’t cut it for Starfield, and player numbers remain low. Will Xbox insist that future development on Bethesda’s attempted space epic is halted? What if Avowed does incredibly well and wins some big awards… but executives decide to shut down Obsidian Entertainment anyway? If I’m looking on as a potential player… why shouldn’t I just wait six months until some or all of these games come to PlayStation or to Nintendo’s next console? What’s the point in buying an Xbox any more?
All of these are questions that Microsoft has opened up by some truly bizarre and desperately short-term moves over the past few weeks and months. If you’d asked me even a year ago what Xbox’s strategy was, I’d have said clearly that there’s a focus on building up Game Pass as a subscription service with a guaranteed income, backed up by some expensive studio and publisher acquisitions to make new titles to add to the platform. But now? What is Xbox trying to do? Where’s the longer-term planning, and where does Microsoft see the Xbox brand in ten years’ time, five years’ time… or even just this time next year? I genuinely don’t know any more.
Where will Xbox be five years from now?
It’s a strange time to be following the games industry – and I suppose that’s been true for a while now, really. Despite the predictions of some doomsters, I doubt very much that we’re heading for a 1983-style “market crash.” Gaming has grown so much since those days, and I just can’t imagine a collapse of that nature happening… at least not in the immediate term. But bigger changes may be afoot, and if Xbox is losing money and unable to keep up with PlayStation, well… sooner or later, something’s gotta change.
As I said a few months ago when talking about Xbox and its exclusivity problem, I don’t believe that the company ceasing to produce consoles would be a good move for the market overall. But, as Sega found just after the turn of the millennium, focusing on software instead of fighting a losing battle on the hardware front might be what’s needed to save the brand.
Strange times indeed.
All titles discussed above are the copyright of their respective developer, studio, and/or publisher. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Spoilers are present for The Rings of Power Season 1 and the trailer for Season 2.
I was one of the folks back in 2022 who generally enjoyed The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power. I think I even named it my favourite series of the year – despite there being plenty of competition for that award! But I also noted some weaknesses, both narratively and on the production side of things, and at the end of the day, I felt there was still work to do for the series to justify its frankly insane billion-dollar price tag.
That’s where I start as I look ahead to The Rings of Power’s upcoming second season. But there are a few other considerations before we dive head-first into the meat of the recent teaser trailer and begin to wonder about storylines and set-piece battles! In this piece today, I want to consider The Rings of Power Season 2 not only as a standalone work, but also as one piece of an expanding “Tolkien-verse,” which will soon include an animated film, a new film based around Gollum, and another currently-untitled film.
What will The Rings of Power Season 2 look like?
The Rings of Power was not well-received in its first season, and Season 2 has the difficult tasks of winning back viewers who were left disappointed, convincing those who drifted away to give it a second chance, and also bringing on board new viewers who either missed out last time or weren’t even convinced to press play. None of that will be easy, and while behind-the-scenes changes could’ve provided The Rings of Power with a soft reboot of sorts… none of that was readily apparent to me in the recent teaser trailer. If viewers want simply “more of The Rings of Power,” then that’s good news. But if the show, as has been reported, lost two-thirds of its audience over the course of a truncated first season… I don’t see how “more of the same” will be of any help.
I’ve discussed this before – thanks to another Amazon Prime Video series, by coincidence – but the huge gap of two years in between such short seasons of television is something that The Rings of Power could’ve done without. I was a fan of Season 1, as previously stated, but even I’m having a hard time recalling the details of what happened last time, as well as the names of characters, where everyone ended up, and just the overall state of Middle-earth as the credits rolled. This isn’t a problem unique to Amazon by any means, as it’s something many streaming productions have struggled with. But it simply must be a priority to ensure that Season 3 is produced much more quickly. Were there problems beyond Amazon’s control this time? Sure: pandemic restrictions in New Zealand and a strike by writers and actors surely had parts to play. But waiting two full years for eight episodes of television is unacceptable – and it will cause actual harm to The Rings of Power as it tries to pick up where it left off.
A glimpse behind-the-scenes…
Let’s talk briefly about where The Rings of Power might fit in an expanding streaming television marketplace. When the series was commissioned, Game of Thrones was approaching the end of its run, and Amazon may have expected – wrongly – that its series would have the high-budget high fantasy space all to itself, at least on the small screen. That hasn’t happened, with Netflix’s The Witcher, HBO’s spin-off House of the Dragon, and several others offering something similar. And now, following the passing of Christopher Tolkien – who had guarded his father’s estate quite vociferously – there are even other competing works being produced out of JRR Tolkien’s stories.
The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim is an animated film that’s currently set to premiere later this year, and just last week we got the announcement from Warner Bros. of two new live-action films: one focusing on Gollum, to be directed by Andy Serkis, and another untitled film. Both will be produced by Peter Jackson, who directed The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit trilogies.
The Rings of Power isn’t the only production based on Tolkien’s Middle-earth that will premiere this year…
Not only does The Rings of Power not have the high fantasy space to itself, but it’s also in direct competition with other works set in Middle-earth thanks to these new films. If Season 3 is slow to enter production and targets a 2026 release date, it could come up against Serkis and Jackson’s Gollum film. While I’m somewhat sceptical of a film focusing so heavily on Gollum – particularly in light of the disappointment of the Gollum video game last year – bringing back Peter Jackson and Andy Serkis is sure to pique the curiosity of fans of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. It’s certainly got me interested!
None of this is to say that The Rings of Power can’t peacefully co-exist with all of these productions – in Middle-earth and beyond. There’s a market for fantasy on television, and most of the projects we’ve been talking about have their own weaknesses, too. But what it does do is muddy the waters, meaning it’s going to be tough for The Rings of Power to truly stand out.
Is this going to be Sauron’s fortress?
When Amazon was negotiating with the Tolkien estate prior to The Rings of Power being commissioned, I can’t help but feel that the wrong decisions were taken. Although this may be controversial, in my view it would’ve been better to re-tell the story of The Lord of the Rings instead of trying to create a prequel from the book’s appendices. Re-making such a popular story less than twenty years after the films had been produced would have drawn a lot of criticism – but The Rings of Power caught that anyway, and at least if the series had been re-telling The Lord of the Rings, the story itself would’ve been built on firmer foundations.
That’s all for the birds now, of course, but as new Middle-earth films are being created, set in and around the time of The Lord of the Rings, I don’t think that the comparison they present is a favourable one for The Rings of Power. Ask 100 Lord of the Rings fans whether they’re more excited for the next season of this series or War of the Rohirrim and the Gollum film… and I think you and I both have a good idea about which way that survey would go!
Princess Disa in the Season 2 trailer.
I’ve had a little time to sit with the trailer for The Rings of Power Season 2, and I’ve given it a couple of re-watches to see if I missed anything interesting. We’ll set aside concerns about the long wait, other fantasy shows, and Amazon’s management of the project and take a look at the trailer now. As always, I encourage you to watch the trailer for yourself if you can – it’s available on YouTube at time of writing, and I assume it’ll be somewhere on Amazon Prime Video, too. I’ll drop a link to the trailer at the bottom of this article.
My two biggest takeaways from the trailer are as follows: first, “more of the same.” In terms of costumes, characters, and visual effects, The Rings of Power Season 2 looks remarkably similar to Season 1 – or at least to my two-year-old recollections of Season 1! As discussed above, I think that in itself could be a serious hurdle for a series whose first season was not especially well-received. This trailer is going to be most folks’ first look at The Rings of Power in close to two years, and if that’s the main impression most people get… I’m not sure that bodes well for bringing back wayward viewers.
Galadriel and the elves appear to be caught in an ambush.
Secondly, I was struck by the absence of several key characters from Season 1 – characters that we know to be returning in some capacity this time around. Their absences could be hiding spoilers, they could be held in reserve for a future trailer, or the post-production work on those scenes and sequences could be unfinished. But I also wonder whether the proto-Hobbit Harfoots and the humans of the Southlands may be taking on less of a prominent role this time around.
We did get a very brief glimpse of the Stranger – the wizard character whom many are assuming to be Gandalf – seemingly performing some kind of magical spell. I’ve had a theory for a while that the Stranger may, in fact, turn out to be another wizard like Saruman; this would be a different outcome to what many viewers seem to be expecting! But the Stranger was barely glimpsed in this trailer, which could also suggest that his role is going to be less significant this time around. I’m not always in favour of writers and artists making big changes to their work based on complaints, but the Harfoot-Stranger storyline was probably not the most well-received in Season 1, so scaling it back could make sense… if indeed that’s what’s happened.
I almost missed this clip in my first viewing of the trailer!
The Dwarves and Elves both seem to be aware of Sauron’s rise, and we saw several clips that could all be from the same battle – or that could be from different fights spread across multiple episodes. One clip appeared to show siege weapons being deployed against a city. Battles in Middle-earth have usually been fun to see on screen – though the titular Battle of the Five Armies in the final part of The Hobbit trilogy was, I would argue, over-stretched and a bit of a mess in terms of some of its CGI. But after Season 1 had ended without a full “battle episode,” it could be fun to have something like that this time around.
We saw most of the main characters, but one character pairing that was missing from the trailer was that of Elrond and the Dwarf prince Durin. These two characters were great together in Season 1, and their dynamic did a lot to bring some of the otherwise heavy stories down to earth. While it’ll be great to see different character groupings in Season 2, and to give the likes of Elrond and Galadriel more screen time together, I hope that doesn’t come at the expense of the wonderful “bromance” between Elrond and Durin that was built up in Season 1.
The relationship between Durin and Elrond was one of the best parts of Season 1.
Season 1 hinted at the fate of Numenor and its people – destruction by a massive tidal wave/flood. Whether that will actually happen in Season 2 wasn’t clear, but with the action potentially returning to the island after Numenor’s excursion to the mainland, I think it has to be a possibility! I didn’t see a lot of Numenor in the trailer, but there did seem to be one interesting clip involving a character I didn’t recognise disembarking from a large Eagle. Does that mean that Tolkien’s somewhat notorious Eagles will be in play in Season 2? That could certainly shake things up!
I can’t help but wonder whether the scene showing what we assume to be Sauron meeting the ring-maker Celebrimbor is actually a flashback. In Tolkien’s original works – which The Rings of Power has diverged from already, I should note – it was Sauron who taught the Elves how to make magical rings, so showing this as a flashback could work. I wouldn’t say I’m 100% convinced of that, but it’s certainly an interesting possibility, and a way to bring the series more in line with The Silmarillion and Tolkien’s own stories.
“Seven for the Dwarf-Lords in their halls of stone…”
There were two creatures/monsters that I didn’t recognise: one that seemed to be comprised of wriggling worms or tentacles and another that resides under the sea. Both of these could be great fun as threats/antagonists, and I look forward to seeing what the series will do with them. In terms of visuals, both looked great – and while they’re CGI creations, they were well-integrated with the sets and characters around them. When looking at video that has been compressed for YouTube, it isn’t always easy to tell how good or bad a CGI moment might look – but these seem to be on the right track, at least.
Although we couldn’t see what caused it, some disaster appears to befall the Dwarves at their underground home, with damage raining down on a Dwarven bridge. The theme of this season could be the tearing down of the existing power structures in Middle-earth, with our main characters needing to leap into action to save what they can and prepare to rebuild what’s going to be lost.
Charge!
The soundtrack to the trailer seemed to be solid. Music in Season 1 was generally pretty good – and the song This Wandering Day in particular was exceptional. With composer Bear McCreary returning to compose the soundtrack this time, I think we can expect more decent music. Visually, as noted I didn’t really feel that any of the CGI/VFX were sub-par. Nothing really leapt out at me as being visually stunning or groundbreaking – but again, a short trailer made for YouTube won’t necessarily give you that!
So that’s my look ahead to The Rings of Power Season 2, which will be on our screens at the end of August. Although it feels like spring has only just sprung, August and September will be upon us before we know it – so there really isn’t that long to wait! I’m debating whether or not to re-watch Season 1 before Season 2 gets here just so I’m caught up and ready to go. When the season arrives, I’ll do my best to share my thoughts and opinions here on the website, so I hope you’ll join me for that.
Despite some issues, I’ll end by saying that I’m generally looking forward to the return of The Rings of Power, and I’m crossing my fingers that the series can build upon the genuine successes of its first season. There should be opportunities to learn from what worked and what didn’t last time around, and perhaps to hone and refine things a little. That’s not really the impression I got from the way the trailer was cut… but here’s hoping!
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power Season 2 will premiere on the 29th of August 2024 on Amazon Prime Video. Season 1 is available to stream now and is also available on DVD. The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power is the copyright of Amazon Prime Video/Amazon Studios and New Line Cinema. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Little Kitty, Big City caught me off-guard. I’d added the game to my wishlist a long time ago, and I knew it was on the cards for 2024 – I even included it on my annual “look ahead” list just after New Year. But I’d missed developer/publisher Double Dagger Studio announcing an actual release date – so you can imagine my pleasant surprise to receive an email saying that the game had been released and was available to pick up!
A couple of years ago, another indie title called Stray took the “playing as a cat” idea in somewhat of a serious direction. That game was one of my favourites of 2022, and as a big cat person, I was champing at the bit for another cat game! Little Kitty, Big City isn’t going to be very complex or taxing – even on my ageing, arthritic fingers and thumbs. It’s a sweet, gentle game with lots of heart, plenty of sunshine and bright colours, and a charming art style that harkens back to the “glory days” of ’90s and early ’00s 3D platformers.
Little Kitty, Big City is an indie title developed and published by Double Dagger Studio.
I’ll make a bold prediction right now, with less than half of 2024 in the bag and some big, exciting releases still on the calendar: Little Kitty, Big City is absolutely going to be in contention for my “game of the year” award. At the very least it’s likely to go down as the best 3D platformer I’ll play this year, but its incredibly cute main character, heartstring-tugging premise, and gameplay that’s just good fun should absolutely put it in contention for the top prize.
Check back in late December to see if the little kitty manages to snatch the award – or rather, knock it off the shelf!
I felt echoes of the likes of Banjo Kazooie in Little Kitty, Big City. Gameplay-wise, the combination of 3D platforming with hidden collectables definitely reminds me of that style of game – but also the way in-game dialogue is presented through text boxes with animal noises also felt reminiscent of games of that era. For a game clearly pitched at a younger audience, it’s refreshing to see some decidedly old-school trappings!
Chatting with a crow.
I adore cats. My oldest is just shy of her tenth birthday, and most cats I’ve rescued over the years are black cats. There are some silly superstitions about black cats and bad luck that often sees them abandoned or never being adopted, with some even having to be put down as a result. As a black cat lover, then, it’s so incredibly sweet to see the protagonist of Little Kitty, Big City as a black cat – at least by default. I’m sure mods will be created for the PC version (if they haven’t been already) to transform the kitty with all manner of fur coats and patterns! Watch this space.
This game feels perfect for cat fanatics like me, and I’m sure that there will be plenty of cat owners and cat-obsessed kids who will fall in love with it as a result. With the exception of Nintendogs + Cats and the aforementioned Stray, there really aren’t many experiences like this; animal protagonists in general are a relative rarity. The concept could, in a worse game, come across as gimmicky… but in a title built from the ground up with its furry protagonist in mind, it doesn’t feel that way at all. In fact, the game’s levels are perfectly-designed for feline exploration, with collectables tucked away out of human reach!
There are some cute hats to try on!
With Little Kitty, Big City being set in Japan, the titular city has a lot of Japanese theming. It doesn’t feel “generic” by any stretch, and if you’ve played games as diverse as Ghostwire Tokyo or Shenmue – or, of course, if you’re lucky enough to have been to Japan – there’ll be a lot of things that feel familiar. When I first booted up the game and got started with exploring the city, it was the depiction of Japanese homes in Shenmue that first leapt to my mind. I’ve never been to Japan, but having that frame of reference gave some familiarity to Little Kitty, Big City and its streets.
In terms of gameplay mechanics, I love the addition of what we might call “cat-specific” moves to the standard 3D platformer lineup! Being able to swipe at objects to knock them off shelves or walls is incredibly cute, picking up objects and carrying them by mouth is also ridiculously adorable, and changing the name of “sprint” to “zoomies” was just pitch-perfect. The titular kitty can crawl, run, pick up objects, knock things out of their way, and – of course – jump.
Lining up the perfect pounce.
The way the jump mechanic is handled here is actually really great. I can’t remember playing another 3D platformer with a “jump preview,” showing both the intended arc and landing site, but being able to see exactly where the kitty cat will jump and land simply by holding down the jump button is a great inclusion. It means less time wasted trying to line up impossible jumps, as well as making sure you’re going to land in the right place before hitting the button. This kind of thing could – and arguably should – be an accessibility feature in other titles, and I think some other developers could take notes from the way “jump previews” are implemented here. Obviously it’s not something that every game needs – but it works incredibly well in Little Kitty, Big City.
With everything from roads and buildings to traffic cones and empty soda cans sized up, the scale of the city really does hit you in those first few minutes. The sense of being genuinely lost is something that many folks don’t experience very often – even less in the days of Google Maps and smartphones. But there’s something about the combination of being small in this very large world and being lost and alone that I felt drew on shared memories of childhood. How many times can you remember, as a kid, getting lost in a supermarket or on the high street, and feeling very small in a world that was too big for you? For me, at least, Little Kitty, Big City really nailed that very specific feeling in a way that I wasn’t really expecting.
Everything feels huge when you’re a small kitty cat!
At the core of the game, of course, is the idea of being lost and alone – and while this is masked, to an extent, by fun gameplay and a vibrant colour scheme, there’s still something dark and worrying hiding inside. The protagonist of Little Kitty, Big City – through whose eyes we experience this beautifully-crafted game world – is desperate to get home, to escape this strange world in which they find themselves. There’s a primal fear, perhaps, as a kid of being separated from one’s caregiver, and being unable to get back to safety. Little Kitty, Big City draws on this – and while there’s still plenty of light-hearted fun with talking crows, jars of jam to knock down, pedestrians’ phones to steal, and so on… I found myself empathising with the protagonist all the more because of those distant memories.
But maybe I’m turning into my old English teacher and over-analysing something that should just be treated as good, solid fun! That’s what Little Kitty, Big City is, at the end of the day. It’s an incredibly fun platformer with an adorable feline protagonist. Jumping on cars, nuzzling pedestrians, and causing more than a little chaos as a black cat is genuinely one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences that I’ve had in a long time – and certainly one of the best of 2024 so far.
Stealing someone’s smartphone has never been more fun… or cuter!
If you have Game Pass, Little Kitty, Big City is available there and it’s really a no-brainer. It’s a small file to download at 1.4GB, meaning you can be playing it in a matter of minutes! I also think the game will be fantastic on Nintendo Switch; being able to play it on the go, during a lunch break, or while commuting is going to be amazing. Little Kitty, Big City is also a title that I feel is priced appropriately: there’s no £60/$70 “base version” here; the game’s developers understood that it’s not the kind of game that needs that price point. It’s not an especially long game – but the different hats to collect and the fun, gentle gameplay give it a lot of replayability in my opinion. At time of writing, Little Kitty, Big City is slightly discounted on Steam, but even at its RRP it’s an easy title to recommend.
I’ve been having a whale of a time with Little Kitty, Big City – and as soon as I’m done writing up this review I’m going to jump back in! It’s easily my favourite game of 2024 so far.
Little Kitty, Big City is available now on Nintendo Switch, PC, Xbox Series S/X, and Xbox One consoles. Little Kitty, Big City is the copyright of Double Dagger Studio. This review contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Starfield’s main quest – including its ending.
I know, I know: I keep telling you that I’m “done” talking about Starfield… only to pop up again a few weeks later with another new article or something else to add! So perhaps I’d better stop saying that this will be my last-ever piece about Starfield and just take it as it comes!
Over the past couple of weeks, Starfield has come back into focus for me. The recent Fallout television series has seen a surge of interest in Bethesda’s other sci-fi property, with both Fallout 76 and Fallout 4 seeing massive player numbers in April 2024. Both games were already running ahead of Starfield – which seems to have dropped out of the charts altogether by this point – but with talk of Bethesda potentially greenlighting some new Fallout project to tie in with the second season of the show, it really puts into perspective how far Starfield has fallen.
Don’t forget to check out my review of the Fallout TV series, by the way. You can find it by clicking or tapping here.
The Fallout TV series has given a big boost to the games.
So here’s the deal: if you’ve read my first impressions of the game, or any of my other post-launch articles, you’ll know that I was underwhelmed by Starfield. There were elements of the game that had potential – but none that truly lived up to the hype. I didn’t hate Starfield by any means, and when I looked back at the worst or most disappointing gaming experiences of 2023, it didn’t seem fair to include it there, either. But the game was clearly not all it could’ve been.
Today, what I’d like to do is throw out a few of my (totally unsolicited) ideas for how Starfield could be improved. None of these are “magic bullets” capable of turning the game into a 10/10 perfect experience. I think that ship has sailed! But even within the confines of Starfield’s limitations, there are ways in which the game could be improved to make it worth returning to. I’m not proposing a total overhaul or re-making of the game, nor am I asking for something totally unrealistic like a brand-new main quest or recreating the game in a new engine. Instead, I’m trying to propose reasonable changes to certain systems or additions that wouldn’t undermine or fundamentally break the game as it currently exists.
My character on the surface of an icy moon.
If that sounds like something you’re interested in, let me begin with my usual caveats! First of all, I have no “insider information.” I’m not trying to claim that anything discussed below can, will, or must be included in a future update or expansion for Starfield. This is a wishlist from an ex-player, and nothing more.
Secondly, all of this is my entirely subjective opinion. If you loved Starfield in its original form, think the game is utterly irredeemable, or just hate all of my suggestions, that’s totally okay! There’s plenty of room in the Starfield and Bethesda fan communities for polite discussion and disagreement – and we don’t need to get into an argument about hypothetical ideas for the game that Bethesda may never include.
With all of that out of the way, let’s get started!
Number One: Empty Planets.
A man-made structure on a random planet.
Considering that one of the biggest complaints I repeatedly hear about Starfield is that “too many of the planets are empty and boring,” this might seem counter-intuitive. But bear with me, because I genuinely believe that making a portion of the game’s planets completely empty would be a significant improvement.
One of the things I wanted most of all from a game like Starfield was the sense of going “where no man has gone before,” and being the first person to set foot in an alien landscape. Like a Starfleet officer, I wanted to explore the galaxy – after all, isn’t that supposed to be the mission of Constellation, the main faction that players are forced to join in Starfield?
Landing on a planet where people have already been – and are still actively living – isn’t really “exploration,” is it?
But instead, the way Bethesda chose to create planets has meant that there are none – literally zero – that are empty. Humans have set foot on all of Starfield’s 1,000 planets, and it’s completely impossible to pick a landing zone that doesn’t already have pre-made structures, points of interest, shipwrecks, spaceship landing sites, and more. Any chance to feel like a bona fide explorer was lost… and for me, one of the single most crucial elements of a “space game” melted away as I came to realise that.
Empty planets in Starfield could serve a variety of purposes. Building outposts and habitats is one – because honestly, who wants to build their dream home or pirate base a few metres away from a spacer hideout, a commonly-used landing site, and an abandoned research tower? Such worlds could also contain more resources – and with a potential overhaul to the way resources are collected and used in-game, becoming a miner or space-trucker could become viable in-game career options.
Scanning a planetary body from orbit.
I loved the idea of finding a desolate planet, far away from civilisation, and building my luxury space penthouse there. I loved the idea of hopping from world to world, collecting rare resources that could be sold or traded, and upgrading my ship so that I could carry more and more cargo. Starfield offers the illusion of this through “mission boards,” but these are so barebones and non-interactive that they hardly even count.
I’d take the core of the Settled Systems – worlds around Sol, Alpha Centauri, and Cheyenne – and leave them more or less as they are. But the further out players get from those core worlds with their bigger settlements, the greater the number of genuinely empty planets there should be. I think this change could work wonders for Starfield, especially if it were to be combined with some of the other suggestions and proposals on this list.
Number Two: New and Modified “Points of Interest,” Including Different Variants.
Arriving at a “deserted biotics lab.”
Within my first few hours of playing Starfield, I’d been to the same “abandoned research tower” and the same “abandoned mine” four or five times each. I hoped that I was just unlucky – that there were many more of these copy-and-paste structures out there and I’d just run into the same couple of them a few times. But there really are only a few of these – some of which don’t have much going on. Considering how big the game is and how Bethesda expected players to want to spend hundreds of hours playing Starfield over the span of a decade, that’s pretty poor, and has been a huge weight around Starfield’s neck.
What the game desperately needs is many, many more of these so-called “points of interest.” Just to start, I’d say there ought to be four times as many as there currently are, and every free update should be adding new ones on top of that. But even if that were to happen, the fact that all of these structures – and everything within – are literally identical from one appearance to the next means that further changes are needed.
Discovering another copy-and-paste location.
So here’s my next proposal: each point of interest should come with multiple variants. I wouldn’t mind encountering the same structure half as much if the NPCs and loot contained within were in different configurations every time! It would make approaching one of these structures feel a bit more tense, too – you wouldn’t know whether you were about to encounter friendly NPCs, hostile enemies, alien monsters, or something else.
Taking the “abandoned research tower” as an example (because I played through several of those!) Here are some variant ideas: one variant could be the same as it is now, with hostile pirate NPCs having made the tower into their base. A second variant could contain scientists and researchers, perhaps even with a quest-giver to provide radiant quests or missions on the planet. A third could also have scientists, but be guarded by soldiers belonging to one faction or another, with players who haven’t gained enough ranks in that faction being turned away… or having to sneak in! A fourth variant could be totally empty, but with audio logs and notes suggesting something bad happened. A fifth could be filled with terrormorphs or other hostile monsters. And so on. How much more interesting would it be to approach an “abandoned research tower” if you didn’t know which variant you were going to get?
A non-hostile NPC at a random location.
There could also be unique once-per-playthrough points of interest that still appear at random but are never repeated. These could be variants of common structures or complete one-offs – ideally a mix of both. Some might spawn randomly on a certain planet or only in a certain biome, and others could be 100% random, with exclusive loot or quests to participate in. Clues could be left behind in the world to guide players to their locations.
In any case, one of the biggest things holding Starfield back is the incredibly repetitive dungeons/points of interest. I don’t think they can be entirely scrubbed from the game due to the way it’s made, but even just adding new and different variants of the current points of interest would be a start. Creating brand-new ones to add to the game ought to be a priority, too.
Number Three: Changes to the Ship-Builder. (Part One)
Starfield’s ship-building system.
Starfield’s ship-builder is one of the game’s best features… but it’s imperfect, finicky, and in serious need of some quality-of-life improvements. Firstly, it’s a pain in the arse to have to trek from one vendor to another to be able to design my ship exactly how I’d like it! Enabling players to access all ship parts at all vendors – or to unlock different constructors’ parts and use them from that point on – would massively improve the ship-building experience.
Being able to unlock different parts or groups of parts and then use them at all ship-building stations would be a massive improvement, one that this otherwise decent system desperately needs. The easiest way, I think, would be for each manufacturer to grant players a “license” (or other in-game jargon) for their pieces, permanently unlocking them. This would mean that players would still have to work to unlock all the different parts; they wouldn’t just be there by default. But it would also mean that there’d be no need to keep travelling between star stations and planets to add one component that’s only available in one location.
It’s a pain to have to continually travel between locations to access all of the different spaceship components.
Secondly, I’d want to see Starfield combine its interior decorating – which is currently only present in the outpost builder – with ship-building. This could be optional, meaning that players who aren’t interested wouldn’t have to participate. But one area of the ship-builder that I felt really let down the whole system was the lack of interior customisation.
It’s possible for players to drop items aboard their ship and have them remain where they fall – something that was epitomised by “sandwich lady” in the Starfield Direct marketing broadcast. But this is a Bethesda game hallmark that’s been present since Morrowind… and it hasn’t been improved in any way for almost a quarter of a century. Not only that, but any modification to a ship – even if those modifications don’t change the interior or layout in any way – would lead to all items being removed and dumped in the ship’s inventory. So even that very, very basic amount of interior customisation comes with a massive downside!
It’s possible to drop and clumsily reposition items on your ship – like this wooden duck.
At the very least, I’d like to be able to choose colours for the walls, floors, and doors, as well as choose where doors and hatches in between modules will appear. At present, there are only pre-set colours and doors appear at random; this should be easily added with a modicum of effort!
If I dared to dream, I’d like to see furniture options for each module, posters and wall art to decorate the ship, and everything from rugs to kitchen appliances, all with different designs and colour variants to choose from. One of the disappointing things for me was that, despite making my ship look the way I wanted from the outside, it never really felt like “mine” when I was exploring the inside. There was a half-eaten sandwich on a table that my character didn’t bite. There were math equations on a whiteboard in my captain’s cabin that I didn’t write. And I would have never chosen such a ghastly colour scheme!
Number Four: Changes to the Ship-Builder. (Part Two)
The ship services technician on Akila.
Sticking with Starfield’s ship-builder, there are a few more places where I think improvements could be made. Firstly, having to manually “assign” weapons is finicky and annoying, and there has got to be a better way to do this. Ideally, weapons would be automatically assigned as soon as they’re added to a ship, with the same slot always being used for the same weapon type. Heck, there are only four types of shipboard weapons in the game – so ensuring that each one is always assigned the same button shouldn’t be that difficult!
Secondly, adding the option to rotate ship pieces would be nice. Maybe not every single piece would need to be rotatable – engines, for instance, as well as cockpits might be tricky. But some layouts might work better a different way around, and being able to have some hab modules running “sideways” could open up a lot more combinations. There are also visual and aesthetic reasons for wanting to be able to rotate certain ship pieces – and this must surely be achievable without ruining the ship-builder!
Having to manually “assign” weapons is a pain in the arse.
It would also be great if there was some way to preview how different ship pieces look on the inside without having to buy them. The in-game descriptions of the likes of the brig and armoury are pretty barebones, and it’s only after purchasing an expensive hab and installing it that players actually get to see what it looks like. If the look isn’t right, if it doesn’t match the rest of the ship, or if it doesn’t do what players had been expecting… it can end up being a waste of time and credits.
This could be combined with the interior decorating and doorway positioning additions that I suggested above. The preview window could show different colour variants, for instance, and also allow players to choose where to place hatches, doorways, and even ladders.
Adding a new module in the ship-builder.
Finally, if players have a particular ship component on another vessel in their fleet, it should be possible – somehow – to swap parts between ships. Even if removing a part from one ship to add it to another made the first ship un-spaceworthy, if that wasn’t the player’s currently-assigned ship, then it should be okay. It seems silly to allow players to amass a fleet of ships that could have perfectly usable components, but be unable to swap them between different vessels in the fleet. Having to buy the same part more than once – especially if other ships are unused and just sitting there – feels like something that could be avoided.
The ship-builder is definitely one of the better game modes that Starfield introduced, building on the likes of Fallout 4′s settlement system. But there are ways in which it could be improved, allowing players to really make their ship into the flying home of their dreams!
Number Five: Alternate Starting Points for Different Character Backgrounds.
Every character starts here – regardless of how they’re set up.
It never made a lot of sense to me that a xenobiologist, a professor, or a diplomat would have ended up working in a mine. Sure, an ex-soldier or a criminal on the run might’ve taken a gig like that… but some of Starfield’s backgrounds just don’t gel with the game’s opening act. Rather than changing the entire opening (starting from a prison cell would’ve worked better, IMHO) perhaps Bethesda could add just a couple of alternate starts to account for some of these different backgrounds.
Look at what Cyberpunk 2077 did with its life paths as an example. There are three different starts in that game, each of which sees V living a different life in a different place. They all come together to kick-start the main storyline, but the journey to that point is pretty different. Even though the life paths don’t matter once the game gets going (there’s one mission apiece midway through, but they were pretty basic and uninteresting), the way the game begins offers players a different role-playing experience.
Starfield could offer alternate starts that work similarly to Cyberpunk 2077′s life paths.
Each Starfield starting point could still see players grabbing an artefact on the mining planet of Vectera if that’s important to Bethesda, but how players get to that point could change depending on which start was chosen. For example, players who wanted to imagine their character as a spacefarer could begin in space, landing on the planet to transport the unearthed artefact to New Atlantis. Or players could begin working in the mine’s laboratory, studying the artefact.
I’d also like to see at least one starting point that didn’t force players down the Constellation/main quest route immediately. Players could choose not to engage with the artefact, for instance, or could choose not to accept Barrett’s offer. After the pirate attack on Vectera, players could commandeer the pirate ship instead of being given the Frontier. These are just a few ideas off the top of my head!
Many of the available backgrounds don’t line up with working in a mine at the beginning of the game.
I don’t think Bethesda would need to go overboard here. There could be two or three mining-adjacent roles that could see players on Vectera in just the right place at just the right time to pick up the artefact. But these could be different enough from one another to take into account the different player backgrounds on offer in Starfield, which is something that I think would make a lot more sense.
If nothing else, adding a couple of alternate starting points would add to the game’s replayability, as it has for Cyberpunk 2077. There are ways to implement something like this without radically changing the game’s main story or even its opening act, and when it comes to the role-playing side of things – the side that makes me want to lose myself in a character and their fictional world – it would be a huge improvement.
Number Six: Make In-Game Careers Viable.
I was unimpressed with Starfield’s mission boards.
One of the things I love to do in a big open-world game is to step away from the main story and get lost in the world. In order to do that, my character needs to be more than just a generic adventurer… so in-game career options need to exist. And no, I don’t mean getting a job with one of the factions that quickly sees the player character climb the ladder to become its leader! I mean jobs that are off to one side, not really connected to any of the main questlines.
For example, it could be possible to be an explorer: charting unexplored and unvisited planets. Players could send probes to the surface, like in Mass Effect 2, to scout landing sites, then disembark and either map the area or collect different resources. These planetary surveys – which would actually require work to complete – could then be returned to Constellation for a profit… or sold to one of the game’s other factions. As players acquire a reputation for exploration, new quests could even arise, with factions offering players bigger rewards to survey planets further and further afield.
The mission board in New Atlantis.
Being a long hauler – one of the actual in-game backgrounds – could also be a career option. Using the mission boards, players could collect cargo from one planet and take it to another, either under contract or just to buy and sell. Different planets or settlements could have different resources or items that they’re asking for, and this could change week-to-week.
These missions would need to be much more interactive than they are currently, with players having to manually load and unload cargo, perhaps, or travelling to meet up with different NPCs inside settlements instead of just having a mission marked as “complete” as soon as the ship touches down! But there’s potential in this system to expand it and make it into a bona fide “space trucking simulator.”
Mining a resource.
Finally, for a game that kicked off deep inside a mine… there’s basically no reason to do any actual mining in Starfield. Resources are so worthless and sparsely spread out that I found there was absolutely no point in mining them when exploring a planet. If I desperately wanted to complete a research project or something, it was easier and quicker to loot a spacer base, sell the items for credits, and buy whatever resource I was missing.
But all of that could change! Making resources more abundant and accessible on different planets could make mining a viable in-game career. Tweaking the value of these resources could also make it much more worthwhile, and it could be strangely relaxing to spend an hour or two mining mercury or lithium to haul back to New Atlantis and sell it. I’m not alone in enjoying those kinds of slower-paced, “cosy” experiences… and it’s actually something I was hoping to get out of Starfield. As things stand, it’s way too unbalanced and grindy, but I can see the potential for a fun time hiding just under the surface!
Number Seven: An Alternate Ending/Reframe the Starborn.
One of the Starborn early in the game.
I hesitate to call this an “alternate” ending… because one of Starfield’s big narrative problems is that many of the fundamental questions present in its main story didn’t get any kind of conclusion in the first place. But that’s beside the point! What I’d like to see, as players reach the final act of the main quest, is the option to reject the Unity and to really push back against the whole concept of becoming Starborn. Not simply choosing not to go through the Unity, but actively stating how evil it is and the Starborn are and rejecting the whole thing.
The game puts Starborn adversaries in the player’s way, but most of these are unexplained, nameless non-entities that don’t really feel like actual people. The only two Starborn characters that players can engage with, the Hunter and the Emissary, have both been “reborn” hundreds or thousands of times over in many different universes – and the game actively pushes players to do the same thing. In fact, it’s the only way to fully complete the main quest.
Completing the main quest requires players to travel to a new universe.
But there are huge implications to abandoning one’s entire universe and everyone in it, and Starfield doesn’t do much more than pay lip service to this. It’s possible, for instance, for players to have a romantic partner or even get married – but their spouse doesn’t travel to a new universe with them. It’s implied that, based on choices the player has made, their universe of origin will be permanently changed in some way by their becoming Starborn… but this raises some massive ethical questions. Again, Starfield does nothing with these ideas.
So here’s my proposal: introduce new dialogue during the final act of the main quest that makes clear that the player rejects the entire concept of the Unity and becoming Starborn – and not only that, but they want to kill the Hunter and the Emissary to make sure that no one else can ever become Starborn either. However many universes these two might’ve fucked up… it ends here.
I’d like to see a “rejection” option added to the end of the main quest.
This is what I’d want to do if I found myself in that situation, confronted with a weird mirror image of myself telling me that “the Creators created everything,” and that becoming a Starborn is my destiny. No – fuck that. I’m from this universe, I want to stay in this universe, and I want to make damn sure that these Starborn clowns won’t be able to harm or kill anyone in the next universe, either. This universe-hopping quest ends here – not just for my character, but for all of the Starborn.
The Starborn and the Unity are the game’s real villains – at least until we get a proper explanation for the artefacts, their purpose, and where they came from. And I would want to see that reality reflected in the game’s final act, with players able to choose to reject the very idea of the Unity and the Starborn and ensuring they can’t go on harming people across countless parallel realities.
Number Eight: Quests with Multiple Pathways to Completion.
Battling a Spacer Captain at the climax of a quest.
One very disappointing thing about Starfield is how damn linear so many of its quests are. Most quests only have one route from beginning to end, and playing the game can feel like you’re riding a bike with training wheels half of the time. It ought to be possible to complete at least some quests in different ways, utilising different combinations of combat, tech, stealth, and even piloting skills depending on how players have set up their characters and which skills they’ve chosen to invest in.
Perhaps Starfield was harmed by comparisons with Baldur’s Gate 3, which was released just a month earlier. Actually, scratch that. Starfield was undeniably harmed by those comparisons! Baldur’s Gate 3 opens up practically all of its quests and characters, giving players a huge amount of freedom to decide how they want to tackle the game – leading to some incredibly fun gameplay moments. It’s possible for practically everyone in the game to die – something Starfield doesn’t allow with its “unkillable” NPCs – and for many quests to be tackled in radically different ways.
Baldur’s Gate 3 is overflowing with player choice and different ways to complete quests.
Where I got frustrated with Starfield was when the game presented the illusion of choice. At one now-infamous mission on Neon, players are teamed up with Walter to acquire another artefact. Walter states multiple times that there will be different ways to approach this interaction – but that turns out to be a lie. The game forces players down one path, and one path only.
Just taking this one mission as an example, it should be possible to abandon Walter and acquire the artefact alone, either by stealthily stealing it, killing the person carrying it, or causing panic at the nightclub and seizing it in the chaos. Then, after the player’s ship is impounded, there should be multiple options for escaping Neon. Players could sneak to the landing pad, knock out the guards, and disable the lockdown, or even rush over to another landing bay and steal a different ship. Just within this one mission there are so many ways things could go – but Bethesda has insisted that players must be locked onto one very specific route.
There should’ve been multiple approaches to this mission on Neon.
And there are many missions like this – both in main questlines and just out in the world. One side-story that I encountered involved a group of families on different planets and moons who found themselves in conflict with a gang of spacers. But there was only one way to complete every step of this mission – getting their communications back up and running, solving a conflict within the group, and then boarding the spacers’ station and killing them all. There should be so many different options in a mission like this – such as siding with the spacers for a reward, picking one family over the other when they argue, sneaking aboard the spacers’ station and opening all of the airlocks, or building a missile launcher on one of the moons and blowing it up from 10,000km away. Those are just a handful of ideas off the top of my head.
It’s obviously true that not every mission can have 100 different outcomes and routes to completion. But there should be some degree of choice in a role-playing game, for goodness’ sake! Even if all Bethesda can do at this point is make it so that some unkillable NPCs can now die and add one new alternate path for a handful of main story missions… that would still be a noticeable improvement.
Number Nine: More Cosmetic Items and Apparel.
It doesn’t take long to find NPCs wearing the same outfit as you!
I was quite disappointed with Starfield’s lack of cosmetic items – clothing in particular. For some reason, clothing only comes by way of whole outfits, with no option to mix and match different tops, trousers, or shoes – and there are almost no skirts, shorts, or different kinds of headgear beyond basic baseball caps and the occasional cowboy hat. Even Starfield’s omnipresent spacesuits are cosmetically limited, with the few available options having no colour variants.
It seems a given that Bethesda and Microsoft plan to add skins as paid-for microtransactions at a future point. You can even see in the game just where these skins will appear when they’re ready to be rolled out. But in my opinion, cosmetic microtransactions have no place in a wholly single-player game, and Bethesda should’ve added a lot more cosmetic variety to Starfield for free from day one.
Clothes shopping in Starfield isn’t much fun.
As far back as Morrowind it was possible to play dress-up by choosing different trousers, tops, shoes, and even individual pieces of armour. This would already make Starfield’s whole-body costumes feel like a backwards step even if there weren’t so few of them… but a combination of a lack of different costumes combined with the inability to select individual pieces of clothing comes together to make for an apparel system that’s underwhelming in the extreme.
For me, one part of the role-playing experience is getting my character to look exactly the way I want them to, and when Starfield offers such a limited range of costumes, that’s impossible. Most outfits in Starfield fall into one of two categories: generic “futuristic” sci-fi or western/cowboy. There’s very little diversity, no way to reflect different cultures and backgrounds… and for a game that makes a selling-point of its photo mode, there’s very little worth photographing from the available outfits.
Wearing a cowboy hat in Akila City.
Things like fashion sense and personal style are, of course, incredibly subjective – so you might enjoy the outfits and spacesuits that Starfield has to offer. That’s great – but even if you like some or all of the costumes available, adding new ones into the mix, as well as expanding the existing lineup with new colour variants and designs, can only be a good thing! I’d love to see Starfield add a lot more costumes and outfits, as well as skins and colour variants – all for free. There shouldn’t be paid skins in a game of this type.
And while we’re at it, let’s create some wholly unique cosmetic items that can only be found once per playthrough. One of the fun things about past Bethesda games used to be exploring dungeons and following questlines and being rewarded with something shiny and new! The only outfit in Starfield that comes close to falling into that category is the Starborn spacesuit… and I wasn’t especially wild about the way it looks.
Number Ten: Actual Spaceflight/Piloting.
There’s not much of an opportunity to be a pilot…
Starfield is a game set in space. It encourages players to build and customise their own spacecraft. Ship-to-ship combat takes place in real-time in space. But there’s absolutely no spaceflight in this game. Let me explain what I mean by that: players can’t get in their ship and manually fly it from one location to another. The only option is a modified form of fast-travel that generates a small bubble of space around the player’s ship. As some folks have demonstrated, there are no “real” planets or objects within that bubble; they’re just jpegs floating in the background.
Of all the points I’ve raised today, this could be the hardest to fix. Starfield is built from the ground up around fast-travelling between locations, and the way in which pockets of space are generated in orbit of planets or near starstations would need to be expanded and changed in a significant way in order to make real spaceflight work. Ships, too, would need to change – with better and faster engines being options for players who long for that space-sim experience.
Starfield appears to be built around fast-travelling from the galaxy map.
So there are real logistical issues in the way of adding bona fide spaceflight to Starfield. But I think it’s worth trying, at least – because if the only option is to fast-travel between locations, much of what appeals about taking to the stars is lost. Locations don’t feel far away from one another if players can teleport there in a few seconds, meaning much of the scale of Starfield’s galaxy – something that already feels diminished in light of its tiny cities, repetitive NPCs, and copy-and-pasted points of interest – is lost.
In past Bethesda titles, the journey from place to place was a significant part of the gameplay in and of itself. Walking from Seyda Neen to Balmora in Morrowind could lead to random combat encounters, side-quests, and interactions with NPCs. In Fallout 3, travelling from Megaton to the radio tower likewise saw the player presented with new opportunities to get lost in the game’s world and have fun. Heck, the recent Fallout TV series even referenced how exploring the wasteland often leads to getting side-tracked!
Part of the fun of past Bethesda games was journeying from place to place and stumbling upon new adventures along the way.
In short, the lack of spaceflight means there are fewer opportunities for players to take their time and explore Starfield’s galaxy in their own way at their own pace. When not on the surface of a planet – or approached by a random ship in orbit – there’s basically no way for players to get side-tracked by being offered a totally different quest or mission in a way that feels natural.
Starfield having functionally no spaceflight doesn’t just harm the game from a space-sim or space game perspective, it also denies players one of the fundamental building blocks of a Bethesda open-world game, too. I don’t know how it could realistically be implemented at this stage – and flying in between star systems would probably have to remain as fast-travel only. But making an effort to get proper spaceflight up and running would be worth it as it would be a huge improvement to Starfield’s immersion and gameplay.
So that’s it!
Does Starfield need to be rushed to the medical bay?
We’ve considered ten ways that Starfield could be improved – in my humble opinion, of course.
Although I spent close to a decade working in the games industry, I’m not a developer. I don’t know whether some or all of these ideas might’ve once been considered for Starfield, but were ultimately cut because they proved to be unpopular, impractical, or unworkable. The game’s very existence is, in some respects, a technological achievement; that Bethesda managed to build something this complex using the zombified remains of a game engine that’s more than twenty-five years old should count for something, right?
But I’m not alone in finding Starfield to be an underwhelming experience to play, and the fact that it didn’t win any big awards and seems to have dropped out of our collective cultural conversation after just a few months is testament to that. Starfield was being regularly beaten by Skyrim and Fallout 4 in terms of active players even before the Fallout TV show brought renewed attention to that franchise… and unless Microsoft and Bethesda take bold action in the months and years ahead, Starfield may very well end up being forgotten.
A custom spaceship on the landing pad at New Atlantis.
I’ve said before that I believe the only way to save Starfield is if its first major expansion is at least as big and impressive as Cyberpunk 2077′s Phantom Liberty DLC was last year. Tinkering around the edges won’t cut it, and if Bethesda can’t find a way to build a significant improvement to Starfield – not just a narrative addition or the inclusion of a new questline – then I think the game’s longer-term prospects will remain bleak.
I’ve had my say, and I’ve made my suggestions! Maybe not all of them would work, and maybe some of them are impossible due to the technical limitations of Bethesda’s game engine or the less-powerful Xbox Series S console. But Starfield would be a damn sight better if they were included… and really, some of these things should have been present at launch.
Could Starfield get its redemption arc one day? Never say never…
Starfield is out now for PC and Xbox Series S & X consoles. Starfield is the copyright of Bethesda Game Studios, Bethesda Softworks, Xbox Game Studios, and/or Microsoft. Some promo images and screenshots used above courtesy of Bethesda. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Twenty-five years ago today – that’s literally a quarter of a century – a brand-new racing game arrived on Windows 98 and Windows 95 PCs. Midtown Madness was an absolute blast and quickly became one of my most-played games of the year. With the millennium fast approaching, nothing was more fun than tearing up the streets of Chicago, getting into scrapes with the police, and taking part in some wild and dangerous races against the AI!
Midtown Madness celebrating its 25th anniversary makes me feel so incredibly old… but I’m glad to have the opportunity to talk about one of my favourite racing games of that era. Midtown Madness did something that I hadn’t really seen before in a video game – it opened up its entire city and let me drive wherever I wanted, however I wanted… even if that meant off-roading across grassy parks, scaring pedestrians on the pavement, or jumping over an open drawbridge! Two-and-a-half years before Grand Theft Auto III would take that series’ titular mayhem to an open-world environment, Midtown Madness was doing something remarkably similar.
The game’s main menu – with a funky custom mouse cursor!
Although it didn’t feel that way at the time, when I look back at Midtown Madness with a quarter of a century of hindsight, it feels like a gaming landmark; an important title that did the “open world chaos” thing in its own way before some of the better-known titles in that space. In 1999 it felt incredibly new and innovative; a game that seemed to take the chaos of the likes of Grand Theft Auto but made it fully 3D. Looking back, it feels like a half-step between 2D games, racing games, and the kind of fully open-world titles that were right around the corner.
I’d also place Shenmue in that same category: the “almost-open-world” games that were the progenitors of the format. Released the same year as Midtown Madness, but in a completely different genre, Shenmue was also an early pioneer of many of the features that open-world games continue to take advantage of to this day. 1999, it seems, was one of the most important years in the development of open-world titles!
Driving a City Bus through the streets of Chicago!
I don’t have the receipt, unfortunately, but I think I must’ve picked up Midtown Madness within a week or two of its launch. I remember playing it that summer and into the autumn; it was one of the only up-to-date PC games that I owned at the time. I’d seen a preview of it in one of the gaming magazines that were prominent on newsagents shelves in those days, and it just looked like such chaotic fun that I could hardly wait to get my hands on it! I didn’t have a PC racing wheel or any fancy equipment – and as you’ll know if you’ve ever tried it, playing a racing game with a mouse and keyboard is painful! But that didn’t stop me, and I must’ve logged dozens upon dozens of hours in Midtown Madness… in between studying and working my part-time job, of course!
Taking on races was the only way to unlock half of the vehicles in the game – the other half were available right from the start. So I definitely took part in as many races as I needed to in order to unlock the likes of the city bus and the GTR-1 racecar! But where I had the most fun with Midtown Madness was driving around the city in free-roam mode – both as chaotically and as calmly as possible! The game’s rendering of downtown Chicago – while undeniably dated by today’s standards – felt like a technological marvel in 1999, and I loved every minute of exploring the city.
Driving around Chicago in Midtown Madness was a blast!
This wasn’t my first encounter with the Windy City. I’d been a huge fan of the medical drama ER in the second half of the ’90s, following every episode and every season as they were broadcast here in the UK. I think by mid-1999 we were on Season 3 or 4 of the show, which at that point still featured George Clooney and Julianna Margulies in starring roles! But because I felt a familiarity with Chicago – from its Lake Michigan waterfront to its “L” trains that ran on elevated tracks above the streets – I felt even more drawn to this digital recreation of the city. In fact, it was one of the first digital recreations of a real-world city that I can remember spending much time with.
Going into the millennium, I’d have had Midtown Madness’ in-game map pretty much committed to memory! I could find my way from one side of the map to the other, stopping to see the sights along the way – and the game recreated some of Chicago’s most famous landmarks. I’ve already mentioned the “L” – Chicago’s elevated metro system. But there was also the Sears Tower skyscraper, Navy Pier on the Lake Michigan shorefront, the planetarium, the Wrigley Field baseball stadium, and even the airport! All of these were a ton of fun to race through and explore.
Wrigley Field as it appears in the game.
Although the game came with options for tuning the physics engine and car performance, I didn’t spend too much time tinkering. The default settings seemed to work well enough, and I was always reluctant to mess about with them too much! Midtown Madness performed very well on the PC that I had at the time, with none of the bugs and glitches that seem to plague games today. Perhaps I’m looking back with rose-tinted glasses when I say that… but I genuinely cannot remember any bugs or performance issues that got in the way of the fun.
Obviously when you compare Midtown Madness with a racing game from the 2020s, like Forza Horizon 5, or open-world car games like Grand Theft Auto V, it feels incredibly dated. Graphics that felt great at the time look blocky in 2024, with far too few polygons, and the game has the overall look of a title from the late ’90s. The turn of the millennium would see advancements in graphics that would make Midtown Madness 3 – released less than four years later – look an awful lot better.
Choosing a car to race with!
And in terms of the game’s world, the relatively low numbers of vehicles on the road and pedestrians on the pavements doesn’t feel right for a massive metropolis like Chicago. There’s also a lack of diversity – there are only a handful of vehicle types and pedestrian models, and you’ll pretty quickly see all of them if you spend much time with Midtown Madness.
But those were the restrictions that game developers had to work with in 1999, and obviously an open-world city like Cyberpunk 2077 or a racing title like Gran Turismo 7 is going to surpass Midtown Madness in every way a quarter of a century later. That’s not what makes it such a special title – and no one is really asking it to go toe-to-toe with modern racing and open-world titles.
Ideas and gameplay mechanics that Midtown Madness pioneered are still in use in modern open-world and racing games today.
Instead, we have to view Midtown Madness – and, by extension, video games in general – as a stepping-stone. The premise or DNA of later titles like Test Drive Unlimited, Project Gotham Racing, or the Forza Horizon series is present in Midtown Madness, and the game was among the first to demonstrate open-world and free-roaming elements in a racing game, as well as the merits of letting players cause chaos and create their own fun. Those gameplay ideas have become commonplace in the years since Midtown Madness was released – and now extend far beyond the racing genre.
For me, Midtown Madness is an incredibly nostalgic title. I’d love to be able to play it again – but getting it to work on a modern PC, even with a virtual desktop running Windows 98, is a pain. The game can be easily found online in its complete form, but it would be fantastic if Microsoft could work with a company that specialises in porting retro games to modern systems and give it a proper re-release. After 25 years, I think Midtown Madness deserves better than to be left behind! Many other retro titles have been brought back over the past few years, so there’s almost no reason not to do it!
Getting side-swiped by a police car during a race. Ah, the memories!
I had such a great time with Midtown Madness as the millennium approached. It was one of the games I encountered in the late ’90s that seemed to be pushing boundaries and trying something different – and something genuinely engaging and fun. It felt like a step up from basically any other racing game I’d played up until that point, and one that definitely captured and held my attention.
As we mark the milestone 25th anniversary of Midtown Madness, I look around at open-world titles and racing games and still see a number of features that I first encountered in this landmark title. It was a truly fantastic game that gave me a ton of fun and with which I made some wonderful memories.
All that remains to say is this: happy anniversary, Midtown Madness!
Midtown Madness is currently out of print, but copies may be available second-hand. Midtown Madness remains the copyright of Microsoft, Angel Studios, and/or Rockstar San Diego. Some screenshots and still frames courtesy of LGR’s retrospective review and The Racing Madness Wiki. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for the Fallout TV series and minor spoilers for several of the Fallout video games.
I’ve just finished my binge-watch of the Fallout television adaptation, so it’s time for a review! Having played a couple of the games, I’m no stranger to the world of Fallout – but I’m not exactly a super-fan of the franchise, either. I came to the TV show with enough background about the setting not to be a complete newbie, but with no real expectations about where things would go narratively. I generally enjoyed my time with the two Fallout games I played, but there have always been some elements of the games, both in terms of story and gameplay, that didn’t work as well for me. So I guess what I’m trying to say is that I didn’t have sky-high expectations for Fallout, but I was cautiously optimistic.
Any series backed up by Amazon should be afforded a decent budget, and that was another reason to approach Fallout with some degree of anticipation. The show’s writing team had also been working with Bethesda Game Studios – developers of the more recent Fallout titles – and again that seemed like something positive as this unique setting was adapted for a brand-new medium.
The main characters on a promo poster.
I came away from Fallout feeling moderately impressed – but by no means blown away. There were some interesting mysteries and truly surprising twists in the story… and some story beats that were either too rapid or that didn’t seem to make a lot of sense. There were some great characters… and one so cringeworthy that I literally fast-forwarded through several of their scenes. There were some great visual effects… and some that weren’t quite as high-quality as I’d have expected from a flagship streaming series of this type.
For every genuine success Fallout found with the pacing of one of its storylines, the development of one of its characters, or the way in which its world was constructed and brought to screen, there was another of these elements that didn’t hit the mark. The overall result was a series that I enjoyed parts of… then ended up rolling my eyes when something didn’t work as well as it should’ve. There were several places where I felt an extra scene or two wouldn’t have gone amiss – so maybe going for nine or ten episodes instead of a curtailed eight-episode season might’ve been better. I also think it was a mistake to dump the entire season at once instead of releasing episodes week-by-week as Amazon Prime Video usually does.
Why did Amazon and Bethesda feel the need to release the entire series at once?
Fallout, for me, was a show that needed room to breathe. I needed to let the events of each episode settle before racing ahead to the next – and with social media awash with spoilers within literally hours of the show’s arrival on Amazon Prime Video, I felt a strange kind of pressure to binge more episodes than I wanted to. The decision to drop the entire season in one hit is an odd one, because it’s not something that Amazon usually does with its original programming. I’d love to know why Amazon and Bethesda chose to do it this way – as not only does it harm the individual episodes by smooshing them all together, but it also means that Fallout’s moment of relevance is a heck of a lot shorter than it could’ve been. If Fallout released its episodes weekly, the show would’ve been part of our collective cultural conversation for a couple of months. As it is, Fallout was already beginning to disappear just days after its premiere.
One day we’ll have to talk in more depth about binge-watch culture and the pros and cons of releasing brand-new television shows this way. But for now, I think I’ve made my point about how Fallout was harmed by this strange and unexpected decision.
Director Jonathan Nolan and producer/showrunner Geneva Robertson-Dworet during production on Fallout. Image Credit: IMDB/Amazon Prime
When adapting a video game for a new medium, one of the big challenges that writers and designers face is how to include some of the game’s interactive elements. In the case of Fallout, we have things like the Pip-Boy device, which is worn on the wrist and serves as an in-game menu for inventory management, navigating the game world, and so on. Fallout went out of its way to include the Pip-Boy in a way that made sense, and I think fans of the games will have appreciated things like seeing Lucy place a map marker, or her Pip-Boy warning her of radioactivity.
But in a series that often had no time to waste, as its main storylines needed attention, in retrospect I’d say there were probably a few too many of these moments. A nod and wink to fans is great – but when more important story beats were cut short, or when characters seemed to switch from one state of mind to another too quickly, I’d either be looking for ways to extend the series… or for less-important things to cut out. Once the Pip-Boy had been established and its basic abilities made known, there really wasn’t a lot of need to keep going back to it.
Lucy’s Pip-Boy.
One thing that has been alluded to many times in the Fallout video games, but never directly shown, was the state of the world prior to the nuclear war. The television adaptation picked up on some of these story threads, and it was genuinely interesting to see more of the pre-war world than we’ve ever seen before. Aside from the opening moments of Fallout 4, which was little more than a character creation menu and basic tutorial, this was the most time we’ve ever been able to spend in Fallout’s ’50s-inspired world. And it was genuinely interesting.
Seeing this world through the eyes of Cooper Howard – later known as “the Ghoul” – went a long way to humanising Fallout’s villain-come-antihero, which was important for his characterisation particularly as we got toward the end of this season’s story. But more than that, it was fascinating to see little glimpses of the world that was destroyed and forever changed by the bombs. Obviously we only got to see one side of that – the upper-class, well-off side. But even that was more than we’d ever really seen before, and it went some way to informing Fallout’s attempted critique of capitalism and mega-corporations.
We got a good look at Fallout’s pre-war world through the eyes of Cooper Howard.
For my money, the way Vault-Tec and the other companies behaved in Fallout was pretty shallow and stupid, and it was the weakest aspect of this pre-war storyline. Vault-Tec went from “company with a unique and potentially life-saving product” to “evil masterminds of the end of the world” in a heartbeat… and I’m still not really sold on the reasoning. This issue isn’t really the fault of the television adaptation, though; Vault-Tec’s presentation is similar in the video games that I’m aware of.
But it does somewhat undermine this anti-corporatist message when, in order to make the corporations into villains, they have to behave so irrationally. Think about it: Vault-Tec is worried because a peace conference could de-escalate the nuclear standoff that America is in, and because the development of fusion power could prevent future conflicts over resources. The company has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders, needing to maximise their investments and earning potential. And its solution is to… turn over control of some of its vaults to other mega-corporations, letting them run wildly unethical experiments on the people inside, and to literally cause the nuclear war that will destroy, among other things, the entire global economy and kill a significant number of the shareholders and investors that it wants to satisfy. Hmm.
A shady deal being made in a smoke-filled room is a bit of a cliché…
Look, I get it. This isn’t something we should look too hard at and nitpick, and as a foundational part of the setting that we didn’t really spend too much time looking at, it works well enough. But Fallout also built its climactic plot twists atop this foundation – that Vault-Tec sought to control the post-nuclear wasteland and rebuild society on its specifications and parameters. And this is the part that I felt didn’t stick the landing quite as well.
In the games, Vault-Tec’s experiments and underhandedness were played off as part of that pre-war setting, and the challenges facing the characters we met involved surviving the aftermath and rebuilding. There have always been parts of Fallout’s world that I felt didn’t make a ton of sense in that context; people living in shacks, for instance, or unburied bodies just lying in the dirt right next to where people had supposedly been living for decades! But at least the main storylines of the games I played involved characters and factions trying to make the best of the post-war wasteland in which they found themselves. Bringing Vault-Tec back as a major antagonist in the show’s present day… I’m not sure. I’m not convinced yet that it’s working as well as it should.
Vault-Tec’s headquarters in Los Angeles before the war.
As a final point on Vault-Tec: I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention how a critique of mega-corporations and how unethical they are is beyond ironic coming from the likes of Amazon! One of the biggest multinationals on the planet putting out this kind of over-the-top depiction of the worst kind of shady corporatism is truly hilarious, and the irony of that wasn’t lost on me.
In typical streaming TV style, Fallout’s character groupings were modelled on the likes of Game of Thrones: different sets of characters start out in different places, but come together as the story progresses. This format can work well… but it’s also something we’ve seen before time and again over the past decade or so, and doesn’t feel as original or ground-breaking as it once did. Still, the way in which it was implemented generally worked well in Fallout, and the action being split between Vault 33, Lucy’s adventures, Maximus’ Brotherhood of Steel platoon, and Cooper/the Ghoul’s travels and pre-war history was well-balanced.
Maximus.
The only character and setting I’d have liked to have seen more of was Dr Wilzig, the scientist who defected from the Enclave. At first, it seemed to be implied that he was defecting to save his secret pet dog, but it was later revealed that he was smuggling a cold fusion device to the remnant of the New California Republic at Shady Sands. Why he was doing any of that, and what his faction, the Enclave, was doing in the first place were all questions that were left unanswered as Fallout ended its first season – and I’m totally okay with leaving story threads behind to be picked up next time. But for such an important character, I’d have liked to have spent a bit more time with Dr Wilzig before his untimely demise.
The attack on Vault 33, which kicked off the events of the series, was also a bit ambiguous. It seems as if the residents of Vault 32 rebelled against their overseer after learning the truth of who governed them. But how, exactly, that led to all of their deaths… that wasn’t explained. Nor was it explained why, if Moldaver and her followers knew the location of Vaults 31, 32, and 33, it took them years to attack. And if they had a Pip-Boy that could access the vaults, why did they not simply stage a direct attack on Vault 33? Or why not break into Vault 31 – something that didn’t seem to be especially difficult? If they needed a Vault-Tec employee, they had a better chance of getting someone cooperative out of Vault 31 than Vault 33! It was also unclear at first to what extent the residents of Vault 33 knew about the world above; Lucy seemed to have some familiarity with “raiders” in the first episode just prior to the attack.
Lucy figured out that her “new husband” was a surface-dweller… and didn’t seem shocked to learn that human life still existed beyond the confines of the vault.
There was also a pretty big disconnect between the behaviour of the “raiders” who attacked Vault 33 and what we saw of the residents of the Observatory. The attack on Vault 33 was supposedly orchestrated by the survivors of the attack on the New California Republic/Shady Sands, but the raiders behaved like out-of-control animals whereas the rest of the people at the Observatory seemed much more civilised. This feels like a “because plot” type of explanation, and that’s never very satisfying.
I keep having to remind myself that this is only the beginning. Fallout has been renewed for a second season, which means it’s quite plausible that some of the unexplained or poorly-explained moments will be fleshed out more in future episodes. I certainly hope that will be the case!
Lucy arrives at the Observatory.
Lucy made for a pretty good point-of-view character, introducing us to both the philosophy of life in a vault as well as to the challenges of surviving in the wasteland. The contrast between her idyllic vault life and the chaos and pain of the irradiated world above was stark, but in both cases, seeing things through her eyes elevated them. Ella Purnell, who had previously voiced the character of Gwyn in Star Trek: Prodigy, brought a lot to the role, and her performance is to be commended.
While we’re talking about great acting performances, Moisés Arias, who played Lucy’s brother Norm, was fantastic. A truly stellar performance as the younger, more easily-frightened brother really elevated the story taking place in the vault, and I was really impressed with the way Arias brought the character to life. Norm seems to be someone that the residents of Vault 31 underestimated, and the way in which he slowly came to investigate the truth behind the vaults was riveting stuff.
Norm, Lucy’s younger brother.
Maximus was, unfortunately, a character who was given several incredibly cringeworthy moments, especially in the first couple of episodes. As I indicated at the beginning, I actually fast-forwarded through several of Maximus’ scenes as a result; the kind of cringe humour usually seen on sitcoms like Friends has never been my cup of tea, and I was not interested in the slightest in sitting through it here. Aside from those scenes, though – which thankfully evaporated as the story progressed – I felt that Maximus was an interesting character and a good foil for Lucy.
Although Maximus seemed to be acting as Lucy’s guide to the wasteland, he was himself somewhat of a fish-out-of-water. Having spent presumably years living as a Brotherhood of Steel apprentice, Maximus could feel just as out-of-place in strange settlements and parts of the wasteland as Lucy – and of course, when he encountered the residents of Vault 4, we got that dialled up to eleven. There were some cute moments as Maximus came to enjoy the treats that vault life had to offer!
Maximus in Vault 4.
Speaking of Vault 4: this was another place where I felt Fallout needed to spend a bit more time. Lucy and Maximus went from falling into the vault – literally – to sneaking around and being expelled within a matter of minutes, and more so than any other part of the story, this felt like an unnecessary “side-quest.” For a series with video game origins, maybe a side-quest doesn’t seem like a bad thing. But when much of it – from the characters to the experiments to what their ultimate plans might’ve been for Lucy and Maximus – felt so half-baked… it needed more screen time, in my view.
The residents of Vault 4 felt pretty one-note; seemingly there for no other reason than to be physical examples of Vault-Tec’s evil machinations. And that’s okay – some stories need characters like that, and by showing the various deformities that some of the vault-dwellers were living with, Fallout was able to quickly convey just how far beyond the pale Vault-Tec had gone with some of its experiments. But that doesn’t help any of these characters feel like well-rounded people, and the whole Vault 4 storyline seemed rushed. If the season had been longer, I think more attention could’ve been paid to at least one or two of these characters, negating that feeling.
Most of the characters that Lucy and Maximus met in Vault 4 felt pretty flat and uninteresting.
But this was a bit of a trend with Fallout, to be honest. Several characters seemed to have incredibly rushed moments that took them from one place to another in a heartbeat. Lucy, for instance, went from “naïve and afraid vault-dweller” to “badass wasteland wanderer” in twenty seconds midway through the season – after being traded by the Ghoul and almost butchered. There’s something to be said for someone discovering their “fight or flight” instinct at a moment like that – but the way it came across was rushed and underdeveloped.
We also saw this at the season’s climax with Hank, Lucy’s father. Though absent for much of the season, finding Hank had been Lucy’s objective in the wasteland – but there was a twist to come. The twist – that Hank was a pre-war Vault-Tec employee who’d been in hibernation for 200 years – was clever enough, but almost immediately after the truth was spilled, Hank went from being the loving, caring father to stealing a suit of power armour and abandoning Lucy altogether.
Hank’s escape.
Again, this is the kind of character shift that could work. The story wanted to say something like this: Hank was always a duplicitous, uncaring narcissist who didn’t really give a damn about his family or anyone outside of Vault-Tec. But the abruptness of the moment absolutely ruined it, and Hank’s transformation from good all-round leader to damsel in distress to hardline evil villain just ended up falling flat for me. I’m hopeful, however, that future episodes and a second look at Hank in Season 2 could salvage the character and this storyline.
Fallout didn’t have time to explain everything as it went along, and as a result there’s still a lot we don’t know. Again, I’m not demanding immediate answers to mysteries that the series plans to explore in future instalments, but there are a couple of storylines that seem to have run their course that I was surprised not to learn more about – such as Moldaver, for instance. How exactly she survived not only the two centuries since the bombs fell, but also the destruction of Shady Sands was not explained. With her apparent death it seems like we won’t get to learn much more about her or how she was able to live so long (though I wouldn’t be altogether shocked to learn, in Season 2, that she isn’t as dead as she appears to be!)
Moldaver in disguise as a vault-dweller.
There was potential in some of the secondary Brotherhood of Steel characters, but we didn’t spend enough time with them to really allow any of them to shine. Dane, played by Xelia Mendes-Jones, had a genuinely interesting idea at his core: the soldier who doesn’t want to be a soldier, and tries to get out of it. But this revelation came very late in the story, after Dane had been basically absent since his first appearance, and not much was made of it. Maximus wasn’t in a position to really blame Dane for anything that happened – so this idea, while great in concept, didn’t really pan out.
Thaddeus, the bully who beat up Maximus, seemed to be getting some genuine character development at one point – but his run-in with a wasteland doctor and apparent transformation into a proto-ghoul was incredibly abrupt. There was no time to elaborate on what this could mean for Thaddeus, no time for him to confront Maximus for his betrayal, for his role in wounding him and thus putting him in that position… no time for anything as his part in the story was brushed aside so that the main characters could get to their endgames. In the cases of Dane and Thaddeus, though, there’s at least hope for more screen time in Season 2 that could flesh out these storylines a little.
Will Thaddeus become a Ghoul? Will we see more of him in Season 2?
There were a couple of places where main characters seemed to receive some pretty heavy plot armour, or where Fallout seemed unwilling to commit to endangering its protagonists. Lucy lost her finger, for instance, in a pretty brutal and agonising sequence – but this was almost immediately undone by medical magic in the very next scene. Both Maximus and the Ghoul likewise seemed to survive situations that seemed to be incredibly dangerous – and the risk with saving characters from bad situations too often is that they begin to feel invulnerable. One of the reasons why folks enjoyed shows like The Walking Dead or Game of Thrones was because of how everyone felt in danger pretty much all the time; being a main character was no guarantee of safety. Fallout, for me, skirted the line this time.
The nature of Fallout’s technology has always been a bit ambiguous; the Pip-Boy is clearly an advanced device, but people are still using black-and-white film cameras, for instance. It was a bit odd, then, when the listening device Cooper received seemed to pair with his wife’s Pip-Boy prototype like a modern Bluetooth headset. Something about the ease with which that was done didn’t quite sit right.
Cooper was able to use his wife’s Pip-Boy to eavesdrop.
This next point is less of an internal inconsistency and more a change from what I recall from the Fallout games. Ghouls seem to escape “going feral” by way of some kind of medication – but I don’t remember seeing this in either of the mainline games that I played. New additions that expand our understanding of a setting are great, and taking the show as a standalone work I don’t think it’s a problem at all. In fact, it makes a certain kind of sense in-universe. But it seems to not line up with the source material – and I wonder why it was introduced. Aside from causing a little tension for Cooper/the Ghoul at the midpoint of the story, it wasn’t really explained or expanded upon, and didn’t serve much of a narrative function.
At the end of the day, Fallout kept my attention well enough. I can be pretty brutal about switching off a series if I’m not enjoying it or if it isn’t holding my interest, and despite some issues, Fallout told a story that I was content to follow to its conclusion. I’m pleased to hear that the series has already been renewed for a second season, and I hope that production can re-start quickly so that it can be broadcast within twelve months or so. Waiting too long in between short seasons – especially for a show that dropped all of its episodes at once – can cause issues!
Maximus and Lucy at the ruins of Shady Sands.
I doubt that I’ll be calling Fallout one of the best shows of the year, but it was interesting enough for what it was. There were some great acting performances, high production values, and a connected story that was generally fun enough and worth following. As some of Fallout’s mysteries were unravelled I was genuinely surprised, and the series was kept on track by several grounded and enjoyable characters.
There were a couple of places where visual effects or physical props fell short, but nothing especially egregious leapt out to ruin my sense of immersion in Fallout’s post-nuclear world. There were moments of intrigue, action, and excitement that propelled the story forward, and if my biggest complaint is “I would’ve liked to see a couple more episodes,” because some of the fun storylines and interesting characters needed a bit more time on screen… well, that’s not the worst thing in the world, is it?
I didn’t need to pick up a new subscription for Fallout as I’m already signed up to Amazon Prime. I’m not sure it would be worth signing up for on its own merit – unless you’re a super-fan of the Fallout series or post-apocalyptic stories in general – but considering I got it as part of a subscription that I already have, I guess I can’t complain too much! Fallout was imperfect, but it was a solid start for what could be a multi-season story that should only grow and improve from here.
Fallout is available to stream now on Amazon Prime Video. Fallout is the copyright of Amazon MGM Studios and Bethesda Game Studios. This review contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
The first part of this review is free from major story spoilers. The end of the spoiler-free section is clearly marked.
Right off the bat, I ought to tell you two things. First, I’ve never read The Three-Body Problem by Liu Cixin, nor either of its sequels. I’d seen the barest of outlines of the premise when I looked into it a couple of years ago – after hearing that Netflix had greenlit this adaptation – but I didn’t track down and read a copy. To be honest… it seemed like it might be a bit weighty and dense for my reading tastes! As a result, I’m not going to be comparing 3 Body Problem to its source material – because I’m totally unfamiliar with that source material. I know there have been some alterations, with several characters being merged and ethnicities being changed to take a Chinese story and make it multi-racial and multi-cultural, but that’s really the extent of my knowledge of the changes that Netflix made with its adaptation.
Secondly, regular readers might recall that I didn’t like the final season of Game of Thrones. Why is that relevant? Because the executive producers/showrunners of 3 Body Problem are none other than David Benioff and DB Weiss – who helmed Game of Thrones for its entire eight-season run. I think I’m right in saying that 3 Body Problem is Benioff and Weiss’ second project since Game of Thrones ended, but its the first that I’ve come across – and arguably the first big project since that series ended its run back in 2019.
Promo poster for 3 Body Problem.
I’ve felt for a long time that Benioff and Weiss did exceptionally well at adapting a complicated series of novels for the small screen – so there was hope for their treatment of 3 Body Problem. Where they went off the rails, I would argue, and where their particular skillset was not as useful, was in writing their own narrative threads and picking up a half-complete story. Nobody could’ve known back in 2008, when Game of Thrones first entered pre-production, that the novels upon which it was based wouldn’t be finished in time and that the TV series would end up “overtaking” the books. But unfortunately, Benioff and Weiss were left to pick up the pieces – and came up short.
But that’s enough about Game of Thrones for now! All of this is to say that, when dealing with a complete novel trilogy, I felt that there was the potential to see Benioff and Weiss shine once more; to put their unique skills to use on an adaptation of a fully-complete story. And, based on the first season of 3 Body Problem, I think I was right about that.
3 Body Problem is helmed by David Benioff (left) and DB Weiss. Image Credit: IMDB.
So here’s the headline: I liked 3 Body Problem. It was exceptionally well-paced with some incredible acting performances, even from stars that I wasn’t particularly keen to see included. Its narrative was gripping; truly well-written sci-fi with a complicated yet enthralling underlying premise. Characters behaved in ways that felt genuine and human, something that can sometimes get lost in stories about higher dimensions, aliens, and interstellar communication.
Visual effects weren’t perfect, and I felt there were a few moments of the dreaded “uncanny valley” creeping into 3 Body Problem. However, when the action focused on characters up close, set designs, costumes, and props all looked great, and many smaller CGI/animated moments looked solid. When compared to other flagship series in the sci-fi/thriller spaces, 3 Body Problem was probably about on par in terms of animation – and perhaps a cut above when it came to physical sets and props.
Some CGI/animated moments fell into the “uncanny valley.”
3 Body Problem dipped its toes in narrative arcs that looked at religious communities and cults, conspiracy theories, alien races, cross-species communication, and much more. The core group of characters felt well-rounded, and the way in which they interacted with these often strange and confusing storylines went a long way to making the whole thing work and feel relatable. Although much of the action focused on scientists who are far more intelligent than I am, I still found myself relating to them and seeing this twisted version of our own world through their eyes. More than once I caught myself wondering how I would’ve reacted, or how I would’ve chosen to act if I were in their shoes – and to me, that’s great storytelling!
There were a few lines of dialogue that were either clunkily overladen with exposition or that made me roll my eyes, but for the most part the series did exceptionally well in that regard. Taking several complicated concepts from the realm of theoretical physics and making them understandable for the layperson is no mean feat – but I came away from every episode feeling like I understood what was going on, where the sources of tension and drama were, and how it was impacting our characters and the world around them. Obviously 3 Body Problem isn’t a physics class, and I don’t want to pat myself on the back and pretend that I somehow comprehend something that other viewers wouldn’t! But I want to draw attention to the very real successes that the series had in making its dense topics work in this fictional setting.
Most of the main cast members on a promo poster.
The only real concern I have about 3 Body Problem is this: at time of writing, it hasn’t been renewed for a second season. The first season didn’t complete the story, so it needs at least one or realistically two or three more seasons to adapt the remaining books in the series and bring everything to a satisfying conclusion. I’m sure that the production team and actors will be happy to make the rest of the story – but right now, the spectre of cancellation is hanging over the series. Netflix has a disappointing track record in this area, with a number of popular and high-profile series being cancelled after a single season. I truly hope that 3 Body Problem won’t join them in the growing Netflix graveyard.
I’ve also made the point before about long breaks in between short seasons. 3 Body Problem ran to eight episodes – which is increasingly typical for a flagship made-for-streaming series these days. With Netflix still uncommitted to a second season, it will take time to re-start production, and that could easily lead to a two-year wait for Season 2. That’s not great, in my opinion, and while I obviously want to see the series continue and finish telling the compelling story it set up, there are issues that arise when any story disappears for years at a time.
Do we need to start a campaign to ensure that Netflix renews 3 Body Problem?
So I think I’ve covered as much as I can without digging into specific story threads and character moments. I don’t put numbers out of ten or star ratings out of five on my reviews, but if you want to know whether or not I recommend 3 Body Problem, the answer is a resounding “yes.” Definitely give it a watch if you have access to Netflix, and it’s probably even worth picking up a month’s worth of Netflix to give it a watch if, like me, you’re being a bit more careful with subscriptions in the current economic climate. That’s what I did, at any rate!
What I’ll do now is talk in a bit more detail about characters and storylines – right up to the end of the season. So if you haven’t seen 3 Body Problem yet and you don’t want to have it spoiled, this is your opportunity to jump ship! But I hope you’ll come back to see what I have to say after you’re done watching all eight episodes.
This is the end of the spoiler-free section of this review. There will be spoilers for 3 Body Problem from this point forwards – including twists, character arcs, and the way the season ended.
There are some producers and writers who love to collaborate with the same actors over and over again. Tim Burton and Johnny Depp, John Ford and John Wayne, and JJ Abrams and Simon Pegg all come to mind as well-known partners across multiple productions. But I confess that I was a little surprised (and disappointed) to see Benioff and Weiss pick three prolific former Game of Thrones cast members to star in 3 Body Problem. Going into the series, I was especially cautious about John Bradley taking on a main role – but also worried about the potential for Liam Cunningham and Johnathan Pryce to overshadow or get in the way of the scenes they were in.
None of these three had any on-screen interaction, which I think is actually a good thing. Pryce is an actor who’s played many different roles over the years, and while his “religious nut” character in 3 Body Problem had echoes of his starring role in Game of Thrones, it wasn’t enough to overshadow it as I’d feared. Cunningham took on a very different role as the leader of the shadowy MI5/CIA-inspired organisation, and thoroughly excelled.
John Bradley in 3 Body Problem.
John Bradley was the actor I had the most concerns about going into 3 Body Problem, and while I wouldn’t say that he was “miscast” in that role… I think there’s a degree of favouritism from the producers there. Bradley’s performance was solid enough, but Rooney was arguably the least-convincing of the main characters – meaning his relatively early demise was probably to the series’ overall benefit.
Ever since she first appeared as Keiko O’Brien in Star Trek: The Next Generation, I felt that Rosalind Chao had the ability to play a starring role. We saw a bit of that in Deep Space Nine, with episodes like In The Hands of the Prophets that gave Keiko a central role in the plot. Chao did not disappoint in 3 Body Problem, taking on the challenging role of an elder Ye Wenjie. Ye was the one who contacted the San-Ti, and who “invited” them to come to Earth, and later had to come to terms with what that might mean for herself and for humanity. The younger version of the character seemed to be steadfast and resolute in her decision, but as time passed – and especially after the San-Ti had abandoned her and her followers to their gruesome fates – Ye was left alone with the weight of what she had done.
Ye Wenjie is confronted with the reality of the San-Ti’s impending arrival.
It’s hard to imagine an actor better-placed to play that role, and Rosalind Chao excelled. The scene in which Ye Wenjie was revealed as the true leader of the San-Ti worshippers was genuinely breathtaking, and her scenes in a holding cell as she at first resisted sharing what she knew, then came to terms with the San-Ti abandoning her and her fellow cultists, was riveting. Ye’s final realisation that she had single-handedly inflicted this catastrophe on all of humankind was shattering for her – and Rosalind Chao brought every bit of that process to life in gut-wrenching fashion.
One thing that modern sci-fi does exceptionally well is emphasising just how different an alien race could be from humanity. We’re used to seeing prosthetic foreheads on aliens in Star Trek, or the human-sized, bipedal aliens present in the Star Wars galaxy, but the reality of alien life – assuming it exists out there in the cosmos somewhere – is likely going to be very different! The Expanse showed us the “protomolecule,” and that was a really clever and fun idea. And in 3 Body Problem we’re introduced to the San-Ti.
The San-Ti presented themselves as humanoid.
I would love to know what the San-Ti really look like. Are they giant space bears? Insectoid? Perhaps some kind of multi-legged amphibian? The fact that they went unseen for the entirety of 3 Body Problem – being represented only by deliberately humanoid virtual avatars – was a hugely positive thing as it keeps the mystery going! I’m not sure whether their true form gets revealed in one of the subsequent novels, but I kind of hope that they remain a mystery. Keeping only a single humanoid avatar (and human cultists) worked exceptionally well. And I think the series might lose something significant if the San-Ti’s true form were revealed too soon!
The titular “three-body problem” is something that, I have to confess, my neanderthal brain is struggling with. A planet orbiting three stars is affected by the gravity of all three – but predicting its path becomes impossible beyond a certain point. That’s my ridiculously oversimplified understanding… but here’s what I don’t get. If the planet’s position can be predicted at all, what’s to stop someone clever from making prediction atop prediction, until they’ve plotted the planet’s course over centuries or millennia? It’s something to do with “chaos theory,” isn’t it? This stuff is way above my intellectual level! But it’s to the credit of 3 Body Problem that I came away with even that basic of an understanding of such a complex topic.
I’m no physicist… but there are three suns!
Having two timelines on the go at once – a “present day” and “flashback” – seems to be in vogue in made-for-streaming TV at the moment, but it’s one element of 3 Body Problem that worked well. We started with young Ye Wenjie in the 1960s, and then jumped ahead to see the main plot of the series beginning to unfold. But there were mysteries left in the past that the story would dip back into at key moments, and these two timelines came together to tell a single, cohesive story.
There were some brutal moments in the flashback timeline, right from 3 Body Problem’s premiere episode. I’m not especially familiar with the history of China and its cultural revolution, but from what I can tell, these kinds of “struggle sessions” were commonplace during the Mao regime. Seeing one unfold in such brutal fashion was pretty hard-hitting, and while the series didn’t spend a lot of time on this, the themes of authoritarianism and later environmentalism as driving forces motivating Ye, Evans, and other characters were an important part of the way the story was constructed.
Ye Wenjie in a flashback sequence.
Despite great performances by Jonathan Pryce and Ben Schnetzer (as older and younger versions of the character respectively), Mike Evans is perhaps a character who needed a bit more screen time. I found the devotion to the “Lord” to be suitably creepy – and reminiscent of more than one real-world cult – but Evans’ transformation from wide-eyed environmental activist to oil company executive seemed pretty abrupt. And there wasn’t a lot in the flashback sequences that I felt really informed his steadfast devotion; why had he taken to worshipping the San-Ti so fervently?
And while we’re nitpicking: how had the San-Ti been communicating for (presumably) years or decades with Evans and his followers, placed spies on Earth… but didn’t understand the difference between fiction and truth, nor understand how humans are capable of lying? It seems like something they should’ve figured out a long time ago, but they didn’t until just the right moment for other narrative beats to play out. It’s not the worst contrivance in the world… and we could certainly make the case that it’s just another example of how truly different and “alien” the San-Ti are in their way of thinking. But as a story beat… it was perhaps the biggest point at which I felt the series could’ve benefitted from another couple of episodes.
Mike Evans and the San-Ti had been communicating for years.
One thing I wasn’t expecting in a sci-fi series like 3 Body Problem was a realistic depiction of someone grappling with a terminal illness – but through the character of Will, the show delivered precisely that. Will’s storyline was incredibly emotional as he came to terms with the ending of his life, his regrets, and the things he’d left unsaid. I could’ve happily spent eight episodes just with Will and his friends – without any of the sci-fi shenanigans going on in the background. That’s how powerful I found those sequences to be. I’m not terminally ill, but I have health issues that I have to live with every day – and I found Will a truly relatable character as he saw his health decline.
There was, of course, a narrative pay-off to Will’s cancer diagnosis, and I liked the way in which 3 Body Problem tied all of its characters and story arcs together. Will seemed to be disconnected from the main storyline of the series much of the time, talking to the other main characters but not really involved with the plan to defend against the San-Ti. Not until the last moment! Will’s sacrifice and the revelation that the mission was a failure was genuinely heartbreaking, especially when all seemed to be going to plan.
Will in his hospital bed.
Along with Will was the character of Saul, played by Jovan Adepo. I really enjoyed Adepo’s performance, as he brought the character to life and made him feel relatable and real. Starting as a junior researcher, Saul’s story took him through the San-Ti plot to become appointed as one of the “Wallfacers” – a unique kind of defender of Earth. The fact that he didn’t want the role was also a really relatable moment; he felt he’d been plucked from obscurity and given an impossible task. There’s a kind of wish-fulfilment fantasy in this kind of storyline; who among us hasn’t wanted, even just for a moment in the back of our minds, for someone to come along and whisk us away on an adventure, or to be told that we’re being appointed as one of the saviours of all humanity?
Rounding out the main characters were Auggie, Jin, and Raj. I liked how the story began with Auggie’s nano-fibre start-up and then, after seeming to move away from that, brought it back in spectacular fashion. That was one of the moments where I felt every piece of this story had been carefully planned, with characters and storylines being built up with purpose. Jin was perhaps the most emotional of the main characters – though there’s competition for that title! She served as our point-of-view character at several key moments, and seeing some of these events unfold from her perspective elevated them.
Jin in the San-Ti’s virtual world.
Raj was arguably the least-developed of the main characters; he served a narrative function but didn’t really get enough screen time to really shine – nor did he get any independent storylines. He was tied to either Jin’s story or the show’s main storyline, and in those capacities he helped move things along without really breaking out on his own. Any story has characters like this, I suppose, and it’s not really a criticism as much as an observation.
The depiction of Wade’s organisation – a three-letter acronym that I honestly couldn’t remember off the top of my head – as being almost everywhere, knowing almost everything felt like a bit of a stretch. As a commentary on government agencies that spy on or observe their citizens I think it could’ve been interesting, perhaps even making a comparison with the “secret police” of Maoist China as seen in the flashbacks. But 3 Body Problem didn’t really do that, and the seemingly limitless resources of the PDC/PIA were not really given a satisfactory explanation in-universe. Nor was it readily apparent why Wade was chosen to be in charge of Earth’s defence against the San-Ti. Minor points, perhaps, in the context of the story. But you know me: I can’t help nitpicking sometimes!
Wade and his organisation felt overpowered, somehow.
So that was 3 Body Problem. I had a fantastic time with the series; it’s undoubtedly the best show I’ve seen in 2024 so far, and probably the best new sci-fi property that I’ve seen going back several years. My biggest fear right now is that it gets cancelled by Netflix before it can conclude its story, because that would be a real tragedy. 3 Body Problem is reportedly an expensive production, and Netflix has been very quick to swing the proverbial axe with shows and films that don’t meet its sky-high expectations. So I admit that I’m worried about that.
With that significant caveat out of the way, however, I genuinely fell in love with this mysterious, grounded, and fascinating tale of humanity’s first contact with a strange extraterrestrial race. I could’ve happily entertained another eight or ten episodes this season, digging even more deeply into this rich and complex story. Basing major plot points on real-world science, without resorting to fantastical technologies that are basically “space magic” kept 3 Body Problem feeling realistic and mature; grown-up sci-fi of the best kind.
I will be keeping my fingers crossed for that second-season renewal, and if Season 2 does get produced I hope you’ll come back in 2025 or 2026 for my review! 3 Body Problem was great, and I highly recommend it.
3 Body Problem is available to stream now on Netflix. 3 Body Problem is the copyright of Netflix, The Three Body Universe, T-Street, and/or Plan B Entertainment. This review contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, roll up and be the first to subscribe to the greatest streaming service of all time: the brand-new MountCock+!
If only it was real…
If you haven’t heard, Paramount Global – the company behind Paramount+, the Star Trek franchise, and others – is in a pretty bad place financially. That isn’t “breaking news;” it’s been the case for quite some time. As Paramount has continued to lose money, its executives have put a lot of faith in streaming to swoop in as some kind of saviour – but they’ve learned, belatedly, that streaming is a difficult market to crack at the best of times. And these are not the best of times!
Here’s what I think happened a few years ago. An elderly executive or investor – who knows nothing about the internet, data, streaming, or any of the complex technologies required to make it work – saw the success of Netflix, looked at CBS/Paramount’s own back catalogue and library of content and said to some poor, overworked employee “make me my own Netflix.” In the mid-2010s, Netflix was the hottest up-and-coming property in the entertainment world, and Paramount wanted a piece of that action. But rather than work with Netflix, Paramount wanted to be a competitor – despite having none of the outside investment, financial support, development knowledge, or technological know-how.
Logo of Paramount Global.
I really wish that I’d been faster at getting to work on this story, because “MountCock+” would’ve been a great April Fools’ gag if I’d made it a week ago! Oh well, lesson learned.
The title of this piece – which, in case it really needs saying, is facetious and won’t really be the name of a potential newly-merged streaming service – comes from news that new Paramount investor and potential new owner, SkyDance Media, is considering rolling Paramount+ and the Peacock streaming service together into one single entity. This would give subscribers to either platform access to a lot more films and TV shows, and the hope is that rolling two unprofitable streamers together will help the restructured Paramount/Paradance/Dancemount (or whatever the new company might be called) edge its way closer to profitable territory.
Paramount Global and Skydance Media may be in talks about a merger or sale.
Let’s get one thing straight right off the bat: small, specialised streaming platforms that only offer relatively few shows and films within a single niche have always been a bad idea. It was a bad idea when DC Comics tried it, it was a bad idea when CNN tried it, and the fact that DC Universe and CNN+ no longer exist as independent platforms is all the proof you’ll ever need. Netflix succeeded in the 2010s because it was a comparatively cheap and convenient way to access a huge library of content. Yes, there were whole genres on Netflix that you’d never even touch because they were of no interest to you. But there was so much other stuff that was appealing that it made a Netflix subscription worthwhile.
That was what convinced me to cut the cord – or rather, the wire to my satellite dish! In the late 2000s I got Sky – a satellite TV provider here in the UK. Getting Sky in the first place had been one of my ambitions for a long time; ever since it launched in the ’90s, the idea of hundreds of channels had been massively appealing! But by the late 2010s, the media landscape was changing. When Star Trek: Discovery was only going to be available on Netflix, I signed up so I could watch it. And I found streaming to be so convenient and at such a good price point that I very quickly dropped Sky altogether.
You can still see a satellite dish on many houses here in the UK.
The reasons for Netflix’s success were its convenience, low price point, and huge library of content. Take away one of those factors and it wouldn’t have become the phenomenon that it did – and as the so-called “streaming wars” rage in the 2020s, it’s a combination of those same factors in reverse that account for the failure or underperformance of other, newer streaming platforms. Less content for a higher price turns people away – even big fans of some franchises. I’m a Trekkie, but in 2024 I’ve only paid for a single month of Paramount+ so far; the streaming platform just doesn’t feel worth it most of the time.
Roll Paramount+ content in with another streaming service, though, and suddenly it becomes a more enticing proposition. As long as the price stays low as the library of content grows, there would be much more of an incentive to sign up for MountCock+ than there is for either Paramount+ or Peacock individually. Continuing as competitors will, in all likelihood, lead to the failure of both platforms, but if they join forces they might stand a chance. Even though Skydance doesn’t own Peacock and thus profits will have to be split, it still feels like a good idea.
There are currently too many streaming services. Some will never be profitable for their parent companies.
Almost every time Star Trek’s parent company has been shaken up, there have been changes for the franchise. And not all of these changes have been positive. We have to keep in mind that it’s possible that a Skydance/hedge fund-owned corporation would have less of an interest in Star Trek, especially if the franchise seems to be underperforming, not bringing in or retaining subscribers, or even running too hot. While I don’t expect to see imminent cancellations, it’s something to be aware of as it’s happened before. It’s also possible that new corporate leadership might be keener on feature films with cinematic releases than on making more made-for-streaming series.
On the other hand, Paramount has been slow and even reluctant to listen to Trekkies sometimes. There’s been a significant fan campaign to create a sequel/successor show to Star Trek: Picard – but after more than a year, it hasn’t garnered a response from those at the top of the corporation. So perhaps new faces in the boardroom would be better at reading the room and understanding where the fan community is and what kind of projects we’d like to see. This is an area where Paramount has needed to improve for a long time, so again there’s the potential to see some positive changes.
Trekkies have been clamouring for another Picard-era series.
Business and finance is not my strong suit nor my area of expertise – and I don’t blame you if the details are boring or difficult to grasp. I’m pretty sure I’m oversimplifying it because I don’t fully understand it either; when you’re looking at corporations that routinely deal in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars… it can be hard to really comprehend the kinds of decisions that they take. But as fans, and as consumers of media in a competitive marketplace, we need to know a little about what’s happening behind-the-scenes. The future of Paramount Global will have an impact on future Star Trek productions, on the corporation’s other streaming projects, and even on its cinematic output and television channels.
For my two cents, I can see why amalgamating Paramount+ and Peacock – or Paramount+ with some other streaming platform, if the Peacock deal falls through – would make sense. After several years of streaming becoming an increasingly balkanised and fractured marketplace, bringing different platforms together just makes sense. There’s a general unwillingness on the part of audiences to pay for more than two or three different streaming services, and smaller, second-tier platforms will struggle in such a challenging environment. I’m a Trekkie – albeit one who’s been feeling a bit burned out of late – but even I have never paid for a full year’s worth of Paramount+; it’s a service I pick up for a month or two at a time to watch a couple of shows. On a related note: have you checked out my review of Halo Season 2 yet?
It’s the Master Chief!
So could the hypothetical MountCock+ turn things around? I think it has to have a better chance of turning a profit than either Paramount+ or Peacock do individually – though it will perhaps need a better name than I’ve given it! But in theory, a bigger streaming platform with more original and legacy content, backed up by a corporate merger that brings more film franchises and television shows under its umbrella is a good thing. We don’t want any one corporation to have a monopoly in this marketplace, of course, but creating platforms that are more consumer-friendly and don’t see small bundles of content paywalled off at every turn is a good thing and a positive development.
“Watch this space” is probably the soundest advice right now! Paramount has been in talks for a while about possible mergers, sales, or splitting off different parts of its business, so nothing is set in stone and this latest Skydance/Peacock proposal is unofficial at best. It could happen – or Paramount could end up going in a very different direction. Still, corporate changes are afoot – and I feel increasingly confident of major news breaking before the year is over.
All properties discussed above remain the copyright of their respective broadcaster, distributor, studio, etc. This article is not financial or investment advice. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Halo Seasons 1-2, and for the Halo video game series.
In 2022, I was one of the relatively small number of folks who enjoyed the first season of Halo. I didn’t think it was the best thing since sliced bread or anything, but it felt like a decent adaptation of the long-running video game series – albeit one that had been trimmed and cropped to fit a very specific mould used by other serialised streaming shows. Season 1 seemed to be a reasonable foundation upon which the next chapter of Halo could be built, so it was with some degree of anticipation that I awaited Season 2’s arrival.
And before we go any further, let’s acknowledge just how long that wait actually was. Halo Season 1 ran from March to May 2022 – meaning it’s been basically two full years since it went off the air. And as I’ve noted in the past with other made-for-streaming shows like Amazon’s The Wheel of Time, The Witcher on Netflix, or even some of the Star Trek shows on Halo’s platform, Paramount+, there are issues that result from long breaks in between short seasons. I needed a recap before the first episode – and at least in the UK, no such recap was forthcoming on Paramount+. Aside from the Master Chief and Kai, I couldn’t remember who was who nor where exactly the story left off – which wasn’t helped by a time-jump of six months in-universe, in which characters had moved around and at least one major story beat had taken place off-screen.
Promo poster for the second season of Halo.
Although it took me a while to get back into Halo during that first episode, as I was hampered by the lack of a proper recap, I will say that I did find myself engaging with the series as its story got going. Although I had to look up a plot synopsis for Season 1 online – something I really shouldn’t have needed to do – once I’d got myself properly reacquainted with the main players, and recapped the major story beats from the end of Season 1, I found a story that was entertaining enough to justify paying for a month’s worth of Paramount+, and that I didn’t mind following to its conclusion.
That being said, I still don’t feel that Halo has truly excelled – at least, not yet. Season 1 laid a solid foundation, but Season 2 seems to have disregarded parts of it, as well as deviated in a major way from the story that I remember from playing (most of) the main Halo video games. While I’m by no means a “canon purist,” I have to wonder: why go to all the bother of licensing a major entertainment property only to jettison most of its story and some of its characters? The story of the Halo video games – at least the first two or three titles, plus Halo: Reach – would have made for a strong and captivating story in itself, and with only a few tweaks could’ve seen the addition of new characters to join the Master Chief.
The story of Halo Season 2 was radically different from that of Halo: Reach.
In my review of the show’s first season, I said that re-interpreting and changing the story – and particularly finding a way to humanise the otherwise stoic Master Chief to make him into a sympathetic protagonist – was something I was generally on board with. And I stand by that to a certain extent; I don’t think a faceless, monotone character who’s an unfeeling killing machine would make for a good television protagonist, even if such a character works well in an action-heavy video game. But this time around, the Master Chief’s story felt muddled and seemed to rely on a few too many clichés and contrivances.
And partly, it must be noted, that’s because Halo’s writers have now taken the story in a significantly different direction to its source material. In Season 1, with the Master Chief getting entangled with a Covenant agent, discovering his humanity, and unlocking the mysteries of a strange alien artefact, there was still the potential to call all of this a preamble; the hitherto-unseen prequel to more familiar events. But in Season 2, with the Fall of Reach being depicted on screen in a radically different way to how it unfolded in the games, and with the story more interested in the intrigue within the UNSC and ONI, that possibility has evaporated. I’m not sure whether the new story that the writers have replaced it with is as compelling or as entertaining as the one that was sitting there, waiting to be adapted.
The Master Chief.
There was clearly an ambition on the part of some of Halo’s writers to use the UNSC, ONI, and the admiralty to look at the politics of war and the calculations that leaders have to make. This concept is sound, but it was let down by poor execution in Halo, unfortunately. In the first season, it felt as if most of the major characters – including Keyes, Halsey, and Parangosky – all had their own agendas. The Master Chief and his squad were caught in the crossfire and let down by the internal workings of the admiralty and leadership.
This message was somewhat streamlined in Season 2… but the way it was done necessitated some major contrivances. Corporal Perez, who Master Chief saved during the first episode of the series, refused to elaborate on what she saw of the Covenant during her debriefing… for seemingly no reason other than “because plot,” and when her words would have corroborated what Master Chief reported, that just doesn’t feel very satisfying. There was potential in Perez’s story to look at trauma and in particular the post-traumatic stress that soldiers can suffer from – but this angle was so undeveloped that I’m loathe to even include it as a plot point. In any case, it went nowhere – and thus doesn’t work as a justification for the narrative contrivance.
The Master Chief with Corporal Perez.
Perhaps this is the armchair general in me speaking… but I have a hard time seeing a character like Ackerson as an out-and-out villain. When confronted with the reality that a Covenant attack was imminent and unstoppable, he and the other admirals took what seems the only rational path open to them: a covert, quiet evacuation of high-ranking personnel and valuable assets in order to establish a new command centre to continue the fight and co-ordinate the defence of other worlds. Reach was, as Cortana explained, already lost before the explosions started – there was no way to prevent it.
Yet because we’re following the story of Master Chief and his crew, the series paints Ackerson and Parangosky as antagonists – more antagonistic, in some ways, than the Covenant themselves. And while we could entertain a more nuanced discussion of the “calculus of war” and how some leaders might try to use it as a justification to seize power or leave rivals for dead… Halo doesn’t really do any of that. It manoeuvres its characters into place – using more than a couple of contrived moments to get them there – and then… that’s it. Master Chief rages about how “they stole [his] armour” and his identity, but that just felt incidental and not like a driving force behind either the character or the story. The series came close to making a point about politics and war – albeit one that other, stronger narratives have already made – but then baulked on it at the last moment, despite the convoluted setup, in order to tee up the next big action sequence.
Halo came dangerously close to making a point about the politics of war with the character of Admiral Parangosky.
When such a story requires characters to act in a specific way to move things along, it can feel forced. And parts of Halo absolutely fall into this trap. During the climactic fight at Fleetcom, Master Chief and his Spartans are conveniently called away at the last second so they can be in just the right place to encounter Soren and Halsey, then Makee and the Arbiter, and finally to be rescued by Laera and Kwan. Master Chief was conveniently obscured by both fog and a communications blackout when he first encountered the Covenant, and the only other character to witness them refused to admit the truth. Laera was able to track down Soren just in time to save everyone from the attack on Reach. And so on.
Although Ackerson and Parangosky were manipulating the situation and keeping everyone in the dark about what was about to happen, their machinations can’t account for all of this – and the result is that the story is built on weak foundations. There are still successful moments of tension, excitement, and drama, and the deaths of major characters still manage to carry emotional weight. But that comes in spite of – not because of – the way in which the story has been structured. Halo is in real danger of getting in its own way.
Ackerson was presented as an antagonist.
In terms of visuals, Halo made a couple of missteps. Physical props used for things like spaceship doors, armour, and other pieces of supposedly “roughed-up” metal could look pretty phony in places, and while it wasn’t enough to take me out of the story entirely, it was definitely something I noticed across multiple episodes. This isn’t something unique to Halo, as I’ve noted it in big-budget productions from Star Wars to the upcoming Fallout series, but that doesn’t excuse it. Set design was generally okay, though, and I liked the interiors of the Covenant ships and the way they were laid out – as well as how the show got creative with re-using certain sets for Makee’s ship, the training simulator, and a real Covenant ship in battle.
Halo had some successes with its CGI – and one pretty epic misfire. The assault on Reach midway through the season, as well as the attack on another planet in the first episode, were fantastic, with explosions and plasma weapons that looked stunning. These were well-blended with physical sets, and the transitions between the two were great. The fleet battle toward the end of the season was likewise solid; a well-animated series of CGI sequences that lived up to the excitement I was hoping for from such a powerful narrative climax.
The Fall of Reach.
Then we got on the ground and came to the climactic one-on-one duel between Master Chief and his Covenant adversary, the Arbiter. The Arbiter felt vastly under-developed as a character, and while his hatred for the Master Chief was stated in almost every scene in which he appeared, there was no reciprocity there whatsoever, so the conflict itself felt very one-sided. I will say, though, that I liked the concept of this duel, and seeing plasma swords clashing almost like Jedi lightsabers was a fun idea, and a great way to take a rather clumsy weapon from the video game series and improve upon it. So in principle, this duel should have worked reasonably well.
But my god, the animation work here was atrocious. Neither the Master Chief nor the Arbiter looked at all real, with that “too shiny, too smooth, and too airy” CGI feel that I thought we’d left behind a decade ago. Even the shaky camera and fast-moving sequence couldn’t cover up these absolutely glaring flaws in the way these characters looked, and the entire duel – which, thankfully, was pretty short – entirely fell apart for me. There were clearly limitations in Halo’s animation budget that were showing, because the series completely failed to make either character look realistic at this moment. Because the Arbiter is a largely CGI creation to begin with, perhaps the way he looked wasn’t as bad as the Master Chief during the duel – though it was certainly the worst the character had looked all season long. But the Master Chief in particular just looked so hollow and fake, and that really took the shine off what was supposed to be one of the season’s final climactic moments.
It’s difficult to convey in a single JPEG just how bad this sequence looked.
One thing we didn’t see much of this time, unfortunately, was the first-person perspective that I noted in Season 1. Last season, this unusual blend of camera work and CGI was used sparingly, but at a couple of key moments it really worked well. As an homage to Halo’s video game origins, I enjoyed what the first-person viewpoint brought to the series. It’s also something a little different in the action space, at least in the medium of television, and in Season 1 it was used infrequently enough as to not be too obtrusive for folks who didn’t like it. It was a little disappointing to get so little first-person action this time around; there was one scene – or a clip, really, as it was so short – that I noticed… but that was all.
This season, Halo struggled to find a good character to pair with the Master Chief. In Season 1, the Master Chief spent time with Kwan, Kai, Makee, and of course Cortana, as well as butted heads with Dr Halsey and Admiral Keyes. His relationships with Makee and Cortana in particular, as well as the resentment he felt toward Halsey, went a long way to humanising him and turning him from that faceless video game protagonist into a character better-suited to a new medium. But in Season 2, Master Chief didn’t really spend enough time with any single character to have those kinds of moments. He spent much of his time angrily barking out orders and pushing his team beyond their limits, and his relationship with the under-developed character of the Arbiter was so non-existent that their conflict and climactic duel didn’t really work.
Halo struggled to find another character to pair with the Master Chief this season.
There’s something to be said for a storyline that puts its characters through a tough set of challenges, or even one that forces them to confront their own limitations and mistakes. But Halo didn’t really give us any of that, with the series presenting the Master Chief as having been “right all along,” even though he was basically behaving like an irrational dick for several episodes in a row. Combined with the lack of a partner or confidant for most of the season, this meant that the series’ protagonist spent much of his time angry and brooding – and that just never feels particularly fun. Shows like Game of Thrones did wonderful things with an ensemble cast that was broken up into distinct groups, taking literally years in some cases before some of the main characters even met one another. But Halo… I don’t think it has the chops to pull off something like that anywhere near as successfully, so splitting up its few noteworthy characters for so much of the story feels more a weakness than a strength at this point. I’d love to be proven wrong about that – but realistically, the show would need to run to six or seven seasons to develop these characters well enough to pay it off.
So after two seasons of a series called “Halo,” we’ve belatedly arrived at the titular ring-world. By this point, the Halo itself has been mythologised out of all proportion, and again this feels like a weakness when compared with the original story present in the first part of the video game series. Again, I have to point out that I’m not well-versed in the more recent lore of the expanded Halo franchise, and perhaps by this point the Halo ring-worlds are as legendary as the TV show depicts. But there was something to be said for the way in which humanity stumbled upon the first Halo, and how the Covenant were the ones who knew more about them and treated them with reverence. This “race to the Halo” idea that was underpinning the story of this season was just another way in which I felt it had diverged significantly from the story I remember.
Halo has finally arrived at the titular Halo.
The introduction of the Flood – which unfortunately came pretty late in the season – is at least potentially a point of interest. Presenting the Flood as akin to zombies from the likes of The Walking Dead or 28 Days Later certainly went some way to ramping up the fear factor as Halo came to the end of its final episode – but I can’t help but feel that more could have been made of this storyline if it had emerged earlier in the season and been drawn out for longer. There were a couple of key points at which the story needed to move rapidly thanks to the time constraint of being halfway through the series finale, and that just left things feeling a bit rushed and unsatisfying.
The biggest example of this is Soren and Kwan’s rescue mission. No one stops to ask “hey, what’s going on here?” because the episode just didn’t have time for the diversion, and when Laera revealed her “zombie bite,” it shouldn’t have been at all clear to Soren and the others that a bite wound would lead to infection. There was no time to explain this in-universe to the characters – nor really to us as the audience, either, as elsewhere in the base, infection seemed to spread by way of small spider-like creatures that emerged from the mouths of the infected. Perhaps Season 3 will be able to expand upon this storyline, flesh out its concepts and ideas a bit more. But as far as an introduction goes… it was a bit of a mixed bag.
The Flood’s “patient zero” in a holding cell.
On a more positive note, Halo took strides for representation, and it did so in a way that I’m always going to advocate for. There was a gay couple shown partway through the season; friends of Riz who she turned to for help. The fact that they were gay wasn’t front-and-centre in either of their characterisations, it was simply treated as an entirely unexceptional part of this sci-fi future. Representation can work incredibly well when handled in this way, and I’d point to Halo Season 2 as an example of how to include LGBT+ characters in a series when there isn’t the time or narrative space to include full-blown LGBT+ storylines or themes. Simply seeing a couple like this represented on screen is a positive thing.
As in Season 1, acting performances were solid across the board, and I wouldn’t want to single anyone out for criticism on that front. Halo’s sound design and music were solid; understated, perhaps, but in line with its source material. I heard several sound effects that were lifted directly from the video game series, which was great! With the exception of some unnecessary “shaky cam” sequences that made it difficult to follow the action, cinematography was pretty good, and the series’ use of light and shadow led to some tense moments of mystery and action at various points.
The Master Chief.
Unlike in 2022, I don’t think I’m going to call Halo one of my favourite TV shows of the year when I dish out my annual awards in December! It was alright; entertaining enough popcorn action fare. But there were significant weaknesses and narrative contrivances this time around that I feel got in the way of the fun, as well as a weak CGI sequence during what was supposed to be a climactic battle. I didn’t hate Halo by any means, but it wasn’t all it could’ve been.
However, now that the action has moved to an actual Halo… maybe there’s hope for Season 3. Although an official renewal hasn’t been announced at time of writing, it’s hard to see how the series could be cancelled at this point, given where it ended. With positive reactions from a number of critics and plenty of social media buzz, a third season feels like a sure thing. If it goes ahead and does actually take place on a Halo ring-world, that could certainly shake things up and perhaps go some way to bringing Halo back to firmer and more familiar ground.
I will be crossing my fingers for Season 3, then – and a story that successfully builds on what Seasons 1 and 2 laid out could go a long way to making some narrative decisions feel better in retrospect. So there are reasons to be positive as Halo continues its run. If for some reason, however, Halo isn’t renewed… I doubt it’ll be remembered particularly fondly, and instead will simply be tossed on the growing heap of video game adaptations that failed to light up the board.
Halo Season 2 is available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. Season 1 is also available on DVD and Blu-ray. Halo is the copyright of 343 Industries, Microsoft, Showtime Networks, Amblin Television, and Paramount Global. This review contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Beware of potential spoilers for Star Trek: Starfleet Academy as well as spoilers for Star Trek: Discovery.
As hard as it may be to believe, it’s been a whole year since Paramount announced Star Trek: Starfleet Academy. Though it had long been rumoured to be in production, and seemed to get a “backdoor pilot” during Discovery’s fourth season, it was only at the end of March last year that the show was officially added to the Star Trek lineup.
Today, I want to talk about Starfleet Academy and look at how pre-production may have been progressing.
This might not need to be a particularly long article, because there’s been a surprising dearth of news about Starfleet Academy over the past twelve months. Given Paramount’s financial dire straits, the shaky position Paramount+ is clinging to as the “streaming wars” rage, and talk of a corporate merger or takeover, you’d be forgiven for wondering whether the series was still going ahead. I know there have been moments over the past year where I’ve had my doubts about it!
The titular Starfleet Academy – as it appeared in Star Trek: The Next Generation.
I’m still surprised by how poorly-timed and threadbare the official announcement of Starfleet Academy was. In early 2023, we learned that Discovery had been cancelled, and it seemed to me that rolling that bit of bad news in with the Starfleet Academy announcement would have made a lot of sense. As it happened, Paramount seemed to be blowing hot and cold on its commitment to Star Trek, when that really could’ve been avoided.
By the time Discovery’s cancellation was being made official, Paramount was already committed to Starfleet Academy – and it would’ve looked a heck of a lot better if the news read something like: “The Discovery era will continue in the brand-new spin-off Starfleet Academy.” Instead, fans were left hanging on for weeks with the distinct possibility of Star Trek as a whole coming to an end. As has become typical for Paramount, they can’t even get the basics right. No wonder the corporation is losing money hand over fist, eh?
Will Paramount ever get its act together?
Starfleet Academy’s official announcement in 2023 was pretty barebones. The only thing we can reasonably infer from the way the statement was worded is that it’s a Discovery spin-off and will presumably be set in the same 32nd Century time period as that series. That could lead to crossovers, connections, and more… which could be fun and interesting elements to include. But we don’t know at this stage whether characters like Tilly and Kovich – who have connections with the Academy and Federation HQ as of Discovery Season 4 – will be part of the series or not. That may have been the original intention during production on Discovery’s fourth season, but we don’t know whether either of those characters – or the cadets we met in Discovery – are still part of the equation.
In a recent interview with Collider, Alex Kurtzman – who’s in charge of the Star Trek franchise at Paramount – gave us a few little tidbits of information. Firstly, the series is being pitched at a younger audience. That’s something that, again, I think most of us were able to infer from the announcement and setting. Putting younger characters front-and-centre – similar to what Prodigy tried to do – could lead to a series that appeals to a tween/teen audience, and bringing fans in those age groups on board is going to be key to the future of Star Trek. So as a general point, that’s positive.
Alex Kurtzman recently spoke about Starfleet Academy in an interview.
We also know that Tawny Newsome, who plays Beckett Mariner in Lower Decks and is a well-respected writer and comedian in her own right, has contributed in some way to Starfleet Academy on the writing side of things. Whether she’s single-handedly crafted whole episodes and storylines or whether she’s been involved as part of a broader writing team wasn’t entirely clear… but her inclusion could speak to Starfleet Academy having somewhat of a light-hearted edge, at least at points. Comedy and humour have been a part of Star Trek going all the way back to The Original Series, so again I think that should be a net positive if it’s done right.
The final confirmed piece of news is this: Starfleet Academy is targeting a 2026 release date. This was also something that, as time has worn on, seemed to be looking more and more likely. Strange New Worlds Season 3 is currently filming, and the Section 31 TV movie has recently wrapped up, and both of those projects are on the schedule for 2025. With a potential further season of Lower Decks also being broadcast next year, 2025 was beginning to fill up – so a 2026 release date for Starfleet Academy seems reasonable. As I’ve said in the past, spreading out the various Star Trek projects instead of bunching them all up is a good thing!
President Rillak with a class of new Academy cadets in Discovery’s fourth season.
Knowing that the show’s broadcast isn’t imminent means that the production team can take their time with things like casting and writing, as there’s less urgency and less of a need to rush. Hopefully that will mean a higher-quality product at the end of the day! I’m all for the producers and showrunners taking their time, and even considering re-writes or changes if necessary – and while I would still expect the series to enter full production this year, the months of pre-production since the official announcement have hopefully been put to good use.
There is one thing we’ve learned from Starfleet Academy’s pre-release material that gives me pause, and makes me feel a twinge of anxiety about the show’s narrative. When the series was announced, one line in the blurb stated that the class of cadets will have to tackle “a new enemy that threatens both the Academy and the Federation itself.” To me, that sounds like the set-up for yet another serialised story that puts the whole galaxy in danger.
Putting the whole Federation in danger – again – would not be my first choice for the new show’s storyline.
After four seasons of Discovery and three of Picard that used this exact setup… I’m pretty fucking sick of it, to be honest. Lowering the stakes is something that I’ve argued Star Trek needs to do, and a return to stories that are smaller in scale – but still impactful for the characters involved – would be my preference. A series with a teen or young adult focus doesn’t need to have a “massive galactic threat” as a foundational part of its narrative in order to be exciting, entertaining, or emotional. And in too many ways, modern Star Trek’s over-reliance on this kind of storyline has been to its detriment.
One of the things that worked so well in both Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks has been storytelling that didn’t feature these kinds of existential threats and catastrophes. Both shows stand as testament to how Star Trek can still tell fun, adventurous, and engaging stories without relying on an enemy or entity that threatens the entire Federation or the whole galaxy. I just hope that Starfleet Academy isn’t overwhelmed by this one narrative concept, and that there’s room for episodic storytelling, exploration of new characters, and other narrative beats.
Hopefully there will be room for standalone episodes – as in Lower Decks and Strange New Worlds.
I liked what Alex Kurtzman had to say about not wanting to alienate different groups of Star Trek fans, and I think there has been an effort on Paramount’s part over the last few years to at least try to keep the fan community together. Not every show is going to be to everyone’s taste – and that’s been true since The Next Generation, or even since The Wrath of Khan took Starfleet in a more militarised direction forty-two years ago! But modern Star Trek has really leaned into the idea of diversifying its output, with a kids’ show, an animated comedy, and serialised dramas in the mould of other modern made-for-streaming productions. Not every Trekkie will be interested in a show with a younger cast that’s pitched at a tween or teen audience – but I feel a sense of hope, from what Alex Kurtzman has had to say, that Starfleet Academy won’t just ignore the rest of us in the fan community!
One point I made last year, when the show was first announced, is that a series set at the Academy is actually a Gene Roddenberry idea. As far back as the late ’60s, when The Original Series was still on the air, Roddenberry was working on pitches and concepts for Star Trek spin-offs or successor shows, and a series set at the Academy – which would have featured a young Kirk and Spock meeting for the first time – was one such idea that was under consideration. So don’t let anyone tell you that “Gene Roddenberry would never have approved,” because in this case that accusation is demonstrably false!
Starfleet Academy as it appeared in Picard Season 2.
So that’s where we’re at – at least as of early April 2024. Starfleet Academy looks set to begin filming later this year, and while there hasn’t been a glut of news about the series yet, there are reasons to feel positive. I’ll be keeping an eye out for any cast announcements, especially if there are any familiar actors joining the Star Trek family or characters crossing over from Discovery. If we get any big news about Starfleet Academy or a teaser trailer, I’ll do my best to take a look at it here on the website.
So stay tuned! I hope this has been an interesting look ahead. Discovery’s fifth and final season has just begun, and while I’m not sure exactly what I’ll be doing by way of reviews yet, I’m sure I’ll have something to say about the season when I get around to watching it. Likewise for Starfleet Academy: I’m not sure yet whether I’ll do individual episode reviews or a full season review. But with the series perhaps more than two years away, I have plenty of time to decide! Thanks for joining me on this brief look ahead – and Live Long and Prosper!
Star Trek: Starfleet Academy is in pre-production and will be broadcast on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available in 2026 (or later). The Star Trek franchise – including Starfleet Academy, Discovery, and all other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
I am unapologetically a politics geek! And 2024 is, without a doubt, one of the biggest and most exciting political years in a long time. If you’ll permit me the indulgence – and the diversion from what I usually talk about here on the website – I thought it could be a bit of fun to talk about what’s coming up this year for both the United States and the United Kingdom, with a focus on what to watch and where I like to get my political fix.
Although politics can be fascinating in all sorts of places and all sorts of contexts, I have two real areas of interest: the US presidency and – understandably as a Brit – the upcoming UK general election. We may touch on a couple of other places tangentially, but those are the two elections I’m most interested in and will be watching most closely this year.
Ready for round 2?
It’s rare to get a single year in which both the United States and the United Kingdom go to the polls for big general elections. In fact, the last time this happened was in 1992 – when John Major was unexpectedly re-elected as Prime Minister in May before Bill Clinton unseated George Bush in November. With the current British government consistently behind the opposition in opinion poll after opinion poll, an autumn election could be on the cards for us this year; I’ve heard November the 14th and October the 24th bandied about as potential election days. These dates would put the UK and US elections within a few days of each other – something that hasn’t happened since 1964.
The ’92 general election is the first one that I can really remember following and being interested in as a kid – even as many of the policy issues went way over my head, I was still gripped by the democratic process and the idea that we could have another new Prime Minister. In those days I didn’t pay as much attention to the American election; my fascination with the US and its systems of government would develop later! But I was definitely following along with John Major’s “soapbox” campaign in 1992 as he faced off against a renewed Labour Party under the leadership of Neil Kinnock. Listening to election news on the radio at lunchtime at school definitely singled me out as a geek!
Former British Prime Minister John Major in 1992.
But that’s enough history for now!
As media-literate folks – which I assume you are if you’re reading an article like this one, at any rate – we want to keep on top of what’s going on in the political sphere… but we don’t want to succumb to bias along the way. With the political environments both here in the UK and over in the US being so divided and polarised, finding unbiased or at least fair sources is increasingly difficult. It’s contingent upon us to not simply accept what we’re being told, but to double-check, or to look around for other sources of news. In this piece, I want to highlight a handful of outlets that I personally follow and regularly check in with – not because they’re free from all bias, but because they can provide analysis and insight that I find interesting or useful.
News and politics can be entertaining, and a well-presented programme can go a long way to making up for “boring” things like policy details or statistics. But we have to be careful not to let flashy graphics or a charismatic presenter blow us off-course; just because a speaker is articulate or passionate doesn’t mean they’re speaking the truth. That sentence should be applied to politicians… but it’s also true of presenters, anchors, analysts, podcasters, and other folks in the news media space.
BBC presenter Jeremy Vine and his “path to Downing Street” graphic in 2019.
So I guess what I’m saying is this: don’t take any individual news source as “gospel,” nor even really at face value. If you have the time to research a subject – by which I mean doing more than just a cursory Google search – then that’s great; trying to gather different sources that examine the same topic or story is just as good.
That’s what I try to do, at least. I’ve diversified my news sources in recent years, and it really is amazing how one-sided some outlets can be. Even if we don’t agree with what someone has to say, hearing another perspective can be incredibly valuable. In these increasingly polarised times, stepping outside of one’s personal media bubble can be uncomfortable, and I get that. But even if your only objective is to better understand the other side’s talking points so you can more effectively argue against their position… it’s still worth doing!
The new BBC News studio.
Having seen many elections and referenda come and go over the years, I find a lot of the passion behind individual candidates and parties to be a younger person’s game. When the same pundits and talking heads hailing this election as being “the most important in our lifetime!!!” have been using that exact same line for twenty years or more… well, let’s just say the impact wears off! That doesn’t mean that there aren’t big and important issues at stake, of course. There usually are!
Donald Trump is someone who, for close to a decade now, has managed to evoke – and provoke – incredibly strong reactions from supporters and opponents alike. His presence in the election this year (assuming he survives the tangled mess of court cases he’s facing) automatically makes it a contentious and polarising race. Here in the UK, the departure of Boris Johnson from the political stage has left us – at least in theory – with two less-charismatic Prime Ministerial candidates! But there are other factors in the race, including the emergence of Reform as a new political party on the right, debates over polarising issues like immigration and the conflict in the Middle East, and the ongoing fallout from Brexit.
Donald Trump’s campaign slogan from 2016.
I’m not in the business of telling people who to vote for or how to vote. And this year – for the first time in a long time, really – I’m not actually certain who I’m going to be voting for here in the UK. I have my ideological leanings – as we all do, of course – and here in the UK there are more than two parties to choose from… even if only the main two seem capable of forming a government. But I won’t be “making an endorsement” nor telling anyone how I think they should exercise their right to vote. As far as I’m concerned, that’s between you and the ballot box!
What I’m going to do now is briefly highlight a handful of pundits, podcasts, content creators, and TV programmes that I think are worth checking out and following as this busy political year unfolds. There are some talented journalists and analysts out there in internet-land, and even if you just put something on in the background while you’re working or doing chores, it can still be useful and you’ll still get something out of it.
A sign indicating the way into a polling station in the UK.
Now for the caveats: this is all my own opinion, meaning nobody paid me for a spot on this list. Most of the channels discussed below can be found on YouTube – which has become one of my go-to platforms for political content – but some can be found either on their own website or on platforms like Apple Podcasts. I’ll try to summarise what it is that I like about each channel/creator – but nothing about this is in any way objective.
With all of that out of the way, let’s look at my list – which is in no particular order.
Number 1: Political Currency
There are several podcasts in the UK at the moment in which former political opponents share a stage. I guess that kind of thing is in vogue at the moment – but it’s simultaneously interesting to hear from people with different ideological leanings and somewhat heartening, in these times of polarisation and division, to see two former adversaries working together. Political Currency features former Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne and his one-time rival, former Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls. The two seem to have developed a genuine rapport after being away from frontline politics for close to a decade now, and their take – particularly on matters of fiscal and economic policy – can be fascinating.
Number 2: Brian Tyler Cohen
One of the biggest independent political shows on the progressive side of the aisle, Brian Tyler Cohen has been able to interview sitting members of Congress and even state governors. His show has different segments featuring a selection of recurring guests who really know their stuff when it comes to the legal and political issues of the day, and as a result it’s quickly become one of my go-to political outlets. However… I desperately wish that Cohen would stop using such awful clickbait titles for his videos and clips! There’s no need, and when every single video is presented as “the biggest breaking news story that’s just sure to torpedo Donald Trump’s entire career…” well, it wears pretty thin. In short: great content… once you look past the horrible clickbait titles.
Number 3: PBS Washington Week
A political show that I’ve only recently come across, Washington Week is a measured, calm discussion between journalists and political commentators, and usually tackles most of the big stories of the week. Because it’s a weekly show, there isn’t as much of an opportunity to discuss breaking news or stories in progress, but that can be an advantage in some ways. PBS – an American broadcaster largely funded by donations – seems to have less of an outright bias than some of the other mainstream news outlets, and that’s reflected in Washington Week’s calmer tone and round-table format.
Number 4: The “Mainstream Media”
I’m lumping all of the main broadsheets, terrestrial news bulletins, and cable news channels into one entry for this list! Practically all of them rely on the same couple of newswires for many of their stories, after all. It can be hard to differentiate between some of the cable news broadcasters, particularly in the United States, and one should be aware of the ideological leanings and biases they have – as well as which mega-corporation owns which news outlet. But there’s still something to be said for old-school journalism, and practically all of the big newspapers and mainstream news channels have stories worth reading, interviews worth listening to, and investigative reporting that can shine a light on candidates, policies, and the political situation as a whole.
Number 5: Times Radio
I’m in two minds about Times Radio. On the one hand, the new radio station – backed up by the long-running Times newspaper – has some well-respected political journalists, some great discussion pieces, and has started a new podcast dedicated to the upcoming election. On the other, its coverage of the Russia-Ukraine conflict is laughably poor, so much so that I don’t trust a word of it. Definitely one to pick and choose which stories to follow… and one I’m a little suspect of. When it gets its political journalism right, Times Radio can be an interesting listen. When it goes too far down the propaganda route on Ukraine… I’m switching off.
Number 6: LegalEagle
LegalEagle is an interesting one. The YouTube channel, which is run by a professional lawyer in the United States, began by looking at how the law and court cases are presented in works of fiction; there’s even an episode examining courtroom drama in an episode of Star Trek! But as the 2020 election unfolded, the channel started to do more videos looking at Trump’s legal cases, and this has continued as the ex-President’s legal woes have mounted. Though it’s not really about pure politics, if you want a closer examination of the law and how it could impact the election, LegalEagle is a great place to look.
Number 7: Fox News
Bear with me on this one, especially if you’re to the left-of-centre politically. Fox is the single largest conservative-leaning news channel in the United States, though to its credit it wears its bias on its sleeve. If you want to know what right-wingers, Republicans, and Trump supporters are thinking – and perhaps more importantly, why they’re making certain arguments or favouring certain topics – Fox is a good place to start. And despite its reputation, there are some journalists and analysts worth listening to on Fox. Some of the big hitters, like Chris Wallace, have now departed the network, but I’d single out Neil Cavuto, Bret Baier, and John Roberts as presenters whose analysis and interviews can still be worth tuning in for.
Number 8: The News Agents
A political podcast comprised of ex-BBC journalists, The News Agents is another I listen to almost every day. Unfortunately, the podcast is late with its uploads to YouTube, meaning you’ll have to listen to it at its source if you want to get that day’s episode instead of one that’s a couple of days behind schedule. No idea why the folks at Global Player can’t get their act together for that… but never mind! Because it’s hosted by bona fide journalists with years of experience covering politics, The News Agents brings a lot to the table – and there’s occasional discussion about how some of the big political stories are being covered in the media, too, which can be fascinating.
Number 9: Robert Reich
Former US Secretary of Labor (and professor) Robert Reich has a YouTube channel and weekly podcast/discussion show, and while he’s very partisan his take is still interesting. As someone who’s been in the Presidential cabinet, he offers a unique “insider’s” take on presidential politics in particular, and his area of expertise is economics – something he also discusses a lot.
Number 10: The David Pakman Show
David Pakman is another podcaster and broadcaster in the same vein as Bryan Tyler Cohen, and occupies a similar left-of-centre, pro-Democratic Party position. Some of his takes can veer into “vote blue, no matter who” – an idiom I wholeheartedly disagree with, as I feel it gives cover to too many politicians who end up under-delivering! But Pakman’s take on the political news stories of the day is usually interesting and entertaining, and his coverage of the media and how the media talks about politics is generally very good as well.
Number 11: The New Statesman
The New Statesman started out life as a magazine, but now much of its content is online. Though the website/app itself is paywalled, unfortunately, there are regular YouTube uploads – one of which features ex-BBC political editor Andrew Marr. Marr’s pieces are often thought-provoking, and free from the confines of BBC impartiality, he’s no longer afraid to share some of his political leanings and opinions while covering one or two of the week’s big stories. As the UK general election gets closer, The New Statesman is one to follow.
Number 12: Leeja Miller
Another lawyer-turned-YouTuber, Leeja Miller talks about politics and the upcoming election in an interesting way. Her take often focuses on the law and the Constitution, and how the law and democracy are intertwined in the United States. Her video output can be quite eclectic, with pieces on topics as diverse as Watergate and the Alec Baldwin criminal case – but always with a legal and/or political focus. Miller is a great presenter, and clearly puts a lot of effort into researching the subjects she discusses. Not every video will be directly relevant to the election – but many are, and sometimes in unexpected ways!
Number 13: Let’s Talk Elections
For a YouTube channel run by a university student, Let’s Talk Elections is surprisingly thorough and well put-together. The slideshow format puts an emphasis on maps, data, and statistics – which, intentionally or not, makes the series feel professional and reliable. If I were to make a criticism it would be that opinion polls (upon which Let’s Talk Elections heavily relies for content) are not always reliable, and have arguably become less reliable over the past decade or so. So your mileage may vary in that regard! But Let’s Talk Elections videos are well-researched, well-presented, and informative.
Number 14: Ring of Fire/Farron Balanced
I’m putting these two YouTube channels together as they’re presented by the same individual and mostly talk about the same subjects. Presenter Farron Cousins can be very energised when talking about the political stories of the day – and that makes for an entertaining look at the news! There are occasionally other guests on the Ring of Fire programme, including a lawyer who often has an interesting take on Trump’s legal issues. Although I don’t agree with every one of Cousins’ takes on the news, he’s usually an interesting one to watch – on either of his channels!
Number 15: Election Night
I’ve loved staying up late to watch the election results as they come in for a long time! Election night programming can be absolutely riveting for a political geek like me, with pundits and analysts breaking down exit polls and trying to extrapolate paths to victory for the various candidates and political parties. We only get one of these every few years – but there’ll be two in 2024! I’ll definitely be staying up into the wee hours to watch as the votes are counted here in the UK and across the pond.
So that’s it!
The House of Commons during a recent session of Prime Minister’s Questions.
Those are my picks for what to watch in this election year. It’s far from an exhaustive list, of course; there are many other publications and content creators large and small who are well worth tuning in to see. I’m just getting started with TikTok (I’m old, I know) but there are several creators on that platform who are doing interesting things with a shorter format, and that’s just one example of another place to look.
As I said at the beginning, we all need to be aware of the biases and political leanings of the broadcasts and podcasts that we listen to – and try not to take any one source at face value. One of the nice things about platforms like YouTube is that it’s relatively easy to hop from one channel to another; to seek out different perspectives on the same story or political candidate. Many of you will already know which way you want to vote – and that’s good! But it can’t hurt to listen to what the candidates themselves have to say, as well as to hear different opinions from analysts, pundits, and podcasters as this contentious election year starts to jump into a higher gear.
I won’t tell you which way to vote. I won’t even tell you who you should listen to or trust. But I hope this list has, if nothing else, given you a place to start or suggested a new podcast or YouTube show that you might not have come across before.
Trekking with Dennis is not endorsing any political party or candidate here in the UK or in the United States. All podcasts, YouTube channels, and other content discussed above remain the copyright of their respective publisher, broadcaster, distributor, etc. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
If we assume that the current generation of home consoles will last roughly as long as the last couple of generations have, then the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 are close to the halfway point. Both devices were launched in late 2020, and as we’re now well into 2024, I think it’s fair to say we’re approximately halfway through their estimated lifespans. So today, I thought it could be interesting to consider the state of both platforms and look at how well – or how poorly – they’ve been performing!
For some background, I spent a decade working in the games industry, and in that time I worked with companies that released games on both Xbox and PlayStation consoles. As someone whose primary gaming platform these days is PC, I don’t really see a need to take sides in the so-called “console war,” so I’ll do my best to judge both machines on their own merits, as well as give my thoughts on the ninth generation of home consoles as a whole.
A PlayStation 5 console.
Let’s start with something I’ve talked about before: both the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 were released far too early. Not only were there brilliant games that were only just beginning to take full advantage of previous-generation hardware – like Red Dead Redemption II, God of War, and Marvel’s Spider-Man, to name but a few – but there were catastrophic problems with production and the supply chain thanks to the shit-show that was 2020. Both machines were launched with wholly inadequate levels of stock, leading to predictable results!
PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series consoles were out of stock everywhere for well over a year; here in the UK folks were on waiting lists that could be months long, and even as the consoles’ second holiday season approached, the only choice many players and parents had was to pay massively inflated prices to scalpers. Neither Microsoft nor Sony did enough to prevent touts and scalpers from using bots to buy up available stock, and throughout the launch window and well into 2021, both companies failed to improve manufacturing and supply chain issues.
“Supply chain issues” quickly became an excuse for why both consoles were out of stock.
Thankfully, those issues have largely abated – at least here in the UK. But now that the availability problem has been solved and the consoles have trudged their way to the halfway point in their life cycles… is it even worth picking one up?
I have to say that, even at their recommended retail price, both consoles feel like a hard sell right now. There are so few exclusive titles to make an expensive purchase like that worthwhile, with a huge majority of games still being released on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One as well as on the current generation of machines.
A visual representation of every Xbox Series X exclusive title.
There have always been cross-generation titles, of course, but usually by this point – more than three years into a console generation – there are fewer and fewer of them. But at time of writing I can only call to mind a handful of games that are genuinely PlayStation 5/Xbox Series X exclusive – the likes of Starfield, Jedi: Survivor, and Baldur’s Gate 3 come to mind, but I really can’t think of many others. Some of the biggest releases and most successful titles of the last few years – like Elden Ring, the Resident Evil 4 remake, and Halo Infinite – have all been released on both current- and last-gen platforms.
Is it worth spending upwards of £450 on a console to be able to play one or two games that aren’t available elsewhere? Don’t get me wrong: great games can and always have been system-sellers. But if I’m considering such an expensive investment, I really don’t think it’s too much to ask that I’m able to play more than just a couple of exclusive games! For a lot of players, there’s really very little advantage to buying one of these new machines in 2024… because most games are still available on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One consoles, which are a lot less expensive and which they may well already own.
An Xbox Series X console.
We are starting to see a shift in that area, but it’s far slower than it has been in previous generations. 2023 saw the release of titles like Starfield and Marvel’s Spider-Man 2, both of which were exclusive to next-gen platforms. But unless those games were on your “must-play list,” there really isn’t a hugely compelling reason to invest in either console at this point.
I noted in 2020, before the launch of PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X, that the jump in graphical quality would be far smaller and less noticeable this time around than it had been in years past – and I think that’s been entirely born out by the abundance of cross-generation titles. There are advantages to current-gen machines compared to last-gen ones, of course, but they tend to be in less obvious areas like loading times and control pad battery life as opposed to things like graphical fidelity and visuals.
Despite being a current-gen-only title, Starfield is hardly groundbreaking in the graphics and visuals department.
One thing that’s definitely happened this generation has been a massive growth in file sizes! With most games now being either wholly digital or coming with massive patches and updates even on day one, downloading 100GB+ files has become commonplace. For those of us with slow internet connections, that can easily mean a couple of days to download a single game or update! That’s an annoyance in some ways, especially considering how some games with massive file sizes don’t actually seem to look much better than their counterparts from a few years ago that were one-third as big.
But large files and downloads are here to stay, I suspect. With both current-gen machines having solid-state drives (and expansion slots to add extra storage, if needed) it’s possible to create larger and more detailed game worlds than ever before. Relatively few games have taken advantage of this yet – and some of those that have, like Starfield, haven’t done so particularly well – but, despite my personal gripes with massive downloads, there’s at least potential here. Larger and faster drives on home consoles can open up new possibilities in game development, and that could lead to bigger and more immersive worlds in the years ahead.
Many titles released this generation have file sizes well over 100GB.
The question of value for money has come up a lot over the past couple of years, and while we’ve partly touched on that with the lack of exclusive games, I want to consider the price point that both consoles are at. For literally decades, console prices have come down incrementally as they get further into their life cycle. Recent console generations have seen cheaper versions produced partway through, with the likes of the Xbox 360S and PlayStation 4 Slim both arriving at around the halfway point in their respective life cycles.
This time around, however, we’ve seen price rises rather than price reductions, with PlayStation 5 consoles now £30 more expensive here in the UK than they were at launch in 2020. Despite initially suggesting no price rises were imminent, Microsoft followed suit a few months later, again rising the price of Xbox Series X consoles by £30 here in the UK. That’s despite both consoles arguably having the least-convincing lineup of exclusive games, and thus having the weakest justification for such an unfair price hike. Sony and Microsoft are billion-dollar corporations whose gaming divisions have been making money hand over fist… so these price hikes – which come on top of the rise in the price of the standard edition of many games – are honestly just disgusting. Price-gouging in the middle of an inflation and cost-of-living crisis is sickening.
Sony boasted to its investors about record-breaking profits… before turning around a few weeks later and hiking up the price of PlayStation 5 consoles.
At the end of the day, I’d have expected more from both the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X at this point in their generation. There have been some great games over the past three-plus years… but many of them aren’t exclusive to this generation of home consoles, leaving me with a resounding sense best summed up thus: “what’s the point?” Neither console has, in my view, given a compelling answer to that question yet. There have been a handful of titles that I could see some folks picking up a console for, but there are undeniably far, far fewer of those at this point in the ninth generation than in any prior home console generation.
There have also been plenty of duds; broken, half-baked, or underwhelming titles. That happens, and while it isn’t the fault of either console specifically, the sheer number of buggy “release now, fix later” titles has done nothing to help current-gen gaming or make it feel like a worthwhile investment.
The Lord of the Rings: Gollum will likely be remembered as one of the worst releases of the generation.
The best experiences of the last few years, I would argue, have come not on the Xbox Series X or PlayStation 5, but on the Nintendo Switch and PC. PC gaming has gone through somewhat of a renaissance, with titles that were once exclusive to Xbox and PlayStation making their way onto the platform, as well as a glut of high-quality titles. And Nintendo has been consistent in its releases on the Switch, even as that less-powerful console reaches the end of its life. Whether we’re talking Animal Crossing: New Horizons, Super Mario Bros. Wonder, the remaster of Metroid Prime, or the Booster Course Pass expansion for Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Nintendo has been serving up hit after hit, and offering players genuine reasons to pick up their machine.
As the ninth generation got underway in 2020, I was content to watch and wait. Even though PC has been my primary platform for several years, I’m not averse to playing on console if there’s a compelling title that seems like a “must-play.” I bought a PlayStation 3 toward the end of its life so I could play the likes of The Last of Us, I picked up a Switch to play Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Mario Odyssey, and more, and I bought a PlayStation 4 during the previous generation in order to play games like Horizon Zero Dawn and Uncharted 4. But no games of that calibre have leapt out at me this time around. Maybe one or two will before this generation comes to a close… but I’m not convinced.
A fancy gaming PC. No, it’s not mine!
So here’s the real takeaway from the ninth generation of home consoles: buy a PC! Most Xbox and even PlayStation titles are coming to PC these days; I’m particularly excited for the upcoming PC port of Ghost of Tsushima, for instance. Having built my own PC a couple of years ago, and upgraded my graphics card just last year, I know for a fact that it’s more than a match for both current-gen consoles. Unless one of them can rope me in with an exclusive title that I can’t get anywhere else – and can’t live without – this could be the first generation of home consoles since the days of the NES and Atari 7800 that I don’t end up buying into.
As the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 reach the halfway point in their life cycles, I confess I feel a sense of disappointment – and more than a little “I told you so.” Both machines are powerful, there’s no question about that. But so far, it doesn’t seem as if anyone has really taken advantage of that power to really innovate and push gaming forward by anything more than the smallest iterative step. I knew going into the ninth generation that changes and improvements would be minimal… but even with that low bar, I’m unimpressed.
There have been some great games in the last few years. 2023 in particular will be well-remembered for releases like Baldur’s Gate 3. But titles like that feel like they exist in spite of, rather than because of, the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X. As we reach the halfway point… neither console has yet come close to reaching its potential.
PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series S/X consoles are on sale now. All titles discussed above are the copyright of their respective developer, studio, and/or publisher. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Minor spoilers may be present for the Fallout TV series and games.
We’ve now seen two trailers for the upcoming Fallout television adaptation, so I thought I’d share my two cents on one of 2024’s most interesting TV shows! Let’s start by acknowledging something important: video games have been notoriously awkward to adapt and bring to the big and small screens alike, and there are many examples that underwhelmed or just outright failed. Recent years have seen better efforts, though: I’d point to Paramount+’s Halo series and last year’s Super Mario Bros. Movie as being great exemplars of what’s possible nowadays.
So there’s hope for the Fallout series, then!
I like to say that I’ve played “two-and-a-bit” Fallout games. I played Fallout 3 and Fallout 4, and I took a look at Fallout 76 before quickly realising it wasn’t my type of game. I haven’t played the original CRPGs nor Fallout: New Vegas – which folks seem to say is the best one! So that’s my background with Fallout, and I have to say that while I generally enjoyed my time with the games that I played… I’m not the franchise’s biggest fan by any means, and I can see some potential issues that may arise as the world of the games is transplanted into a made-for-streaming TV series.
Fallout 3 was set in Washington, D.C. and the surrounding area.
The Fallout series has a very particular aesthetic, and it’s one that works well in the simulated worlds of video games. But there are some cartoonish trappings of the games’ post-apocalyptic setting that I’m not convinced will work in live-action, especially if the series goes down a serious, almost deadpan route with its characters and storytelling. Blending things like power armour, flying robots, and brightly-coloured Vault-Tec jumpsuits with a post-nuclear setting replete with dirt and grime… it works in the games, but I felt from looking at the two trailers that there were some visual clashes.
Modern TV programmes and films have sometimes struggled with high-resolution cameras and screens that show everything down to the last detail – and what I mean by that is that if the details aren’t perfect, or don’t look believable enough, they end up sticking out like a sore thumb. Some of the pieces of metal for things like robots and power armour didn’t quite look “metallic enough” in the trailer, looking too flat, too matte, and too much like the foam-rubber that they’re probably made from! I’ve noted similar issues in films like The Rise of Skywalker, so clearly this is something that some film and TV studios have yet to fully get to grips with.
Power armour as seen in the second trailer.
Then there were the Vault-Tec jumpsuits that several characters were seen to be wearing. For me, these came across looking too bright, and when I went back to the games to compare, I feel like they didn’t have the same issue. The jumpsuits in the Fallout games always seemed to me to be made of denim or some similar fabric; the ones made for the television series seem to have an almost shiny appearance in some sequences. I understand that there’s meant to be a contrast between the “clean” vault and the “chaotic” wasteland – but maybe dialling this back a notch or two would’ve looked better. For me, the way the jumpsuits look felt almost cartoonish.
I’m by no means opposed to bright primary colours – I’m a Star Trek fan, and Star Trek’s uniforms are almost all in similarly bright tones. I think jumpsuits like the ones seen in the trailer could work… if the rest of the aesthetic was similarly toned up to match. But it felt like most of the wasteland was a fairly drab post-apocalyptic brown and khaki, making the bright blue jumpsuits stick out. Maybe that was the intention – but there are other ways to accomplish the same task without making characters look like they’re heading out to a fancy dress party.
Vault residents in their jumpsuits.
But maybe I’m nitpicking and being too harsh! There were definitely highlights from the trailers; things that looked exciting or mysterious. I’m glad that – so far, at least – Fallout hasn’t fallen into the trap of exposing too much of its story. Some modern trailers overdo it, leaving very little for viewers to discover when they get to watch the full film or series. There’s a line to walk between generating interest and over-sharing, and I think Amazon and Bethesda did a good job in that regard.
I was quite surprised to see that all eight episodes of the series will be arriving at once. Fallout could absolutely be a blast to binge-watch… but I tend to prefer watching week-to-week rather than feeling I need to watch the whole series over a couple of days to avoid picking up too many spoilers. As Netflix has discovered to its cost, releasing an entire series all at once isn’t always the best approach, and we’ve seen many modern made-for-streaming series fall back on the “old-fashioned” approach of releasing episodes weekly. Amazon doesn’t typically broadcast its shows this way, so I’d be interested to find out why Fallout is being released all at once.
Unlike with other Amazon original series, all Fallout episodes will premiere on the same day.
Actor Walton Goggins – who plays a character known only as “the Ghoul,” and who also narrated the second trailer – is someone I recognised from the trailers, though I couldn’t pinpoint exactly where from! Interestingly, as a Trekkie at least, Fallout’s writer (credited as the “creator” of the series) is Geneva Robertson-Dworet, who Paramount had announced was writing/producing one of the Star Trek Beyond sequel efforts a couple of years ago. That project may or may not still be going ahead – watch this space!
And speaking of Star Trek connections: Ella Purnell, who plays Lucy in Fallout and has been featured prominently in the show’s marketing material, was the voice of Gwyn in Star Trek: Prodigy. Gwyn was a great character in that series, and there may be echoes of that kind of “fish-out-of-water” character in Lucy the vault-dweller as she makes her way through the wasteland for the first time. At least we know that Ella Purnell can play that kind of role convincingly!
Ella Purnell plays Lucy.
The original Fallout was set on the West Coast, and some elements from that game – such as the New California Republic faction – also appeared in Fallout: New Vegas. Because the games I’m more familiar with take place on the East Coast – in D.C. and Boston respectively – I have less of a familiarity with the “lore” of Fallout as it pertains to the California area. Having said that, there are a couple of factions and locations that seem to be lifted directly from the games: the aforementioned NCR being one, as well as the Brotherhood of Steel, and the settlement of Shady Sands, which was a base for one of the first game’s factions.
The series is set more than a century after the events of the first Fallout, a few years after the main events of Fallout 4 – and almost 200 years after Fallout 76! Its place in the timeline gives it scope to change things, or at least do things differently when compared to the games. I’m not a huge stickler for “canon” – especially in a fictional setting that I have, at best, experienced only a portion of. But at the same time, I hope the series doesn’t overwrite or retcon too many things from the games – especially as it’s set in the same part of the world as the first game. After all, if writers are just going to ignore everything that had been established to tell their own story… why not make a brand-new setting?
Three of the show’s main cast members – along with a suit of power armour – at The Game Awards in December.
The two trailers both contained moments of mystery and excitement. Walton Goggins’ Ghoul appears to be an antagonist, and Lucy seems to be our point-of-view character as she emerges from the vault into this strange, new world. Beyond that, I caught glimpses of references and “Easter eggs” from the games, such as a dog that resembles Dogmeat – a canine companion present in all of the main games. There was also the famous “please stand by” screen in the vault, bottles of Nuka-Cola, power armour, and more.
Although I’ve found a few things to pick on from the trailers, most of that is aesthetic! A strong story can make me forget even the silliest visual quirks, and it’s also worth pointing out that a short trailer that had to be compressed for social media isn’t always going to be totally reflective of the finished product. There was enough in both of the trailers to keep me interested, and when Fallout arrives next month I’ll be sure to tune in!
The wasteland in the vicinity of Shady Sands Public Library.
Although Fallout has never been one of my all-time favourite gaming franchises, I’ve enjoyed it enough to sink dozens of hours into two of its titles, and I generally had a good time. There’s more to the unique world than can be portrayed in a couple of video games, though, and I think Fallout could make a good television adaptation. Whether this particular story and script will live up to that potential… I’m not sure. We won’t know until we’ve watched the series, I guess! But there are positive notes to take away from the two trailers, and reason enough to think that Fallout could be a fun watch this spring.
When Fallout has premiered, I hope you’ll circle back for a review and my impressions of the series. With all of the episodes arriving at once, it might take me a little while to get through the full series, but I’ll endeavour to write up a review before too long.
See you out in the wasteland!
Fallout will premiere on Amazon Prime Video on the 11th of April 2024. Fallout is the copyright of Amazon MGM Studios, Bethesda Softworks, and/or Kilter Films. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for the Star Wars franchise, including Return of the Jedi, The Last Jedi, The Mandalorian, The Book of Boba Fett, and the video game Jedi: Survivor.
A couple of years ago, I shared six of my “hot takes” about Star Wars. But it’s always fun to stir the pot, so I’ve come up with six more! These are all controversial takes that I have on Star Wars; opinions that seem to be a minority position based on my limited engagement with the fan community. I thought it could be entertaining and interesting to share some more of these with you today!
This is just for fun, and while I do genuinely hold all of these opinions – I’m not just making up stuff for the sake of clickbait – there’s no need to get into a big argument! Everything we’re going to talk about here is subjective, not objective, and I’m keenly aware that I’m in the minority. They’re called “hot takes” for a reason, so feel free to disagree with me vehemently on any or all of the points I raise!
If you want to check out my first set of “hot takes,” you can find them by clicking or tapping here. Otherwise, this is your last chance to nope out if you don’t want to read some potentially controversial Star Wars opinions!
“Hot Take” #1: The Book of Boba Fett is probably the best Disney+ Star Wars series so far.
Promo poster for The Book of Boba Fett.
I went into The Book of Boba Fett with low expectations. I’ve never been wild about The Mandalorian, thanks in no small part to its decision to bring the Force and Luke Skywalker into a story that was originally pitched as “the adventures of a gunslinger beyond the reach of the New Republic.” Boba Fett has always felt like a non-character to me ever since I first watched the original trilogy in the early ’90s. Add into the mix Disney and Lucasfilm grossly overplaying the nostalgia card in the sequel trilogy, and I truly did not expect to get anything out of The Book of Boba Fett whatsoever.
But I was surprised to find an exciting and interesting story that was just plain fun. It was a nostalgia overload for sure, but it managed to keep me entertained regardless – and by the time Boba and his friends were fighting for their very lives on the streets of Mos Eisley, I was gripped. Maybe it’s because of those low expectations that I had such a good time with it… but whatever the reason may be, I thoroughly enjoyed the series.
Like a bantha!
When I compare it to the other Star Wars offerings that I’ve seen on Disney+, it tops the charts easily. The Mandalorian isn’t great, in my opinion, and I find the show’s protagonist difficult to root for because of how utterly monotone he is. I once described Din Djarin as an “unemotional helmet-wearing slab of nothing;” a character who seems to act at the behest of a room full of TV writers, and not because of any motivation or character trait that I can detect.
Obi-Wan Kenobi was a show so utterly dire that it put me off Star Wars for months afterwards! Trying to write a review of that appalling mess was likewise so unpleasant that I ended up taking a break from writing anything at all here on the website – and I still haven’t finished that review! The mere thought of going back to Obi-Wan Kenobi just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Inside the Sarlaac monster…
I haven’t seen Andor yet – thanks, in no small part, to Obi-Wan Kenobi causing me to turn away from the Star Wars franchise for a while! But I suppose when I get around to watching it it could dethrone The Book of Boba Fett. As could The Acolyte – a project I’m definitely looking forward to as it promises to step back in time to a wholly different era of the Star Wars galaxy.
But The Book of Boba Fett isn’t just my favourite Disney+ Star Wars show by default. The others have their problems, sure… but The Book of Boba Fett could’ve been just as bad. I was surprised at just how entertaining it was, and how a character I had no interest in was able to be transformed into a genuinely fun protagonist. There were themes of loss and revenge as Boba navigated Tatooine’s criminal underworld, but my biggest takeaway was how positive, fun, and light-hearted the show could be. I admit that I’m surprised to see that it wasn’t received more positively by other Star Wars fans.
“Hot Take” #2: “From a certain point of view” is patent nonsense and always has been, and Star Wars is made worse by continually trying to justify it.
What a crock of shit!
Are you old enough to remember when Return of the Jedi was regarded as the weakest Star Wars film? Before the prequels came out, that was the general consensus! When I first watched the Star Wars trilogy it was at the insistence of a friend, and his father was adamant that Return of the Jedi was an awful film and a poor way for the story to conclude. So it seems that divisiveness in the fan community is nothing new – but more on that later!
One of the reasons for Return of the Jedi being held in lower esteem than its two predecessors is the clumsy and just plain stupid line from Obi-Wan Kenobi to Luke Skywalker that coined the phrase “from a certain point of view.” I’ve always considered this explanation to be absolute dog shite, making no sense whatsoever. And Star Wars has since doubled- and tripled-down on this idea… when it really should be ignored and pushed aside.
Luke asked Obi-Wan how his father died in Star Wars.
Let’s step back and set the scene. In Star Wars (a.k.a. A New Hope, the first film in the series), Obi-Wan Kenobi explained to Luke Skywalker that Darth Vader “betrayed and murdered” his father. That line was unambiguous and not subject to interpretation! But by the time The Empire Strikes Back rolled around, the decision had been taken to retcon the relationship between Vader and Luke, transforming them into father and son – leading to one of the most iconic scenes in all of cinema.
As with many other things in Star Wars, though, something that should’ve been left alone… wasn’t. We could’ve ignored what Obi-Wan said in that first encounter, accepting that the retcon overwrote it. It would’ve been an inconsistency, sure… but it would have been one that the story could’ve survived. There are also legitimate in-universe reasons for Obi-Wan not wanting to tell Luke the truth; he could’ve apologised or explained his reasoning and left it at that.
The Obi-Wan Kenobi series revisited this idea.
But instead we got this ridiculously convoluted work of semantic gymnastics, with Obi-Wan justifying his lie – and it was made into a lie by the retcon in Empire – by trying to claim that, somehow, Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader aren’t the same person. Even though they’re literally the same person, with the same body, “soul” or essence, Force abilities, and so on. Anakin made a decision to defect from the Jedi to the Sith… but it doesn’t mean he stopped being Anakin. Even thinking about it in the most abstract and poetic terms… he’s still the same person.
Since this line was uttered, Star Wars has continually stumbled by trying to justify it and make the concept stick. The prequel trilogy made a big deal about Palpatine granting Anakin his “new” Sith identity, and the aforementioned Obi-Wan Kenobi series also tried to double-down on this idea, with Obi-Wan saying that the man he knew “is truly dead.” But… he isn’t. He’s different, sure. But he isn’t dead. This whole “from a certain point of view” idea just doesn’t work for me. It didn’t when I first saw it in Return of the Jedi thirty-plus years ago, and every attempt that the franchise has made to lean into it hasn’t helped. I wish Star Wars would quietly drop this idea and move on!
“Hot Take” #3: Franchise fatigue is beginning to set in.
This is just a snapshot of part of the Star Wars category on Disney+.
Though not as oversaturated as Star Trek has been in recent years, I’d argue that Star Wars is very much in danger of running too hot. Too many shows and films in too short a span of time is going to lead to franchise fatigue – and while there will always be fans who will turn up for every new project, the more casual audience that any series relies on will begin to drift away.
I think we’re already seeing this, at least to a limited extent. Solo: A Star Wars Story was the first film in the franchise to make a loss at the box office, and it was released only a few months after The Last Jedi. On Disney+, too, it seems that more recent shows and seasons have attracted less attention and excitement. Fewer people turned up for Obi-Wan Kenobi or The Book of Boba Fett than had for the first season of The Mandalorian, for instance.
A Star Destroyer as seen in the opening shot of Star Wars in 1977.
Since the Disney acquisition of Lucasfilm went through more than a decade ago, Star Wars has hardly been off our screens. The sequel trilogy came along in the back half of the 2010s, with Rogue One and Solo in cinemas as well. And since the launch of Disney+, there have been new live-action and animated shows every year. With several of these projects overlapping each other or being spin-offs that rely on older films or shows to set them up, keeping up with Star Wars and knowing what’s what and who’s who can feel like a full-time job!
With Disney+ in poor shape financially, the corporation is relying heavily on its biggest brands to bring in and retain subscribers. But the likes of Star Wars and even Marvel are in danger of burning out; turning away audiences due to convoluted interconnected storylines or just because there’s a desire to look for something new and different. A few years ago, a massive audience would’ve been hyped for a live-action Star Wars series. But now? I can almost hear the collective sigh as yet another season gets sharted out onto Disney+.
I haven’t seen much excitement for the likes of Skeleton Crew recently…
I genuinely don’t know what the solution is here. The truly hard-core Star Wars fans will, of course, keep showing up for any and every new project. But how long can the franchise rely on those folks if a wider audience of more casual viewers can’t keep up or loses interest? As Disney recently found out to its cost with the Galactic Starcruiser hotel at Disney World… there are only so many of those hard-core fans.
Maybe you don’t feel a sense of franchise fatigue just yet – and that’s okay. If you don’t, I’m genuinely happy for you! But with so much Star Wars content on the horizon, with new series, films, and video games coming every few weeks… how long can that last? How long will it be before you say, “eh, I think I’ll skip this one and watch something else?” In my opinion, no franchise can keep up this frenetic pace for very long. Star Wars has already been pushing it for several years, and I wonder when it will have to slow down.
“Hot Take” #4: Jedi: Survivor was crap.
Battling battle droids in Jedi: Survivor.
I absolutely adored Jedi: Fallen Order when I played it. Going on that adventure with Cal Kestis and the crew of the Stinger Mantis was fantastic, so I was incredibly excited for the game’s sequel in 2023. But as you’ll know if you read my review of the game… I really didn’t like it. Mechanically and narratively, the game failed – and that’s before we get into the bugs and glitches that have come to define its poor launch.
An open-world design is not something that suits every game, and Jedi: Survivor was made significantly worse than its predecessor by attempting to go down this route. The clumsily-designed maps, particularly on the main planet of Koboh, really got in the way of the story and immersion. It made no sense to me that Cal and his friends would hide out in a “quiet, out-of-the-way” settlement like Ramblers Reach… when that settlement was a stone’s throw from both a massive pirate base and two Imperial outposts.
The game’s open-world design put Ramblers Reach literally a few metres away from the Empire and pirates.
In terms of story, I found Jedi: Survivor to be an unimpressive relation to its illustrious predecessor. Cal was teamed up with a character who was obviously, from almost his first second on screen, a “secret bad guy in disguise.” This plot point was so flagrantly telegraphed that it might as well have been lit up in neon. And the return of Master Cordova, a character who played a huge role in the story of the first game, was handled incredibly poorly.
There were some narrative highlights: Cere’s story took her full-circle, for instance, and while I could see Bode’s betrayal coming from a mile away, Cal’s reaction to it was genuinely emotional. But the foundations of this story felt weak and almost random, with Cal stumbling into a random cave, Greez accidentally building his cantina atop ancient Jedi ruins… and a convoluted plot involving an ancient Jedi sealed in a bacta tank and a “lost” planet that no one knew how to reach. Compared to the story of Fallen Order, Jedi: Survivor came up short.
A duel in Jedi: Survivor.
Obviously we can’t discuss Jedi: Survivor without commenting on the game’s shockingly poor condition. I’ve uninstalled it now and haven’t touched it since September, so I can’t comment on its current state. But I saw the reviews Jedi: Survivor received upon launch and chose to wait several months before jumping in – only to find that it was still in an absolutely appalling state, with bugs, glitches, frame-rate problems, stuttering, and low-res textures all getting in the way of the experience. The fault for this lies with publisher Electronic Arts, who chose to force Jedi: Survivor to be released before it was ready.
At the beginning of 2023, I genuinely expected Jedi: Survivor to be in contention for my “game of the year” award. Instead, for a variety of reasons it ended up as one of the biggest disappointments of the year. A sequel is in the works, and while I’m going to be much more sceptical this time around… I have to at least cross my fingers and hope for something better.
“Hot Take” #5: The sequel trilogy won’t ever be retconned out of existence.
The Holdo manoeuvre is canon. Suck it, haters!
I’m not sure how hot of a take this really is, because I think most folks understand that Disney and Lucasfilm aren’t going to turn around one day and announce that the sequel trilogy is suddenly non-canon! But in some corners of the Star Wars fan community, this fantastical notion has taken root. I’ve heard some big-time fan blogs and channels with sizeable audiences pushing the idea that some or all of the sequel trilogy – and The Last Jedi in particular – are about to be “erased” from canon or overwritten.
Like any franchise, Star Wars has grown and evolved over the years. Stories, characters, and themes that may have been controversial or hated at first tend to be more accepted with the passage of time, as we’ve seen with both Return of the Jedi and the prequel trilogy. The same is sure to happen for the sequels, given enough time. Fifteen years from now, they’ll just be part of the furniture; inseparable from the rest of Star Wars.
Rey in The Force Awakens.
In 1999, I really didn’t like The Phantom Menace. In fact, the only part of the prequel trilogy that I even considered to be passable was Revenge of the Sith – and that dim praise comes with multiple caveats! But as time has passed, the prequels have been folded into the broader lore and canon of Star Wars quite effectively – to the point that I’d never even consider the idea of overwriting them at this stage.
Many of the fans who seem to be arguing most passionately in favour of the sequel trilogy being scrubbed are – somewhat ironically, perhaps – younger folks who first came to Star Wars when the prequels were in cinemas. The prequel trilogy was their way into the Star Wars fan community, so the idea that those films could’ve been disliked or hated as much as the sequels are today doesn’t seem to register for a lot of folks. But they were… and the fan community was able to recover!
“Somehow, Palpatine returned…”
I don’t know what the future holds for Star Wars. Maybe it will go on for years and years, producing new content all the while. Or maybe it’ll take another decades-long break before triumphantly returning, as it has in the past. But either way, the sequel trilogy will remain part of that story. It may not be beneficial to Disney and Lucasfilm to put it front-and-centre right now, particularly as fans seem to long for more stories set during the prequel era or the time of the original trilogy. But the sequel era is developing stories, spin-offs, and a lore all of its own – and building on that will be a key part of Star Wars’ future.
The idea that a billion-dollar trilogy of films, complete with spin-offs, merchandise, and more would ever be dumped or retconned out of existence is nothing more than a juvenile fantasy; the ultimate “cope” from folks who can’t stand those films. And look… I agree that the world would be a much better place if The Rise of Skywalker had never existed. That film was an absolute catastrophe! But it won’t ever be erased or overwritten – and I’m okay with that. I’m still content to give Star Wars a chance to impress me with what comes next.
“Hot Take” #6: Writing a sequel to Return of the Jedi that didn’t feel like tacked-on fan fiction was probably impossible.
The main characters at the end of Return of the Jedi.
Stories end. Every story eventually comes to an end, with its character arcs, sub-plots, and main narrative threads all being drawn to a close. And for better or worse, Return of the Jedi was the end of Star Wars; the final, climactic battle of the Palpatine-versus-Skywalker saga. The Emperor was dead, Imperial forces were implied to be in disarray, the threat of the Death Star had been removed, and it seemed as if the Rebel Alliance had won the day. After three films – or six, if we include the prequel trilogy – the story had come to an end.
And what an end it was! Saving the galaxy, destroying both Sith Lords, restoring the Jedi Order, and setting the stage for a return to freedom and democracy after two decades of oppressive autocracy is a great place for the curtain to fall and the credits to roll. And having seen both the impotent fan fiction of the old Expanded Universe and Disney’s sequel trilogy, one thing seems abundantly clear to me: that should have been the end. There just wasn’t space to add a new story after the events of Return of the Jedi.
The Death Star explodes above the forest moon of Endor.
It’s ironic that Disney is the company that purchased the Star Wars brand, because the sequel trilogy is a great example of what I like to call the “Disney sequel problem.” Every Disney film – of the classic and renaissance eras, at any rate – ended with a “happily ever after” moment, with the heroes celebrating a hard-fought victory and the baddies vanquished. It proved impossible to make a sequel to those kinds of stories that didn’t feel either tacked-on or derivative.
And both of those labels apply to the Expanded Universe and the Disney-created sequel trilogy. The First Order basically picked up where the Empire left off, and the revelation that Palpatine had been secretly pulling the strings the whole time completely undermined whole narrative arcs from the original and prequel films. The Force Awakens was basically a carbon copy of A New Hope, and The Rise of Skywalker tried its best to be Return of the Jedi. No part of the story was original, and as I wrote once, the entire sequel trilogy feels like a bait-and-switch. Instead of answering questions about the Star Wars galaxy that fans had been asking for years, the films simply re-told the same story with a different coat of paint.
Kylo Ren and General Hux in The Force Awakens.
And I don’t see how it could’ve been different. After killing the Emperor and Darth Vader, there was no “big bad” left to defeat. Mopping up the leaderless remnants of the Empire would’ve felt anticlimactic, and replacing the Emperor with Snoke and Vader with Kylo Ren was just cheap and derivative. The same feelings would have arisen if a new Emperor had emerged, a new Sith Lord had been discovered, or the First Order had been given a different name to match one of the silly Expanded Universe stories.
Unfortunately, modern entertainment franchises can’t be allowed to come to a dignified end. They must be resurrected and kept on life-support at all costs, with new stories being churned out to suit the needs of corporate shareholders who are too cowardly to invest in new stories and characters. After saving the galaxy and defeating the Sith, Return of the Jedi left Star Wars with nowhere to go narratively – but Disney and Lucasfilm went there anyway.
So that’s it!
The Jedi Council.
I hope I didn’t upset too many people with this list!
There’s still plenty to enjoy with Star Wars, even if I’ve found a few things to pick on this time. In 2024, I’m looking forward to The Acolyte on Disney+ and to getting my hands on the remastered Dark Forces video game – so I’m still engaged with the franchise. I also like to keep up to date with big developments, and I’m sure that I’ll eventually get around to watching most of the live-action series and seasons that I’ve missed.
I hope this has been a bit of fun, and perhaps thought-provoking in places. Although these are “hot takes,” it wasn’t my intention to upset anyone or cause anger and division. The Star Wars fan community has more than enough of that! At the end of the day, we all have things we like and things we dislike in our favourite films and franchises.
Until next time… and may the Force be with you!
The Star Wars franchise – including all films, games, and other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Lucasfilm and The Walt Disney Company. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Beware of minor spoilers for the following Star Trek productions: Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Picard, and Prodigy.
For years, I’ve been publicly calling on Paramount Global to finally remaster Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Voyager. Two of the franchise’s best-loved shows are languishing in DVD quality even on Paramount Plus, turning away a potential audience and making it harder for Star Trek to convert sometime viewers into fully-fledged Trekkies. With massive story connections in Prodigy and Picard in particular, you’d have thought that remastering these shows would’ve been a great idea… but alas.
It often feels like Paramount Global is being run by morons; short-sighted corporate idiots who said “make me my own Netflix” without any idea about streaming, the internet, or the technology required to make something like that happen. It’s nothing short of a miracle, perhaps, that Paramount Plus works as well as it does! But even as Paramount Plus has continued its painfully slow international rollout and brought in new subscribers, executives seem content to overlook one of the biggest requests from Star Trek fans… even if it would be easier and cheaper than ever before and would surely bring in new subscribers and make money.
Tom Ryan, CEO of streaming at Paramount.
We could talk all day about how Paramount executives have misunderstood Star Trek and the kinds of shows Trekkies wanted to see – and perhaps one day soon we’ll have to do that (again!) But for now, suffice to say that a remaster of Deep Space Nine and Voyager is something that fans have been calling for for well over a decade – but those calls have continually fallen on deaf ears. It’s high time to change that!
Technology gets better and better all the time – including in video production, special effects, and upscaling. With readily available AI tools – pieces of software that already exist today – it’s possible to upscale old television programmes from DVD quality all the way up to full HD, 4K, and beyond… and churn out creditable results. Two full years ago I made the case for Paramount taking advantage of this technology to massively reduce the costs involved in remastering Deep Space Nine and Voyager, and the case for doing so grows stronger by the day.
Programmes like Topaz Video AI 4 are already on the market. Image Credit: Topaz Labs
Unlike when The Original Series and The Next Generation went through the process in the late 2000s and early 2010s, selling Blu-ray discs is no longer the objective. The Next Generation only “underperformed” on Blu-ray anyway because the move away from optical discs in favour of streaming was already happening when it was released. Remastering Deep Space Nine and Voyager today wouldn’t have to come with the same cost – and the same sales target – as those other shows. Instead, it could be all about giving Paramount Plus a (desperately needed) boost.
And unlike when whole sequences from The Original Series and The Next Generation had to be remade and reimagined from the ground up, artificial intelligence can fill in a lot of the gaps. I don’t want to do people out of work, nor encourage greedy corporations to utilise and rely on AI any more than they are already… but if cost is a concern, there’s no denying that remastering can be done a heck of a lot cheaper in 2024 than it could’ve been a decade or fifteen years ago. Taking advantage of these technological advancements just makes sense.
The Next Generation has already been remastered.
At present, fans only have access to Deep Space Nine and Voyager on DVD or VHS. But even with those limitations, it’s incredible to see what some tech-savvy Trekkies have already been able to create. Remastered and upscaled scenes are available to watch right now, with fans having put in a lot of hard work on their own, for free, to bring these shows into the 21st Century. And that work will undoubtedly continue.
The entirety of Deep Space Nine – all seven seasons – are already available in 720p thanks to AI, and the show can be… shall we say “acquired” through certain unofficial channels by anyone who knows their way around a computer. While arguably imperfect, this is still one of the best ways to watch the series – and Paramount isn’t making a single penny from it. If Paramount would commit to doing this work, it could be a nice little earner, driving new subscribers to Paramount Plus and giving existing subscribers a reason to stick around.
AI-upscaled versions of Deep Space Nine are already available to fans who know where to look.
Here on the website, we’ve argued back and forth about piracy before. Here’s my take: if a film or series is available to rent or purchase, I’m firmly in the camp that says “pay for it.” But if Paramount won’t remaster these fantastic shows and make them available… I don’t see anything wrong with fans doing it ourselves and sharing it within the community. Paramount is the only loser in that situation, and the corporation has inflicted that loss upon itself!
An interesting example of a fan-made project like this comes from the Star Wars franchise. I’ve talked before about Project 4K77, and how a dedicated group of Star Wars fans were able to get hold of a high-quality copy of the original, unmolested Star Wars from 1977, and how they were then able to digitise it, preserving it for future generations. That project was incredibly successful; a testament to the hard work and determination of Star Wars fans. And it has quite literally saved and resurrected the original version of the film that spawned the long-running franchise – a version of the film that George Lucas and the Walt Disney Company wanted to throw in the dustbin.
Project 4K77 preserved the original version of Star Wars.
Now, it’s true that Deep Space Nine and Voyager haven’t been abandoned in the same way as the original version of Star Wars was. And I agree that DVDs are still perfectly watchable – especially on smaller displays and screens. But I also think it would be a terrible shame to leave Deep Space Nine and Voyager behind as Star Trek – and the media landscape in general – moves on. The simple fact is that returning to DVD-quality video after enjoying full HD and 4K feels like a significant downgrade, and the fact that those shows only exist in that way is going to be offputting to old fans and potential new fans alike.
Think of the younger audience that Paramount tried to appeal to with Star Trek: Prodigy. Prodigy leaned heavily on the legacy of Voyager, bringing in a holographic version of Captain Janeway and telling a story that was, in many ways, a sequel to the events of that series. But any of those younger viewers who wanted to see Voyager for themselves would’ve found a decidedly sub-par product either on DVD or Paramount Plus… and that may well have put them off. Had Voyager been remastered and ready to go in full HD, a better connection with Prodigy could’ve been possible.
Prodigy reintroduced characters from Voyager.
Even now that Prodigy has been cancelled, though, remastering Voyager and Deep Space Nine is still worth doing. The fact that fans are already doing it, using only DVDs and consumer-level software, should show Paramount that there’s not only the technological ability to do this, but an audience that wants it, too. Trekkies want to be able to watch our favourite series and episodes in the best quality available, and right now, Paramount isn’t offering that. The corporation could offer it – and many folks would jump at the chance to re-watch Deep Space Nine and Voyager that way. But if not… we’re going to continue to see fans using better and better programmes and AI to make their own versions.
There’s a quotation about new technologies that I think about a lot whenever AI is being discussed: “this is the worst it will ever be.” What that means is that technology improves all the time, and next year or in five years’ time, some of the issues will have been worked out and AI’s capabilities will only have grown. If fans are able to achieve such great results already… who’s to say what will be possible a few years down the line?
Fans are already making – and sharing – AI-upscaled and remastered scenes and clips.
What that means, in my opinion, is that Paramount has a pretty limited window of opportunity. If Deep Space Nine and Voyager are ever to be remastered, now is the time to do so… because at the rate AI is growing and improving, in five years from now any Trekkie who wants to could well be in a position to use AI to watch those shows in 4K or 8K from their old DVDs or even VHS tapes – without needing to sign up for Paramount Plus. Paramount won’t make a penny in that situation.
So the time is now, Paramount! Act fast, and finally give these shows the official remaster that we all know they deserve. With no need to print huge numbers of Blu-ray discs, and with the benefit of new technologies, remastering Deep Space Nine and Voyager won’t be anywhere near as costly as remastering The Original Series and The Next Generation was. Adding those shows, in all their 4K glory, to Paramount Plus will be a significant boost to the platform, and I have no doubt that people would sign up just to watch them – or stay signed up for longer. Remastering will be an expense, sure… but it’s an affordable one, and one that will pay off.
But if you won’t do it… don’t expect fans to wait around. The technology to make it happen is already here, already accessible, and already being used by Trekkies to make our own versions of these great shows. Continuing to ignore this request is going to prove costly in the long run, because if a fan-made version is available in better quality than anything on Paramount Plus… why would anyone sign up for Paramount Plus? Pushing your biggest fans toward piracy isn’t a great business model!
In most jurisdictions around the world, piracy – defined above as the sharing of copyrighted material over the internet – is not legal. Trekking with Dennis does not endorse, condone, or encourage the sharing of copyrighted material. The Star Trek franchise – including Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and all other properties discussed above – remains the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for several main story missions in Starfield.
I was excited about Starfield last year. By the time the game’s big showcase had wrapped up in June, Starfield had rocket-boosted its way to the very top of my most-anticipated games list, and it held onto that position even as Baldur’s Gate 3 diverted my attention. But despite doing my best to give the title a fair shake, sinking more than twenty-five hours into it, and really wanting to love it… I didn’t. Starfield just didn’t have that “Bethesda magic;” the “je ne sais quoi” that has made some of the studio’s previous games into all-time classics.
And I’m far from the only person who feels that way. Despite launching to generally positive reviews from both players and professional critics, the longer folks have spent with Starfield, the further the game’s ratings have slipped. Although there are multiple areas of criticism from writing and dialogue through to the game’s outdated underlying technology, the general consensus is that Starfield is disappointing, shallow, and lacking in the replayability that Bethesda desperately tried to build into it.
An NPC aboard a spaceship in Starfield.
But it’s 2024, and if there’s one thing the games industry knows it’s this: you can launch half a game today and promise to patch out all of its issues later! The dreaded business model that I’ve dubbed “release now, fix later” has firmly embedded itself in the games industry – and Bethesda is no stranger to utilising it. The company’s most recent title before Starfield – Fallout 76 – has received years’ worth of patches and updates, and even though it endured an appalling launch, it’s in a much better state today than it was five years ago. In fact, Fallout 76 is now sitting just ahead of Starfield in terms of average reviews on Steam.
There are some areas of Starfield that patches, updates, and DLC have the potential to improve or fix. In a game all about exploration, being forced to re-play the same handful of copy-and-paste structures filled with nameless, mindless enemies got old fast – so how about quadrupling the number of these structures, creating some unique ones that only appear once per playthrough, and adding new and different types of enemies and loot to fill them. Or how about making at least some of the game’s 1,000 planets genuinely empty, with no pre-built structures at all. That sense of exploration, of being the first person to set foot in a “strange, new world” is what I wanted from a game like Starfield… and it seems like something that could be implemented into the game without too much effort.
It’s hard to convey how disappointing it was to land on a “deserted planet” only to find buildings and bases full of nameless, meaningless NPCs.
Then there’s the game’s main story. It was left deliberately open-ended to push players into New Game Plus – and I firmly believe this was one of the first and most important ideas conceived for Starfield during its creation – but it’s led to a fundamentally unsatisfying end to the game’s main quest. So Bethesda could write a better ending – and a more conclusive one. Who created the artefacts? What was their intention? Could the player character interact with these “Creators” somehow? Again, that seems like something that should be achievable.
Adding in new and varied paths through certain quests is also something that should be doable. A notorious mission in the main quest sees the player character travel to the “pleasure city” of Neon to acquire another artefact, but this quest is about as on-rails as it’s possible to be. No matter what choices the player makes, there’s only one way to get the artefact and complete the mission. It should be possible to tackle a quest like this in more than one way – and adding that in wouldn’t break the rest of the story or other parts of the game. For example, being able to kill the character who has the artefact, or finding another way to escape Neon after the deal goes down are things that would only impact that one quest – and being forced to play it in one specific way isn’t what a lot of folks wanted or expected from a game like Starfield.
This mission offers the illusion of choice, but ultimately forces players down one very specific route.
There are, of course, some things that can’t be fixed in Starfield, no matter how much of an annoyance they seem to be! I wasn’t personally all that bothered by the game’s loading screens when opening an airlock or entering a building – but I know that the loading screens have been an area of complaint for a lot of folks. Starfield is built on the creaking, zombified remains of a twenty-five-year-old game engine, though… so I don’t see a way to remove them. Nor could the game’s fundamental spaceflight problem be fixed; Starfield is built on the player and their ship fast-travelling between locations, so any opportunity for actual piloting or flying is basically gone at this point.
So we need to be realistic about what we could reasonably see from updates and future DLC; Starfield won’t change fundamentally in terms of either gameplay mechanics or narrative. But that doesn’t mean there can’t be significant improvements that could mean the game will be worth re-installing and giving a second chance. And yes, in case you were wondering: I’ve already uninstalled Starfield.
Things like adding better in-game maps for towns and other locations should be achievable.
But here’s the thing: Bethesda basically has one chance to do this.
Many players who tried out Starfield are already moving on. Games like Baldur’s Gate 3 and Cyberpunk 2077′s Phantom Liberty DLC emerged around the same time and have, by comparison, highlighted many of the fundamental weaknesses in Starfield – as well as how far behind Bethesda has fallen in terms of game design and development. Bringing back players like myself who tried and gave up on Starfield – or convincing sceptics to try it for the first time in light of mediocre reviews – is not an easy task.
Phantom Liberty has done the impossible for Cyberpunk 2077, completely changing the way whole mechanics work, adding a massive new area of the map, new missions, and much more. Starfield needs its first piece of DLC to be at least as substantial and as transformative as Phantom Liberty given its shortcomings, and it needs this DLC to be well-received. If not… a lot of those players we’ve been talking about will be forever lost, with Starfield being brushed aside in favour of newer, better gaming experiences.
Phantom Liberty quite literally transformed Cyberpunk 2077.
Starfield is basically a “single-player live service” game. That’s the model Bethesda and Xbox chose to adopt, and we can see inside Starfield just where the paid skins and cosmetic items will appear when they’re ready to be pushed out. But like any live service, Starfield has to be basically good enough to build up a playerbase before anyone should be thinking about microtransactions, cosmetic loot, or paid mods. If Starfield’s first big expansion isn’t good enough, I don’t see the game retaining enough players to make that kind of “ten-year experience” anywhere close to viable.
Look at other games in the live-service space. Whether it’s Anthem, Marvel’s Avengers, or Ghost Recon: Breakpoint, it’s incredibly easy for even massive publishers with huge brands to fail. And there are relatively few titles that launch to such a mixed reception that go on to make a recovery. The jury’s still out on the likes of Halo Infinite and Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League, but to say they’re limping along wouldn’t be unfair. Asking for a single patch or update to transform the fortunes of titles like that seems like a big ask… but it’s where they’re at. Just like Starfield, they’re in the last chance saloon.
We’ll see how much of this promised content for Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League actually gets released…
Gaming is a marketplace – and a very competitive one at that. New titles are being released all the time, and while once-in-a-generation masterpieces like Red Dead Redemption II or Baldur’s Gate 3 are comparatively rare, there are enough good games out there – even in the single-player and role-playing spaces – for players to very quickly move on from a disappointing or underwhelming experience. Most games don’t even get a second chance; by the time developers have been able to address issues and roll out updates, the damage has been done and players have left, never to return.
Starfield is lucky in that Bethesda’s pedigree and Xbox’s sky-high marketing budget will almost certainly grant it a second chance and a second look from a decent number of players. But that second look had better be substantially different and a massive improvement – with changes and fixes across the board. Because there damn well won’t be a third.
Starfield has already had a chance to impress me.
Xbox won’t willingly burn money on Starfield if things don’t improve, just like Electronic Arts didn’t with Anthem or Square Enix didn’t with Marvel’s Avengers. Publishers pretty quickly hit their limit when it comes to supporting a failing game – so Starfield’s life-support can’t last forever. The game sold a decent number of copies at launch, and drove at least some new subscribers to Game Pass, so it’s probably bought Bethesda some time. But that time is finite, and if, at the end of it, the DLC or update isn’t good enough… I can see that being the end of the road for Starfield.
One interesting example here is No Man’s Sky. After that game was poorly-received by a lot of players upon release, Hello Games knuckled down and got back to work. Over the span of years, No Man’s Sky received dozens of updates that brought it much closer to its original vision. But those updates were all free, and players who stuck with the game were rewarded for their support and patience. Hello Games didn’t have the audacity to charge extra for completing the work that should have been done ahead of release… so perhaps there’s a lesson there for Bethesda and Xbox, too.
Some big free updates wouldn’t go amiss!
At the end of the day, despite whatever positive spin the PR departments at Microsoft and Bethesda might try to put on it, Starfield is in trouble. I gave up on the game after giving it more than enough time to impress me, but what should be even more concerning for Bethesda are the reports from folks who stuck with the game to the end – only to say it isn’t worth re-playing. The game’s launch did not go to plan, and the purported “ten-year experience” seems to be disintegrating before our very eyes.
We can discuss how all of this happened, where Bethesda went wrong, or what the worst aspects of the game are. There are already plenty of articles and essays about all of those subjects – and many different answers to those questions. But there is still a glimmer of hope for Starfield, that updates and improvements could bring it closer to the game we were all hoping for. But time’s a-ticking, and there’s one last chance to get it right.
Let’s cross our fingers and hope that Xbox and Bethesda seize the opportunity.
Starfield is out now for Xbox Series S and X consoles and PC, and is also available on Game Pass. Starfield is the copyright of Bethesda Game Studios, ZeniMax Media, Xbox Game Studios, and Microsoft. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Trek: Discovery Seasons 1-4 and the trailers, teasers, and announcements for Season 5.
With Star Trek: Discovery’s fifth and final season due to premiere in just a few weeks’ time, I thought it could be a good moment to look ahead! Season 5 is going to be the show’s last chance to tell a different kind of story, explore under-utilised characters, and potentially lay the groundwork for Starfleet Academy and other possible spin-off projects. It’s also Discovery’s final opportunity to win over sceptical Trekkies – hopefully bringing to a close one of the most contentious chapters in the history of the Star Trek fan community. Suffice to say there’s a lot that needs to go right!
I admit that I have concerns already, even at this early stage. The revelation that Season 5 wasn’t originally written with the show’s cancellation in mind could prove fatal, and last-second re-writes and pick-up shots could end up feeling obvious and tacked-on. Then there’s the premise itself: is the mystery at the story’s heart going to be yet another re-hash of the tired “all life in the galaxy is in danger and only Burnham can save it!!!!” trope?
Discovery has consistently raised the stakes in its stories… and it’s past time for something different.
On a personal note, I’ve been feeling burned out on Star Trek since midway through last year – and even though I still consider myself a fan of the franchise and want to see it succeed, I’ve stepped away from Star Trek over the past few months. I haven’t finished watching Strange New Worlds’ second season, nor even started Lower Decks’ fourth, and I haven’t played either of the Star Trek video games that were released last year despite having planned to do so.
Discovery’s fifth season thus exists in a strange place for me at this time. I don’t feel a great deal of hype or excitement for its premiere, not in the same way as I did for all four of the show’s previous seasons. If I’m being brutally honest with my introspection… I can’t even say with 100% certainty that I’ll watch it as it’s being broadcast, or whether I’ll pick up Paramount+ later in the year for a month or two and watch it then. I’d love to be able to say “stay tuned for weekly reviews,” as I’ve generally enjoyed the process of writing reviews for Seasons 3 and 4. But at this point… I’m not 100% committed to doing that.
A behind-the-scenes glimpse of the USS Discovery’s bridge set.
As I look ahead to Discovery’s fifth season, there are several loose ends that I’d like to see the series tie up, some narrative traps that I hope can be avoided, and a couple of fantasies – that will almost certainly go unfulfilled – about the series tying its 32nd Century setting closer to the rest of Star Trek. It’s these points that we’re going to look at today. I’m calling this piece my “wishlist” for Season 5!
But first, I have to give my usual caveats! Firstly, I have no “insider information,” and I’m not claiming that anything discussed below will be included in Discovery’s upcoming season. This is a wishlist from a fan, and nothing more. Secondly, we all have different opinions about what makes for a good Discovery story. I’m offering my subjective take on what I’d like to see included, and you are free to vehemently disagree with all of the points I raise. Nothing about this is “objective” in any way! Now that that’s out of the way, let’s get started!
Wish #1: A proper ending.
Season 5 will be Discovery’s final outing.
Season 5 is to be Discovery’s swansong, and I’m already deeply worried about that. Comments from people who worked on the season – most notably director and Star Trek legend Jonathan Frakes – have confirmed that last-minute re-writes and extra filming sessions were required to “make the finale into the finale” after news of the show’s cancellation broke. To me, that suggests that Season 5 was not written with the show’s cancellation in mind, and that raises some pretty big concerns about how conclusive and definitive its ending will be.
There are many different ways to bring a story to its end. I’m not, for example, suggesting that the entire main cast should be killed off, nor that the show’s end needs to be explosive and dramatic. But other Star Trek shows have done their best to give their crews a proper send-off – whether it was Deep Space Nine showing its characters going their separate ways, Voyager finally making it home, or even Enterprise’s ultimately disappointing attempt to show the founding of the Federation. Discovery’s characters deserve an ending, in whatever form that may take.
Chief O’Brien left DS9 and headed for Earth in the series finale.
Let’s be blunt: there won’t be a Picard-style resurrection for these characters in twenty years’ time. While it’s still possible that we might see the likes of Tilly or Kovich in Starfleet Academy (assuming that series is still going ahead amidst the neverending chaos of the Paramount corporation), for most of the crew, this is the end. And that end, however it may come, needs to be worthy of the show and its great cast of characters.
At the very least, I’d like to see all of the main characters get an ending to their respective arcs and stories – and if we can stretch things out, there are several prominent secondary characters who deserve that, too. Again, we don’t need to see anything explosive or dramatic for everyone; something as simple as Admiral Vance choosing to retire with Burnham taking over as head of Starfleet could be one way to handle those characters, for instance. One way or another, though, we need to get an ending that feels conclusive… and doesn’t feel like it was written on the back of a napkin in twenty minutes because Paramount’s executives have no idea what they’re doing.
Wish #2: Lower the stakes.
Control threatened to wipe out all life in the galaxy in Season 2.
Discovery has, over its four seasons so far, put the entire Federation in danger no fewer than four times. Putting Earth itself in the firing line at the end of Season 4 was just the icing on the cake… but it’s past time to try something different. Other Star Trek shows have used the “massive galaxy-ending threat” storyline quite sparingly – and that’s been to their benefit. It’s only Picard that’s come close to over-using this trope as much as Discovery.
There are so many stories that can be told in this wonderful sci-fi setting that don’t require such high stakes. Stories can focus on individual characters, factions, planets, and so on without forcibly cranking the drama up to eleven. This is now Discovery’s last chance to tell a story that doesn’t involve some sort of existential threat to the Federation and/or the entire galaxy, and I’d really like to see how Captain Burnham and the other characters thrive in that kind of narrative environment.
The apocalyptic disaster known as “the Burn” was the driving force behind the story of Season 3.
The season’s original premise seemed to tease a mystery – one that could tie into the events of The Next Generation or even the Picard eras, which could be a ton of fun. Unravelling an archaeological mystery, searching for some kind of hidden treasure, and striking out on a bona fide adventure are all ideas that could make for an entertaining and compelling story.
Some of my all-time favourite Star Trek episodes (and favourite Discovery episodes too, come to that) are smaller character-focused pieces, or stories that put exploration and adventure at their core. We’ve seen glimpses of this in Discovery, with episodes like An Obol for Charon in Season 2 and Choose to Live in Season 4, but those stories still came along as part of season-long arcs about imminent threats to all life in the galaxy. It would be great if Discovery could take this last opportunity to tell a story with lower stakes and let us see how the characters we’ve come to know would cope with an altogether different kind of mystery.
Wish #3: Finally explain the events of the Short Treks episode Calypso.
Craft aboard the long-abandoned USS Discovery.
If you’ve been a regular reader for a while, you might remember this particular point from my commentary leading up to Seasons 3 and 4 as well! Thus far, Discovery has taken steps toward embracing some of the plot points from Calypso – including the creation of Zora from a merging of the ship’s computer and the sphere data, as well as the use of the term “V’Draysh” to refer to the post-Burn Federation. But on the other hand, the ship’s retrofit, the galaxy-wide ban on time travel, and the show’s current place in the timeline have all taken steps away from what we saw in this mini-episode.
Maybe I’m one of the last people to still give a shit about Calypso. It was a fifteen-minute mini-episode produced in 2018 for the sole purpose of trying to retain subscribers to what was then still called CBS All Access in between seasons of Discovery. Maybe I should just… write it off. But because Calypso still feels like such an outlier – and a mysterious one at that – I can’t. I want to see some kind of conclusion to its story, and with this being Discovery’s final season, it’s all but certain to be our last chance to get one.
The USS Discovery in Calypso.
A big part of me suspects that Calypso will be brushed aside by Paramount. It seems clear at this point that it was written at a time when Discovery was flirting with cancellation after an unimpressive first season, and could have served as a kind of epilogue to Season 2 with only a couple of narrative tweaks. It also set up Season 2 in suitably mysterious fashion, leaving us wondering about the thousand-year time-jump and the state of the galaxy in the far future.
If left unresolved, Calypso wouldn’t be the only outlier in the history of the franchise – not by any means. Star Trek’s world has grown and evolved over decades, with storylines and ideas falling by the wayside. Maybe it would be too complicated to write an explanation for Calypso in the confines of a ten-episode season that also has a lot of work to do for other characters and storylines that are arguably much more important. But with talk of a mystery that could be centred on the 24th Century… I can’t help but wonder. Could some kind of time-travel be on the agenda? And if so… could the USS Discovery and its computer end up hidden in a nebula for hundreds of years, waiting for the crew to return when the time is right?
Wish #4: A major connection to the Picard era.
The USS Titan.
For two shows in the same franchise that were in production simultaneously for three full seasons, there’s been remarkably little crossover between Picard and Discovery. The inclusion of the Qowat Milat from Picard’s first season has been the biggest, but it feels like both shows missed open goals when it comes to making bigger connections. I don’t want to see Star Trek go down the Marvel route of making every show and film one piece of a bigger puzzle – because that kind of storytelling has its own limitations. But there’s more Paramount could do to connect disparate parts of the Star Trek franchise, even with Picard and Discovery being set centuries apart.
A teaser trailer for Season 5 (which was only shown at a fan convention, as far as I can tell) featured a Romulan scout ship of the same design seen in The Next Generation – according to reports from those who saw it. Combined with what we know about the story’s “ancient mystery,” some kind of connection to the 24th Century seems to be a possibility – and that’s great! Anything that ties into The Next Generation and the shows of that era would be wonderful to see.
A Romulan scout ship in The Next Generation.
But there’s got to be more to it than just a hit of cheap nostalgia for nostalgia’s sake. A successful story that ties into the events of The Next Generation and Picard could do a lot for the languishing Picard spin-off pitch – Star Trek: Legacy. Many Trekkies, myself included, would love to see another series or film set in the Picard era, and Discovery’s final season could help set it up and rally more support.
In any event, this is Discovery’s last chance to connect to Picard. With Picard having concluded its run, perhaps the necessity of such a connection is lesser now than it was a couple of years ago… but I’d still like to see something more. It doesn’t have to be a major appearance by a main character or anything like that – though that could be absolutely phenomenal if handled well – but if Discovery could do something more to connect with its sister show, I’d appreciate it!
Wish #5: Undo some or all of it?
Could time travel lead to a reboot of Star Trek’s far future?
This isn’t something I’m sure I want to see – hence the question-mark! But Discovery’s 32nd Century has certainly been a departure from what we’ve come to expect from Star Trek’s incredibly positive and optimistic take on the future. Furthermore, its place in the timeline casts a shadow over practically every other Star Trek story; the knowledge that the Burn will come along and cripple the Federation is now forever present, and that can have an impact on how future stories are perceived.
For much of Season 3, I wondered whether Discovery’s writers were planning to “undo,” through time travel, parallel universes, or other technobabble shenanigans, the Burn and the post-apocalyptic 32nd Century. Going that route could’ve even tied in with Calypso, the Short Treks episode we discussed a moment ago. It didn’t happen in the end – and Season 3 came to an end with the Burn’s cause being explained and the Federation beginning the slow task of rebuilding.
Time travel and undoing broken timelines has been a theme in Discovery already.
At this point, with two full seasons set in this time period and having been introduced to several genuinely interesting characters, wiping out this version of the 32nd Century would be difficult to pull off from a narrative standpoint. In-universe, however, there are still some good arguments for doing so. Saving the lives lost during the Burn is one, as is saving the future from more than a century’s worth of strife and difficulty. Going back in time could also save Kwejian and other worlds from last season’s dark matter anomaly.
I doubt that this is the way Discovery will choose to go in its final season… but there are arguments in favour of resetting the 32nd Century to bring it more in line with the rest of the franchise – especially if Paramount hopes to make the 32nd Century the setting for other projects. Starfleet Academy seems all but certain to be set in this era, and while there’s something to be said for stories about rebuilding after a disaster… Discovery hasn’t really done much with that idea so far. Maybe it would be better to admit now – before it’s too late – that “post-apocalyptic Star Trek” was a mistake, and find a way to undo it.
Wish #6: A big-picture look at the state of the galaxy and its factions.
The Emerald Chain is one of the only new factions we’ve met in the 32nd Century so far.
Star Trek has built up its factions and their relationships over the course of decades, and only rarely has the franchise “zoomed out” to take a broader look at the shape of the galaxy. But with the 32nd Century still being a relatively new setting, there’s so much that we still don’t know about how the galaxy looks in this era. It would be great if Discovery could shine a light on at least some of the factions that we remember from past iterations of Star Trek, showing us what became of them over the centuries.
Several factions have been name-dropped over the past couple of seasons: the Borg, for example, and the Q Continuum. And we’ve seen background characters from races like the Ferengi and Lurians that indicate they’re still around. But other major races and factions from Star Trek’s past are noticeably absent: where are the Klingons, the Betazoids, or anyone from the Delta Quadrant? It would be great to catch up with even one returning faction and see what position it’s in – and if I had to choose, I guess the Klingons would be the most interesting. Not only has the Klingon Empire been a major faction across Star Trek’s history, but Captain Burnham and the crew had multiple run-ins with them in the 23rd Century.
The Klingons played a big role in Discovery’s first two seasons.
If Discovery could zoom out, though, even just for a few moments, and show us other major players in the 32nd Century beyond the Federation and the Emerald Chain… I’d really appreciate it. It would be wonderful to see how the Star Trek galaxy has evolved over that time, as well as seeing how powers like the Klingons or the Borg coped with the effects of the Burn and its aftermath. With the Burn now 100% confirmed to have originated with the Federation… could that cause tension or even conflict? There’s a lot that could be explored here.
Setting up what the galaxy looks like beyond the Federation’s borders could also be to the benefit of Starfleet Academy and any other potential spin-off projects, giving them something to build from. Discovery’s 32nd Century feels very open-ended at the moment – and that can be a good thing, don’t get me wrong. But beyond just the curiosity of seeing more of the galaxy in this era, there are solid narrative reasons for establishing the status of major factions and races.
Wish #7: Properly explain Dr Kovich and his role in the Federation.
Dr Kovich and Captain Burnham in the first Season 5 trailer.
Dr Kovich is a fun and enigmatic character, portrayed brilliantly by David Cronenberg. But he’s also mysterious to the point of being frustrating, and I’d like to see Discovery finally explain who exactly he is and what his role is within the Federation’s hierarchy. We’ve seen Dr Kovich as a psychiatrist, a military analyst, a commander with the authority to give orders, a teacher or professor, someone with classified medical knowledge, and more. Last season, he told Captain Burnham that he couldn’t accompany her on Discovery’s mission to the galactic barrier because he had “more important things to do,” only for that line to be ignored as the season came to a close.
So once more I’m asking this question: who is Dr Kovich? What’s his role in Starfleet/the Federation? Is he, as I’ve long suspected, the head of – or perhaps even the sole survivor of – Section 31? The latter could be an interesting tie-in with the upcoming Section 31 TV movie.
Could Dr Kovich work for Section 31?
Enigmatic and mysterious characters are a ton of fun. But Dr Kovich has, for me at least, crossed a line. He seems to be too perfect; a master of too many trades and a jack of none. Narratively, he seems to be moved around at the drop of a hat to fill any senior role that the writers need – but with no explanation of how he has all of this classified information and knowledge of such a broad range of subjects. If he was part of Section 31 in this era, a lot of that would make sense.
Perhaps that will have to be my own personal “head canon,” though! Still, with Dr Kovich returning this time, it would be nice to learn more about who he is and what exactly his rank or position is within Starfleet or the Federation. He’s also a character who has the potential to reappear in Starfleet Academy… so if he can’t be given a full explanation or spotlight episode this time, maybe there’s still hope!
Wish #8: Tee up the “next phase” of Star Trek.
A series set at Starfleet Academy has already been announced.
Discovery’s cancellation, if you really think about it, could be a turning-point for the Star Trek franchise. It was the first made-for-streaming Star Trek series, the first fully-serialised show, the first Star Trek series on the small screen in more than a decade, and the first to explore this new 32nd Century setting. Its finale will mark the end of an era – so the question “what comes next?” should be firmly on the minds of executives and producers.
Discovery is bound to do something to lean into or set up Starfleet Academy – I think that’s a given. We already saw a “backdoor pilot” in Season 4, and I think Season 5 could expand upon that, perhaps giving some of the cadets from that episode more of a starring role. But beyond Starfleet Academy and Section 31 – another Discovery spin-off – what else can this final season do to give potential future projects a foundation to build upon?
Season 3 has already set up the Section 31 TV movie.
There are many ways this could go – from doubling-down on characters and themes to killing off half of the cast or even overwriting some or all of this iteration of the 32nd Century. But if Discovery could use this final season to blaze a trail that other shows could follow – without leaving things unresolved or ending on a deliberate cliffhanger – I think that would be fantastic.
Star Trek’s future is up in the air right now, with three of the franchise’s shows all coming to an end and questions over Paramount’s future. Personally, I don’t think it’s impossible to imagine a time in the very near future when Star Trek is once again on hiatus. But a solid final season from Discovery could include something for fans to keep in mind – and for the franchise to return to in the future.
Wish #9: Spend a bit more time with one or two of the secondary characters.
T’Rina and Saru.
The question of Discovery’s secondary characters – and the bridge crew in particular – always feels like a contentious one in some quarters of the fan community. We all agree that Discovery was pitched as “the Michael Burnham show,” but that doesn’t mean there isn’t room to spend a bit more time with some of the other members of the crew… especially as Burnham has arguably seen her main character arc come to somewhat of a conclusion.
It was interesting in Season 4 to spend a bit of time with some of the folks at Federation HQ – T’Rina, President Rillak, and Admiral Vance all made fine additions to the show’s cast of characters, and several members of the crew also got moments in the spotlight. Not all of these character moments have worked as well as they should, perhaps, but I appreciate the effort!
Admiral Vance with his family.
It would be great if Season 5 could find the time to explore someone like Owosekun or Rhys a bit more. Or even to bring back someone like Gray, who was rather unceremoniously shuffled off the series at the earliest opportunity. Now that Burnham is firmly embedded in the captain’s chair, has resolved her issues with Starfleet, and settled her relationship with Book, there’s perhaps more of an opportunity than in past seasons to spend more time with other members of the crew.
Obviously in a ten-episode season with a mysterious main story, we aren’t going to have time for a detailed look at everyone. That’s a shame – but it is what it is! I’d settle for even a single episode with a focus on one of the secondary characters, or storylines featuring a couple of them spread throughout the season.
Wish #10: Standalone episodes and storylines to offset the season’s main narrative arc.
Saving the Abronians in Choose to Live was one of the highlights of Season 4.
When I think about Seasons 3 and 4, my favourite episodes and storylines were actually off to one side, not really part of the main season-long narratives in either case. Episodes like Terra Firma and Choose to Live were among the highlights of their respective seasons, and that’s because they did something that Discovery hadn’t really done before: self-contained episodic storytelling.
Since the likes of Lost and Game of Thrones set the entertainment world ablaze with incredibly popular serialised stories, that’s the only model that most executives have wanted to pursue. But a franchise like Star Trek was built on an older style of episodic storytelling, and that’s something many fans have long appreciated and want to see more of. It’s also, I would argue, why a franchise like Star Trek proved to be so popular in re-runs and on DVD: you don’t need to have followed a whole season-long story, it’s easy in most cases to just pick up an episode or two and have a great time. But that’s a longer conversation that we’ll have to save for another time!
“Carl” in Terra Firma Part I.
Strange New Worlds managed to strike a wonderful balance in its first season. Characters could have season-long arcs, learning, growing, and changing as their adventures unfolded, but each week the crew would be in a different situation, orbiting a different planet, facing a different foe, or tackling a different challenge. This blend of serialised arcs with episodic storytelling was fantastic – and I would dearly love to see more of it in Star Trek (and on TV in general!)
I don’t expect Discovery to fully go down the Strange New Worlds route – as much as I’d love to see it. But there really ought to be time for a couple of standalone episodes, perhaps focusing on other characters off to one side as the ship and crew travel to their next destination. Opening up the season to new and different adventures would be well worth it!
So that’s it!
Captain Rayner… a new character for Season 5.
Those are ten of my wishes for Discovery’s upcoming fifth season. Although I’ve been feeling that sense of burnout that I described earlier, I do fully intend to watch Discovery this spring. Whether I’ll sign up for Paramount+ in April to watch it week by week or whether I’ll wait till June and binge it… I can’t be sure right now! But as I said shortly after New Year when I put together my annual “looking ahead” list, Discovery is a series that I’m looking forward to.
My biggest concern at this early stage has to be whether the series can manage to put together a solid, conclusive ending given that no such ending was originally written. Can re-writes and a couple of days of additional shooting make up for that deficit? Or will the series come to a close in unspectacular or even disappointing fashion?
I hope you’ll stay tuned here on Trekking with Dennis, because there will eventually be episode reviews and perhaps some additional commentary once Season 5 gets going. And when the series has broadcast its final episode, I’m sure I’ll have something to say about the way it ended – as well as perhaps taking a retrospective look at Discovery as a whole. Until then… Live Long and Prosper!
Star Trek: Discovery Season 5 will be broadcast on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available beginning in April 2024. Seasons 1-4 are available to stream now, and are also available on DVD/Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including Discovery and all other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Earlier this year, a quotation from Ubisoft director of subscriptions Philippe Tremblay was doing the rounds. Many news outlets seized upon it, as did bloggers and commentators – and the reaction, at least from what I’ve seen, was pretty negative. Tremblay suggested that players will get comfortable with “not owning [their] games,” and that four-word phrase sent usually sensible critics and analysts into a state of meltdown.
As I state in the title of this piece, the way in which practically all of us engage with and consume media has changed dramatically in the last few years – and that change is continuing. I’ve been through multiple stages of this transition myself with different forms of media for at least twenty years, if not more. It began with music, with digital downloads replacing cassette tapes and CDs. It happened again with DVDs and Blu-ray discs losing out to video-on-demand. It’s happened already in gaming with the move from cartridges to discs and then the decline of optical discs in favour of digital downloads.
And all of that is before we get into subscription services and streaming.
Xbox Game Pass is the first major gaming subscription service… but it won’t be the last.
Twenty years ago, I couldn’t have predicted the rise in streaming and subscription platforms – but now they’re everywhere. Many people, especially younger people, have never purchased so much as a single song or film – they’ve grown up streaming their music and videos. Forget about physical discs or tapes, there’s a whole generation of younger people who’ve never even bought a song on iTunes or paid to watch a film or TV series on demand. Subscriptions have become the way many people want to engage with different forms of media – and it’s easy to see why.
Subscriptions offer a “best of both worlds” approach. Like a cable or satellite TV package, they offer a good deal of choice. And like video-on-demand or a DVD box set, they let viewers choose when they want to watch. Music streaming, too, has these same advantages: an abundance of choice and the freedom to choose what to listen to and when. Audiences no longer have to put up with the rigid schedules of broadcasters and TV channels, while also having access to far more viewing or listening options than they would with CDs or DVDs. For a relatively low price per month, massive libraries of content become available – opening up far more titles than any of us would ever be able to reasonably expect to purchase. This was the original appeal of streaming, and while in the film and TV space there are problems resulting from the “streaming wars,” it remains the major appeal of the format.
Paramount+ is one of a growing number of film/TV subscription services.
I don’t have a crystal ball, so I can’t predict what the media landscape might look like another twenty years down the line. It’s quite possible that further changes and disruptions will have come along, and streaming may no longer be the flavour of the month. But right now, as things stand, it’s the direction of travel for music, television, film… and even gaming. Anyone who doesn’t acknowledge that is simply wrong, and unfortunately for folks who want to push back against it… I think that’s a losing battle right now. Is it worth being aware of the shortcomings of streaming and subscriptions? Absolutely! Is there a reasonable chance of reversing this trend in the next few years, and can we expect people to go back to buying cassette tapes and DVDs? Absolutely not.
It’s no shock to me that gaming is also moving toward a subscription model. The only real surprise, if I’m being honest, is that it’s taken until now for subscriptions to begin to take off. An all-digital product like a video game is well-suited to being bundled into a subscription package, and gamers – who tend to be a younger demographic on the whole – are exactly the kind of tech-savvy people who are already engaging with other forms of media in this way. It makes perfect sense that subscriptions would be the “next big thing” in the gaming market.
A subscription model for video games actually feels overdue!
Here’s the fundamental question at the heart of this controversy: do I, as a player or viewer, need to own outright the media that I’m engaging with? Because answering this question should go some way to explaining why some people are so angry at Ubisoft for this comment, and why others seem to be just fine with it.
I’m happy to watch a movie or TV show once and never come back to it again. I can think of many, many films and TV shows in that category. I watched them, I enjoyed them, but I have absolutely no need or desire to go back to them. Buying the DVD box set of a show like Battlestar Galactica just to watch it once seems wasteful, and while I could re-sell it afterwards, I wouldn’t get most of my money back. I could rent it – as we used to do in the days when Blockbuster and other video rental stores were in every small town… and that’s basically what streaming subscriptions are. Yes, you don’t own the media you consume when you subscribe to a platform. You pay to access it – i.e. you rent it.
No offence, Battlestar Galactica…
For a lot of TV shows and films, that’s totally fine. Last year, for instance, I watched Ladybug and Cat Noir: The Movie. It was a decent enough film; a perfectly enjoyable superhero adventure for kids. But I don’t need to own a copy of Ladybug and Cat Noir: The Movie… because I’m almost certainly never going to watch it again. Paying £15-20 for a DVD, Blu-ray, or digital copy just seems wasteful.
And that mindset also applies to games. There are many, many games that I’ve played over the last thirty-plus years that were one-and-done affairs. These are titles I enjoyed but just see no need to revisit… such that owning them outright, either digitally or on a disc/cartridge, is unnecessary. So if a streaming service is going to come along and let me essentially rent the games that I want to play – while also giving me access to a library so colossal that I could never afford to purchase even one-tenth of the titles on offer – then heck yes. Sign me up!
A selection of “trending” titles on PC Game Pass in February 2024.
When I first started talking about Microsoft’s Game Pass service in 2020, that was how I felt. And I will admit that subscriptions in the gaming space have some bugs and kinks to be worked out – in particular how DLC and expansion packs should be handled. But those are surmountable hurdles, and the benefits of the subscription model, particularly to low-income folks like myself, outweigh the disadvantages. If you asked me right now, in early 2024, what would be the most cost-effective route into current-gen gaming, I would say without hesitation that an Xbox Series S console and a Game Pass subscription is by far the best option for folks on a budget.
At present, there are no titles (of which I’m aware, at any rate) that are only available to people who sign up for an expensive subscription package. That means that players can still choose to purchase – and own outright – any game or games that they choose to. Some developers and studios, such as Baldur’s Gate 3 creators Larian, have indicated that they won’t put their games on any subscription service in the near future – and that’s okay, too. An independent publisher or studio will always have the freedom to choose whether to engage with subscription platforms – and which to sign on with, if any.
Developers Larian Studios have pledged not to put titles like Baldur’s Gate 3 on subscription platforms for the foreseeable future.
Permanently owning media is, if you think about it, a relatively new concept. When films came along in the first years of the 20th Century, they’d be shown in cinemas – but there was no way for the average person to own a copy of a film until really the late 1970s. The same applied to television shows: audiences would be entirely dependent on broadcasters to watch their favourite shows, with no way to purchase their own copy. This was even true of shows that eventually spawned long-running series and franchises: Star Trek, for instance, and Doctor Who, both started off in the 1960s, when viewers could only ever hope to re-watch their favourite episodes when television networks would do re-runs.
Even within my own lifetime, owning a copy of a film or television series was a relative rarity. When I was very young we didn’t have a video recorder at home, and it was only in the late ’80s that my parents purchased a Betamax system, and then later still a VHS recorder. I could count on my fingers the number of video cassettes I owned as an adolescent, and most of those were blank tapes used for recording programmes directly from the TV; even in the ’80s and into the ’90s, the idea of purchasing and owning a vast media library was far from the norm.
Nobody that I knew in the ’80s or ’90s had a collection like this one!
In gaming, too, this idea of permanent ownership hasn’t always been around. Games started in arcades, where players would have to pay to play a game that they didn’t own. And in the ’80s and ’90s, renting individual games and even entire consoles from rental shops was commonplace. I still remember the mad rush of trying to complete a game the night before it was due to go back to the shop!
With streaming and subscriptions growing in the music, film, and television spaces, their arrival in gaming was inevitable. And perhaps in the future we’ll look back on the period of media ownership from the 1980s through to the early 2020s as a bit of a blip; an outlier in a media landscape that has tended to favour a less permanent relationship with audiences. I don’t have a great track record at predicting the future… but that seems at least plausible to me, at any rate!
I don’t claim to predict the future…
I could probably count on my fingers the number of films, television shows, and video games that I’d want hard copies of, because there really aren’t that many that I consider to be the kinds of masterpieces that I need to return to over and over again. There are a great many games that I’m happy to only play once, and that I don’t need to own outright because I’ll never play again. Paying the inflated asking price of £60/$70 for a game in that category feels wasteful… even more so to think that a physical copy of the game would just end up gathering dust on a shelf.
All that being said, I don’t expect to see “physical” copies of games disappear entirely. As we’ve surprisingly seen with the resurgence of the vinyl and cassette markets in music, there’s a hard core of collectors (and hipsters) who long for those slightly archaic formats – and the same will almost certainly be true of video games, too. Many games that began as digital-only products end up releasing a physical copy on a disc or cartridge – Hades, one of my favourite games of 2021, is one such example. And “collector’s editions” of games aren’t going anywhere, either. So for collectors and fans of games in boxes, I don’t think they’re going to entirely disappear. Whether they’ll remain affordable is another matter, of course!
Many modern artists release their albums on vinyl.
Returning to the quotation that prompted all of this, though, here’s what I have to say: I’m totally fine with renting most of the games I play. I can think of several titles from just the past couple of years that I paid full price or close to full price for that 100% did not deserve it, and if I could’ve tried those games as part of a subscription package, I could’ve saved myself some money and bother! For the way I personally play games, subscriptions and renting are perfectly fine. And for those occasional once-in-a-generation masterpieces like Baldur’s Gate 3? I’m happy to splurge!
The way all of us engage with media has changed a lot over the past decade – and it changed in the decade preceding it, too. There will undoubtedly be more changes to come in the years ahead, and it’s entirely plausible that a return to one-off purchases and full ownership will be on the cards. But right now, subscriptions and renting are the way things are going. The transformation has already happened in music, it’s ongoing if a little unsettled in film and television, and gaming is just beginning to catch up. There are drawbacks, of course, and we mustn’t kid ourselves: corporations are doing this for their benefit, not ours. But as someone on a low income, and who remembers growing up as a gamer with literally a few pennies in my pocket, having access to a massive library of titles for one monthly price still feels like a great deal. And if I don’t own any of those titles and can’t replay them if they get taken off the service… well, that’s a trade-off I’m okay with.
All titles discussed above are the copyright of their respective studio, publisher, and/or developer. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
I don’t usually like to cover rumours here on the website, but the growing controversy swirling around Microsoft and Xbox is proving difficult to ignore. If you haven’t heard, a number of reputable outlets have been reporting that Microsoft is planning to make some of its biggest current and upcoming console-exclusive titles available on PlayStation 5 consoles – including the likes of Indiana Jones, Starfield, and the Gears of War series.
This feels like a potentially massive shift in the gaming landscape, perhaps on a scale we haven’t seen for a long time. And I have to admit that it leaves me with pretty big questions about Microsoft’s strategy. What does the company hope to achieve in the longer-term with a move like this… especially after having spent so much money buying up companies like ZeniMax and Activision-Blizzard?
Microsoft spent a lot of money to purchase Activision-Blizzard recently.
Console exclusives suck. Let’s make that clear right off the bat. It would be better for players if every game could be available on every current-gen system with no limits… but that isn’t the world we live in. Nintendo games are exclusive to the Switch, and that’s gone a long way to helping the company shift well over 100 million consoles. PlayStation exclusives have likewise helped Sony dominate two console generations in a row. And Microsoft has been lagging behind since the end of the Xbox 360 era in that department.
But the company has seemed determined to course-correct. Microsoft has spent lavishly over the last few years, buying up the likes of Obsidian, Bethesda, and of course Activision, and using those long-established companies to create new exclusive titles. After launching Game Pass and bringing in tens of millions of subscribers in a few short years, Xbox’s plans seemed pretty clear: develop more and more exclusive games for consoles and PC, and turn the brand back into the powerhouse it was in the 2000s.
Xbox dominated the console market in the mid/late 2000s with the Xbox 360. Image Credit: Mario A.P. via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0
If these rumours of exclusive games going to PlayStation are even close to being true, that corporate strategy is no longer one that Microsoft is pursuing. And to me, it feels short-sighted almost to the point of desperation. Putting a game like Starfield on PlayStation might bring in some cash in the short-term as players who had previously been locked out will be able to pick it up. But in the longer-term… why would anyone buy an Xbox or even consider subscribing to Game Pass?
If Microsoft is willing to put games that it owns on a competing platform, but that competitor isn’t reciprocating, that’s tantamount to admitting defeat and throwing in the towel. Players will quickly realise that PlayStation is the place to be, because it allows them to play almost every title going – whereas Xbox doesn’t. PlayStation exclusives like God of War, Horizon: Zero Dawn, and The Last Of Us have been hugely influential in Sony’s success over the past decade or so, and if games that had previously been only available on Xbox also join the PlayStation lineup… that’s a great deal for PlayStation gamers.
Will we soon see Game Pass available on PlayStation consoles?
So what’s Microsoft’s move here? Are Xbox consoles to be discontinued, going the way of the Atari Jaguar and Sega Dreamcast? Have sales of the Xbox Series S and X been so poor over the past three years that Microsoft is considering getting out of the hardware market? If so… where would that leave the gaming landscape? If PlayStation and Nintendo are the only ones left, that might not be good for gaming and competition in the marketplace.
Sony learned a lot of harsh lessons during the PlayStation 3 era when the Xbox 360 sold more than 80 million units and gave the PS3 a real run for its money. That competition spurred Sony on and led to better things a few years later. With Nintendo effectively off to one side doing its own thing, Xbox has been PlayStation’s main competitor for the past twenty years – and having competition is necessary for a healthy marketplace. I don’t want to jump the gun and write Xbox’s eulogy, but if previously exclusive games start appearing on PlayStation… it feels like a harbinger of worse news to come.
PlayStation had to play catch-up during the PS3 era.
If Microsoft is finding that their current-gen machines aren’t selling as well as they’d hoped, there are other options besides a total surrender or abandoning hardware production. Nintendo ditched the Wii U well ahead of schedule, launching a brand-new machine less than five years later. That could be one route for Xbox to follow. If the Xbox Series S is proving troublesome from a development perspective, retiring that console in favour of the Series X could also be possible. Even just waiting, treading water in anticipation of bigger exclusives in the next few years might be better than abandoning exclusivity altogether for the sake of some short-term cash.
Microsoft has some upcoming games that have the potential to be console-movers. Indiana Jones is one – albeit one that I personally wasn’t taken with when it was shown off a few weeks ago! The sequel to Skyrim is also bound to be a big deal when it’s ready in a few years’ time, and that’s before we’ve looked at some of the franchises and games that Microsoft owns the rights to after its recent acquisition of Activision.
The Elder Scrolls VI could be a console-seller if it’s an Xbox exclusive.
With so many studios coming “in-house,” Microsoft’s future in the gaming marketplace looked to be getting brighter. Game Pass continues to add subscribers, and with subscriptions being the current direction of travel across various forms of media, Microsoft is actually ahead of the curve in the gaming realm; Game Pass is streets ahead of any comparable offering from any other company. Game Pass’ current success could pave the way for a subscription-based future for the Xbox brand. But Game Pass – and Xbox consoles in general – need exclusive titles to make it work.
I don’t really have a dog in this fight; the only current-gen console I own is a Nintendo Switch. But even as PC player, what happens on console has an impact. Microsoft’s seemingly abrupt change in strategy could have implications down the line for Game Pass, for ongoing and upcoming titles, and more.
What will this mean for Xbox?
I’m all in favour of shaking things up in the games industry, but Xbox seemingly surrendering its already mediocre lineup of exclusive games isn’t how I’d have expected – or wanted – things to go in the first part of 2024! And as I said at the beginning, I really don’t understand what it’s supposed to achieve beyond a short-term injection of cash. If Microsoft’s gaming division is so short of money that it needs a few hundred thousand sales of Starfield on PlayStation 5… then something’s gone very wrong indeed.
This is great news for PlayStation owners – assuming that these rumours turn out to be correct, that is. For people who’ve invested into the Xbox brand, though, I can understand why there will be some degree of upset. There’s tribalism, of course, with some Xbox die-hards determined to cheer for “their” console, but that isn’t really what I mean. Stepping back and trying to look at things as reasonably and objectively as possible… PlayStation is looking like a way better deal. If Microsoft’s biggest exclusives join its already impressive lineup, I can absolutely understand why players who shelled out for an Xbox Series X would feel hard done by.
The Xbox Series S and X consoles are still relatively new.
It’s that sense of regret, of having made the wrong decision. By sending their games to PlayStation, Microsoft will be giving that platform a boost and making it the better deal for players – leaving current Xbox gamers and supporters feeling understandably upset. If they’d known this was going to happen when purchasing a new console, PlayStation 5 would have been the logical choice.
We’ve all experienced that kind of regret or envy, even if just on a small scale. How many times have you chosen the wrong line at the supermarket, only to see the other lines moving faster? Or ordered a dish at a restaurant only to see your friend or partner’s plate look way better? It’s those kinds of feelings that I think we can all relate to; this is something that goes beyond merely “Team Green versus Team Blue.”
It could be a good time to consider buying a PlayStation 5…
So we’ll have to watch and wait for official news from Microsoft – as well as an explanation, if this does end up going ahead. I wanted to share my two cents on the subject, at any rate. Console exclusivity isn’t great, but what’s worse is seemingly promising players exclusive titles, using exclusivity as a major selling-point, and then U-turning on it midway through a console generation. Some players will feel that they’ve been left high and dry by Microsoft and Xbox… and the damage that could do to the brand, with some of its biggest fans and supporters potentially souring and turning away, should not be underestimated.
Is a bigger shake-up of the gaming landscape imminent? Will Xbox drop out of the hardware market altogether? Will a reciprocal deal be struck to bring titles like Spider-Man 2 and God of War Ragnarök to Xbox and PC? Is this the end of console exclusivity?
There are some big questions floating around… and all we can do is watch this space. Be sure to check back in the days and weeks ahead, though, because if there really is massive news from Xbox, I’m sure I’ll have more to say.
Xbox Series S/X and PlayStation 5 consoles are available for purchase now. All titles discussed above are the copyright of their respective developer, publisher, and/or studio. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
I have very little interest in the new survival/monster game Palworld. I’ve never engaged with titles like Monster Hunter or Pokémon, so the game just wasn’t on my radar. But an issue has come up for Palworld that I think is an important one not only for the games industry, but for entertainment and media as a whole, and I felt compelled to add my two cents to the conversation.
If you haven’t heard, Palworld has been accused of “ripping off” or plagiarising the long-running Pokémon series. The game uses some familiar designs for its monsters, and although I haven’t bought it or played it for myself, I understand that some elements of its gameplay are similar, too, with players being able to “catch” monsters and use them in battles.
Sheep-like critters with machine guns in a promo screenshot for Palworld.
Nintendo and The Pokémon Company, who jointly own and develop the Pokémon series, have even commented on this, with the latter releasing a statement saying that they “intend to investigate” Palworld and “take appropriate measures to address any acts that infringe on intellectual property rights.” I’ve linked to The Pokémon Company’s full statement at the end of this piece so you can read it in full if you’re interested.
Whether you like Palworld or not, the issue this raises is a genuinely interesting one – and it’s one that the games industry hasn’t really wrangled with for a long time, at least not in public. The basic question is this: can any company claim ownership of, and potentially patent, trademark, or copyright, an entire genre, style of game, or gameplay mechanic?
Do Nintendo and The Pokémon Company have a monopoly on designs and gameplay elements?
The answer should be obvious: no, of course not, don’t be stupid. The Pokémon Company and Nintendo can’t own the concept of a game with battling monsters any more than Rockstar could own the open-world sandbox crime genre, or PlayerUnknown’s BattleGrounds could own battle royale. The developers of PlayerUnknown’s BattleGrounds tried in vain to claim ownership of the battle royale genre, even going so far as to try to sue Epic Games, creators of Fortnite, over the perceived “copying.” That lawsuit went nowhere – and rightly so.
I’m old enough to remember when first-person shooters were literally called “Doom clones.” Doom popularised the first-person shooter in the early 1990s, and on the back of its success, dozens of other FPS titles were developed. But Doom’s creators didn’t lawyer up and try to prevent anyone else from making a first-person shooter at the time, nor did Rockstar go after the likes of the Saints Row series in the mid-2000s.
Doom (1993) popularised – but did not invent – the first-person shooter.
Going all the way back to the earliest video games, new titles have come along that used similar styles, designs, and gameplay elements. Some of these games have gone on to innovate, pioneering entire sub-genres and gameplay mechanics, and if they’d been shut down or prevented from existing by excessive copyright lawsuits or patents, gaming today would be in a much worse place. The history of gaming is one of piecemeal innovation, and of companies jumping on popular genres, innovating, and pushing boundaries.
There were first-person titles literally decades before Doom, with 1980’s Battlezone in particular being a noteworthy progenitor. And there were crime games and open-world titles years before Grand Theft Auto III came along. So in neither case can the developer claim to have wholly independently “invented” something, even if their title was the one that popularised it. That was the fundamental flaw in the PlayerUnknown’s BattleGrounds lawsuit.
PlayerUnknown’s BattleGrounds didn’t win its lawsuit against Epic Games.
Stepping away from gaming, we can look to cinema and even literature for other examples. No one would try to make the claim that only Tolkien should be allowed to write fantasy, or that fictional races like elves and orcs are somehow copyrightable. Nor would anyone be able to argue that the owners of 1927’s Metropolis should be able to trademark the entire sci-fi genre. That isn’t how art and media work or have ever worked.
Look at a film like Galaxy Quest, or a TV series like The Orville. Both lean heavily on the Star Trek franchise for inspiration (and parody), but Paramount wouldn’t have a leg to stand on if it tried to take their creators to court. And once again, that’s because Paramount doesn’t own the sci-fi genre, or even the “explorers on a faster-than-light spaceship seeking out new life” sub-genre of sci-fi. Anyone is allowed to tell their own stories – as long as they don’t use trademarked names or characters for profit.
The Orville pays homage to the Star Trek series in more ways than one.
If Palworld had its own Pikachu or Charizard, maybe Nintendo and The Pokémon Company would have an argument here. But from what I’ve seen, the game’s monsters all have unique names, and while they may look similar to critters from the Pokémon series… so what? You can’t claim ownership of any and all yellow-haired monsters in every video game. That’s the kind of claim that would be laughed out of court.
Maybe The Pokémon Company and Nintendo have been complacent, because there hasn’t really been a serious challenger to the Pokémon series before. Monster Hunter exists in a similar space, as do games in the Digimon series, but Pokémon has been a force unto itself for a long time. Perhaps the sudden arrival of Palworld struck a nerve, or perhaps Nintendo is worried because recent Pokémon titles haven’t been well-received.
I can see why Palworld appeals to fans of the Pokémon games.
But none of that actually matters. Palworld has as much right to exist as any of the 873 Pokémon games, and if its better than anything that The Pokémon Company has done in recent years… well, they’ll have to adapt and do better. They’ll have to make better games, actually finish working on them before releasing them, and maybe even look at some of the features included in Palworld that players have enjoyed. Pokémon has arguably been pretty stagnant for a while, at least from what I can see looking in from the outside, so a kick up the backside from a genuine competitor could be just what the series needs. Complacency breeds stagnation and ultimately decline, but competition can revitalise a flagging series.
Rather than seeing Palworld as a problem to be crushed, The Pokémon Company and Nintendo should view its entry into the marketplace as a window of opportunity. After years of having the monster-battling space all to themselves, there’s now the potential to look at how other developers might handle that kind of game – and even opportunities to learn and grow. But that would take the kind of critical thinking that Nintendo doesn’t always have a knack for!
The Pokémon series has been running for decades, so a challenge and shake-up couldn’t hurt.
Either way, Palworld is here to stay. I can’t imagine that the game will be pulled from sale or forced to be shut down because of a complaint from Nintendo and The Pokémon Company, because any threat of legal action would surely be doomed to failure – as it has been every other time it’s been tried by other publishers and developers. Even if we accept that Nintendo and The Pokémon Company originated the monster-battling sub-genre (which is very much up for debate, as Pokémon itself is a variation on the role-playing game genre), they don’t get to claim ownership of it exclusively. And even if Palworld uses similar designs, visual styles, and gameplay mechanics… none of those things are copyrightable. This argument will go nowhere.
I will concede that, from what I’ve seen, parts of Palworld do look similar to the Pokémon series. And from the point of view of a fan or player, I can absolutely understand wanting to leave it a negative review pointing that out, or even to boycott it and refuse to play it because of its perceived “ripping off” of the Pokémon series. That’s absolutely fine on an individual level – and I can definitely appreciate why some Pokémon fans might see things that way. But that’s very much a personal, individual decision – and one that has no bearing on any copyright law or trademark case!
For my money, Palworld is a title I’m happy to skip. It’s not my thing – just like Pokémon isn’t. But I found this argument to be interesting – particularly when The Pokémon Company itself weighed in. I doubt we’ll hear much more about this; if The Pokémon Company has decent lawyers, they’ll tell them pretty quickly that nothing in Palworld comes close to violating copyright laws. But hey, I’ve been wrong about these things before… and in a way, I’d quite like to see this issue litigated, especially if it ends up embarrassing Nintendo and The Pokémon Company and costing them a lot of money!
You can read the full press release from The Pokémon Company by clicking or tapping here. (Warning: Leads to an external website)
Palworld is out now for PC, Xbox One, and Xbox Series S/X consoles. Palworld is the copyright of Pocket Pair. All other titles discussed above are the copyright of their respective publishers, developers, and/or distributors. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Discovery, Star Trek Beyond, The Empire Strikes Back, and The Rise of Skywalker.
Where do you stand on questions of “canon” in works of fiction? That’s the thorny issue we’re going to grapple with today!
The term “canon” as it’s applied to franchises and fictional universes today comes from the realm of theology, surprisingly enough. The first “canon” referred to the Bible, specifically to which books of the Bible were considered sacred and authentic. It has its roots in Latin, and is etymologically distinct from “cannon” – the large gunpowder weapons that we often associate with pirate ships.
No, not that kind of cannon!
In the context of fictional universes and modern entertainment franchises, the word “canon” has kind of taken on two meanings. Firstly, we have the authoritative list of which stories are the accepted ones in a particular series. And secondly, we have the meaning that we’re looking at in more detail today: how the word “canon” has been applied to individual story threads, narrative elements, and the minutiae of a fictional setting.
As more and more films and television shows have grown and been turned into ongoing franchises by their corporate overlords, the question of canon in its secondary meaning has come to the fore in fan communities. It’s worth noting that some fandoms have been wrangling with questions of canon for longer than others: Star Trek fans, for example, have been caught up in these kinds of debates for literally decades, as have fans of some comic books. Other franchises and fictional settings are new to the debate, prompted by new additions to their series, or in some cases, by corporate decisions that overwrite what had been previously established.
The Star Trek fan community has been caught up in these debates for decades!
Very few people would dispute that a film or television episode produced officially as part of a franchise is “canon.” That’s not really what we’re looking at today – though there are certain exceptions, such as how Star Trek: The Animated Series was “officially” considered to be non-canon for several years. Debates instead tend to focus on smaller story elements – the background of a character, how a fictional technology works, or whether Event A clashes in an irreconcilable way with Event B.
Some television shows – particularly comedy, but not exclusively comedy – tend to play very fast and loose with matters of canon. If a good joke requires a character to act completely differently, or even for an entire setting to be transformed, then these kinds of shows will do it. Why waste a good joke, after all? But other shows and films like to take themselves seriously, presenting their fictional worlds as big, persistent alternate realities in which audiences are invited to lose themselves. It can be jarring for some viewers when a new film or episode comes along that seems to challenge or even “violate” some aspect of what had been accepted as canon.
Questions of canon and consistency matter far less in a comedy series.
In fan communities – or at least, in those of which I’m aware – folks tend to fall into one of two rather rigid and well-defined camps.
On the one side are the “purists.” These people insist that the tiniest minutiae must be respected at all costs, and any perceived violations of canon must be given a satisfactory explanation. Overwriting or undoing an element of a story that had been previously established doesn’t usually sit well with canon purists.
Opposing the purists are the “don’t cares.” As the name suggests, these folks are completely uninterested in whether a story fits with the rules and backstories that have been established; as long as the story itself is entertaining, they’re happy to ignore such criticisms and concerns.
Some characters and storylines attract more criticism than others…
Canon purists will often argue that a story falls apart if the newest chapter doesn’t “respect” or fall in line with everything that has been previously established. On the other side of the debate, the don’t cares will argue that none of that matters and that they’re happy for the writers of a new chapter to take them on a different and unpredictable journey.
So where do *I* sit? What’s my answer to the canon conundrum?
The answer, as you’ve probably guessed, is that it’s a bit more complicated! I don’t buy into the black-or-white nature of this argument, and my position tends to be a bit more nuanced.
There’s no need to get into a fight…
Let’s define one more term: internal consistency. In the context of works of fiction, internal consistency has a fairly literal meaning: within the confines of a setting or fictional universe, basic rules are established that don’t change, in a fundamental or transformative way, from chapter to chapter or story to story.
Internal consistency is, for me, one of the essential pathways to suspension of disbelief. To give a couple of examples: if a fantasy universe establishes that magic works because magic users are born with innate magical power, the writers can’t arbitrarily change that later on to say that magic is actually something that anyone can learn from spellbooks. In a sci-fi setting, if we establish that a machine can travel backwards in time because it uses black hole technology, that also mustn’t be changed later to say that the time machine works by fusing together time-mushrooms in its engine.
The cultivation bay aboard the USS Discovery.
In short, canon matters because basic internal consistency matters. The fundamental building blocks of any fictional setting or world must remain consistent from one story to the next, and can’t be changed at the whim of the writers simply to force a particular story beat to fit. If that story beat can’t fit with what’s already been established because it clashes in an irreconcilable way with one or more of those building blocks, I believe it should be changed or even abandoned outright.
But that isn’t all there is to say.
When it comes to smaller things, like designs and aesthetics, I’m much more forgiving. If characters in a fictional organisation used to wear blue jackets, but in a new story they’re wearing red jackets… that’s not a “violation” of canon in my book. And that extends to smaller story beats, too. If a couple of lines of dialogue two seasons ago established that an event happened “200 years ago,” but a brand-new flashback shows the event happening 100 years ago – and it fits better with the story – then I’m content to let it slide. There are many, many cases where stories have technically “overwritten” something that had been hinted at or even explicitly stated, but the outcome ends up being positive.
Things like redesigns and visual overhauls don’t phase me.
These debates can often be incredibly subjective. Fans can be willing to overlook a change or disruption to canon if they like the outcome or if it takes place in a story they enjoy, even if they’d otherwise consider themselves to be sticklers for internal consistency. Likewise, fans who might otherwise have a more relaxed approach to canon might find themselves calling out inconsistencies or retcons if the story is unenjoyable to them for some other reason.
And it’s worth acknowledging that some changes to canon or retcons have just… worked. Although some Star Wars fans didn’t like it at the time, you’d struggle to find many folks in 2024 who are adamant that Darth Vader being retconned to be Luke Skywalker’s father is a bad thing that “ruined” The Empire Strikes Back. Or Trekkies who’d argue that the way the Borg changed in between their first and second appearances was to The Next Generation’s detriment.
Darth Vader’s revelation in The Empire Strikes Back is an example of a popular and well-received retcon.
Time is also a great healer. I wasn’t wild about Enterprise when it premiered, and some episodes in that show tripped over what had been established in Star Trek episodes set further along the timeline. Many Star Wars fans in the late ’90s and early 2000s felt that the prequel films messed up the franchise’s internal consistency… but those arguments have fallen by the wayside in the intervening years. Don’t get me wrong, you can still find fans who are bitter about these things, but the passage of time has paved the way for many folks to accept the changes that were made.
Speaking of the passage of time, it isn’t just modern entertainment franchises that have had to deal with this issue! Going all the way back to the end of the 19th Century, some readers of Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories were mortified when the character was resurrected after his supposed “death” at the Reichenbach Falls. If these arguments have been raging for more than a century, what hope have we of resolving them now?
Sherlock Holmes’ survival proved controversial with fans in the 1890s…
At the end of the day, I’m happy to admit that I fall somewhere in between the “purists” and the “don’t cares.” Canon is important because a fictional setting needs to be basically consistent from one story to the next. Too many overwrites and retcons erode the fundamental building blocks of a world – bringing the whole story crashing down. I also don’t believe that new writers coming in to a long-established setting can or should have totally free rein to do whatever they want; they are, whether they wish to be or not, constrained to an extent by what has already been set up. If they can’t create a story within reasonable limitations… then they aren’t a good fit for that franchise, and their story should probably be discarded.
Having said all of that, though… I’m also not someone who’s a stickler for the minutiae of canon. If a new writer comes in with new ideas for a fictional world, I’m happy to give them the chance to tell their story and add to our understanding of that setting and its lore. Just because a particular character or event hasn’t been mentioned before… that doesn’t mean it didn’t exist, and there are ways to interpret many stories that can include new additions without feeling like something has been entirely cancelled or overwritten. Retcons and changes can also work incredibly well, representing an improvement on the original story or idea in many cases. We don’t have to look far to find great examples of that.
The Star Trek franchise has some great examples of how changing canon can work.
At the end of the day, I want to be entertained. I return to a familiar fictional setting in part because I’ve enjoyed what writers and creatives have built and want to see more of it – so it can be jarring if a new story changes too many things too quickly, or seems to overwrite something I particularly enjoyed. But at the same time, a strong script, fun ideas, and high production values can win me over before too long. A new story that strikes out in an unexpected direction can keep me on my toes, challenge my expectations, and prove incredibly fun and engaging.
There is a time and a place for canon. Basic building blocks that are key to the functionality of a fictional world, or well-established origin stories for major characters are the kind of things that I feel either shouldn’t be challenged or that have a very high bar to overcome. But smaller things involving secondary characters, or the likes of designs and aesthetics, are absolutely fair game in my book.
Canon represents the “building blocks” of a fictional universe.
I hope this has been an interesting look at “canon.” This is a subject that I’ve touched on in other reviews, articles, and essays over the past few years, and it’s one that I’ve been meaning to delve into more deeply for some time. In fact, it’s been in my writing pile since I first set up my website more than four years ago. I’m glad to have finally been able to get around to it and try to explain where I stand!
Hopefully I’ve been able to get my point across as clearly as possible. This is a big topic, one that could easily be a whole series of articles with dozens of examples and anecdotes! I’ve tried to keep such things to a minimum this time, instead taking a “big picture” look at canon as a whole. But there may be time in the weeks and months ahead to dig a little deeper using some specific stories from across the world of entertainment.
And there’s no shortage of examples!
It’s been fun for me to finally put (metaphorical) pen to paper and tackle this question. Canon is a big deal for a lot of folks in fan communities, and I get that. There have been times over the years where I’ve felt that a story could’ve benefitted from staying true to canon a little more… and other times where I’ve felt that a story played it too safe, or that a retcon wouldn’t have gone amiss!
But I confess that I get a little tired of this black-and-white argument, with “purists” and “don’t cares” caught in a seemingly endless back-and-forth argument that never makes progress. We won’t always agree on what makes a good story – nor even on what the basic needs of a story are. That’s okay, and I share this piece with the world in that spirit. This is my subjective opinion on questions of canon – and nothing more. A lot of folks can and will disagree, and I’m totally fine with that. It’s up to all of us as individuals to decide what’s important and how we wish to approach entertainment franchises and fictional worlds.
All properties discussed above are the copyright of their respective company, broadcaster, distributor, or studio. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Paramount has tried and failed multiple times to get a sequel to 2016’s Star Trek Beyond into production… so it was a surprise to learn that the corporation has tapped yet another writer and director to work on a script. I’m beginning to lose count, but if we don’t include the Section 31 TV movie and disregard – for now – Sir Patrick Stewart’s Picard movie concept/pitch that I talked about the other day… is this the fifth time Paramount has announced a new Star Trek film in just the last couple of years? Or is it the sixth?
At this point, I’m a die-hard sceptic, unfortunately. There have been so many false starts, premature announcements, and just straight-up failures with this project that even when I’m halfway through watching the film I’ll still be doubting its existence! Paramount’s commitment to making a new Star Trek film may be rock solid, but the corporation’s basic competence is in serious question. So I guess what I’ll say is this: I’ll believe it when I see it!
An explosive moment during filming on Star Trek Into Darkness.
It feels odd to be covering two separate Star Trek films just days apart. I’m loathe to call Sir Patrick Stewart’s comments about a hypothetical Picard film an “announcement,” because the more I’ve watched his interview, the less convinced I am that the script he was hyping up is anything more than a speculative pitch. But even so, 2024 has been kick-started with some interesting Star Trek news!
One thing that seems clear from Paramount is that neither of the two Star Trek films currently in development are connected to Picard. One is the repeatedly-failed Beyond sequel, and the latest announcement sounds like it could be a prequel – or perhaps a film set in between Enterprise and 2009’s Star Trek whose place in the timeline will undoubtedly prove controversial! But are either of those concepts worth pursuing? And with Paramount’s dire financial situation and a potential takeover of the company happening later this year… will any of these hypothetical films ever make it to screen?
Director JJ Abrams and Kirk actor Chris Pine during work on 2009’s Star Trek.
The last time we talked about a potential Beyond sequel, I had this to say:
“I don’t think we still need the Kelvin timeline. And if I were in the room, I’d argue that there are better ways for Paramount to spend money on Star Trek than greenlighting a new film starring this cast…”
That was almost a year ago… and honestly, I don’t think much has changed since then – at least not in terms of my attitude to a new Kelvin timeline film, be it a sequel or prequel.
Concept art of the Kelvin timeline’s USS Enterprise.
Midway through 2023 I began to feel burned out on Star Trek. Part of the reason for that is the complicated, downright convoluted nature of the franchise, with different shows all being set in different periods along the timeline. There has been a lot of Star Trek over the past couple of years, and franchise fatigue is definitely in danger of setting in. Given all of that, there’s even less space for another new film with new characters – or different variants of current characters – than there was before.
What Star Trek needs more than anything else is space to cool off. The past few years have been frenzied, with Paramount seemingly greenlighting any idea that came along with little regard for how oversaturated the franchise has gotten, nor for how well the different shows work together. If Star Trek is to survive much longer, then producing fewer shows and films – perhaps with a tighter focus on a single setting and time period – is what’s needed. This scattershot approach of different parallel realities and eras just adds to the confusion of Star Trek as a whole and makes it difficult – if not impossible – to bring new fans on board. And as I’ve said countless times before: that’s vital to the franchise’s future prospects.
Paramount has arguably mishandled Star Trek over the past few years.
The Kelvin timeline served a purpose in the late 2000s and early 2010s. Star Trek and Into Darkness proved definitively that audiences hadn’t entirely fallen out of love with Star Trek – and that the franchise could still do new things even after decades in production. Without the Kelvin timeline films it’s hard to see how Discovery and the rest of modern Star Trek would have been possible. So I don’t want to diminish or disregard the Kelvin films and their place in the history of Star Trek.
However, that’s not the question before us right now. Instead, we need to seriously evaluate whether or not there’s a place for a new Kelvin film in 2024. When considering everything that Star Trek has done since 2016 – which is almost 200 episodes of television across five-and-a-half different shows, lest we forget – what role could a new Kelvin film play? I’m not sure there’s a place for one film in that timeline, let alone two.
The Kelvin timeline is named for the USS Kelvin.
The Kelvin timeline’s big selling point – from a corporate point of view, at least – is its profitability. Although Beyond was considered a disappointment, it still brought in money at the box office, and Into Darkness is the Star Trek franchise’s highest-grossing film. If Paramount is worried about Star Trek paying its way, I can see the appeal a new Kelvin film might have to a faceless suit in a boardroom.
As well-received as Strange New Worlds and Picard have been, they haven’t been able to drag Paramount Plus across the line and into profitable territory. A lot of Trekkies and viewers liked what they saw, but that hasn’t translated into Paramount Plus becoming a must-have subscription. If a new film were to prove successful and bring in millions at the box office, it could shore up Paramount’s finances in the short-term… as well as the corporation’s commitment to Star Trek. That might be the single biggest point in its favour from my point of view!
Strange New Worlds has been well-received by many Star Trek fans.
But when I think about what I’d like to see most of all from Star Trek, a new Kelvin film doesn’t even break into the top ten… or top twenty. There have been some interesting pitches and ideas over the past few years, from Discovery spin-offs to animated shorts. Right now, I’m more interested to see Star Trek explore more of the Picard era – the early 25th Century. That feels like something that has huge potential and could really drive the franchise forward – comparable, in some respects, to what The Next Generation and the other Star Trek shows of the ’90s did.
With the fan campaign for Legacy still doing the rounds and still being talked about almost a year after Picard ended, that’s where I’d choose to focus my energy if I had a foot in the door of the Paramount boardroom! But even if Legacy couldn’t go ahead as currently envisioned, the Picard era is still ripe for further exploration and feels like the right setting for future Star Trek projects.
A new series or TV movie set in the Picard era is very appealing.
So I guess that’s where I’m at. In a perfect world – one where the Star Trek franchise had limitless budgets and creative freedom – I’d say go for it. But when budgets are constrained and there isn’t the time or money to do everything, priorities have to be set – and speaking for myself, as a Trekkie, the Kelvin timeline just doesn’t feel necessary. There’s no compelling reason to return there, and with several prominent characters also taking part in Strange New Worlds – a series that I sincerely hope will continue beyond its third season for several more years – there’s also a narrative risk. Competing versions of the same character could trip over one another, or come across as repetitive and having nothing new to say.
On the practical side of things, after so many false starts and cock-ups I have absolutely no faith in Paramount any more. The corporation has screwed up these announcements multiple times, including in 2022 when a humiliating un-announcement had to be made just days after one of the aborted Beyond sequel ideas had been officially put on the schedule. I’m not convinced at this stage that either of the two films allegedly in development will see a release – or even start filming.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me six times in a row with the same announcement? I’m not even sure there’s an expression for that!
Spock and Kirk in a promo photo for 2009’s Star Trek.
If you want to get excited and hyped at the idea of Star Trek returning to the big screen after the longest-ever gap in between films, I feel ya. I’d love to be able to jump on board the hype train and ride it all the way to Starfleet Headquarters! But Paramount has sapped my faith over the past couple of years, and I’m at a point where I don’t have any confidence in the corporation or any announcements it makes. I genuinely don’t know whether this latest Star Trek film will even come close to entering production.
Despite my reservations about both Paramount as a whole and a Beyond sequel or prequel as narrative concepts, I will do my best to talk about them here on the website. If there’s big news, casting details, or a trailer, I hope you’ll join me for my thoughts and analysis. Just because a new film set in the Kelvin timeline wouldn’t be my first choice doesn’t mean I won’t treat it fairly and give it a chance to impress me.
Still crossing my fingers for that Legacy announcement, though!
The Star Trek films should be available to stream on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the service is available, and are also available on DVD and Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including all films and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Star Trek: Picard Seasons 1-3.
It’s been a while since we talked about much Star Trek news here on the website. I explained back in the autumn that I’ve been feeling burned out on the franchise – to such an extent that I haven’t even finished Strange New Worlds Season 2, nor even started Lower Decks Season 4. There are a variety of reasons why, and I won’t go over the whole thing again. You can click or tap here to read my thoughts on franchise fatigue and burnout if you’re interested!
Suffice to say that Picard’s third season was the last full Star Trek project that I watched, and while it undoubtedly had some highlights and some very strong emotional storytelling, it was far from a perfect production. Although the story of Picard’s third season came to an explosive end, an epilogue seemed to hint at there being more to come for Picard and the crew of the Enterprise-D. I was cognizant of the very deliberate way in which the final scenes of The Last Generation (the Season 3 finale) replicated almost shot-for-shot the ending of All Good Things, the final episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation in 1994. But here’s the thing about that: at the time All Good Things was filmed, Star Trek: Generations was already underway. Production on the film would begin almost immediately after The Next Generation ended… so doesn’t that feel like someone was dropping a hint? Or perhaps making a pitch?
The end of All Good Things…
…and an identical shot from the end of The Last Generation.
Sir Patrick Stewart, who has played the role of Captain Picard since 1987, recently teased that a script for a film featuring the iconic character is in the works. In an interview with Josh Horowitz on YouTube (which I’ve linked to at the bottom of this article and encourage you to watch for yourself) Stewart said that he hoped to receive the script within days.
Although this is far from an official announcement, I wanted to consider what a new Picard film could look like… and whether it’s a good idea!
Sir Patrick Stewart recently teased this idea on a podcast.
The first thing to say is actually something I talked about a lot during all three seasons of Picard. I first came to Star Trek in the early 1990s by way of The Next Generation. Captain Picard and the crew of the Enterprise-D were my “first contact” with the franchise, and that series is what made me a Star Trek fan. So I will always have a strong bond with the show and an emotional attachment to Picard, Riker, Dr Crusher, and the rest of the crew.
I think it’s important to state that up-front because there’s no way I can be unbiased about this. More Next Generation is always going to be something I’m interested in, and another adventure with Captain Picard will never fail to be appealing. As I said more than once when Picard was on the air: this project almost feels like it’s being tailor-made for me!
The Next Generation was “my” Star Trek show!
But I’d be lying if I said that I didn’t have concerns. Across its three seasons, Picard told a muddled, often contradictory story that rarely reached the heights I was hoping for. It was a different kind of show from The Next Generation – which is fine, in theory – but I didn’t always feel that the series even knew what type of story it wanted to tell, let alone executed it well. There are orphaned storylines that went nowhere before being dumped, main characters who just disappeared, and more. It was far from the perfect series.
Season 1 came to a disappointing end, with the series literally running out of time. Season 2 is basically unwatchable for me in its entirety due to how poor its mental health story was, and because of how long it spent aimlessly wandering in a modern-day setting. Season 3 was an improvement in some ways, but its central villain was stupidly wasted and its final act rug-pull brought back the most boring and predictable of factions.
Star Trek: Picard was a mixed bag with some serious narrative weaknesses.
So the overall quality of Picard, and the way in which the character was handled in the series as a whole, has to be a concern for any future project. It may be better to say that, despite some issues, Picard managed to pull out a decent enough ending to its third and final season and kind of… leave it. Don’t risk undoing that ending for the sake of another tacked-on project.
I could quite happily say that Picard’s story is complete, and after the launch of the Enterprise-G he either returned to Starfleet Academy or went into a well-earned retirement, living out the rest of his life with one of his wives at his Château in France. Although there was a tease at the very end of The Last Generation, that scene focused more on Jack Crusher, and seemed to represent a handing of the baton from one generation of characters – and one crew of the Enterprise – to another.
You didn’t skip the credits… right?
And that’s another really great point. Ever since the 1980s, Star Trek has boldly struck out in new and different directions. New characters have been introduced with new starships and settings to explore, and the idea of returning to classic characters in such depth is a fairly new idea. While nostalgia can be a great selling-point, I don’t believe that Star Trek should rely on it to such an extent. There’s a case to be made for the next Star Trek film or series stepping away from legacy characters, at least partially, to focus on telling new stories and expanding the franchise.
If Star Trek had kept telling stories with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy for close to forty years… would that have made it better? Look at the problems facing Star Wars, a franchise that has failed to break away from its original stories and characters. That’s come to feel like an almost fatal flaw in the Star Wars franchise as it doubles down on prequels, mid-quels, and spin-offs from spin-offs. There’s a real danger that too many Star Trek projects focusing on the same handful of characters could stagnate the franchise and leave it with nowhere to go narratively.
Would Star Trek be better today if it had spent decades with the same handful of original characters?
One of the things I was most excited to see, going all the way back to the announcement of Star Trek: Picard, was how the franchise could potentially pass the torch to new characters. Unfortunately several of the new characters created for the show were dropped or written out, but Season 3 ended with at least one – Jack Crusher – still in play and still potentially able to accomplish that goal. And with a fan-led campaign to make Star Trek: Legacy happen as a sequel to Picard, there’s still a glimmer of hope, perhaps, that it could happen.
Where would a Picard movie fit in with Legacy? If it came down to a straight-up choice between one or the other, which would fans prefer? And which would be better for the franchise overall? I feel that Legacy, as envisioned by the fan campaign at least, has the upper hand here.
The Enterprise-G.
A Picard movie would surely be the end of the line for the character. I mean, it would have to be… right? And it could be a successful project both critically and commercially, bringing in either cash at the box office or new subscribers to Paramount+. But it would also be an ending, not so much a launchpad for new stories – which is what I’d argue Star Trek needs right now. Picard set the stage for more Star Trek in the early 25th Century, and if handled well, I really do feel that there’s the potential for the franchise to take advantage of that. It hasn’t happened yet, though… and the window of opportunity may be closing.
As a concept, TV movies and one-off stories are a great idea for Star Trek. If this new script couldn’t sustain a ten-episode season of TV, making a one-off film is a great idea. In fact, it’s something that the Star Trek franchise should try to do more of in future. Section 31 doesn’t need to be the only one! As I said when I made the case for more of the Short Treks mini-episodes, there are dozens of ideas for individual characters and story threads that couldn’t be a full film, series, or even episode that can work in that format. I don’t think anyone would really be opposed to that idea – and it extends to TV movies and films, too.
I’m in favour of Star Trek doing more one-off stories, short stories, and TV movies.
But any time we have that particular conversation, we pretty quickly run into the elephant in the room: Paramount Global’s finances! The corporation isn’t in a good position, and Star Trek’s future budgets are very much in question. We’ve already seen Discovery cancelled and Prodigy sold to Netflix, and there’s been little by way of news about Starfleet Academy since it was announced almost a year ago. Paramount doesn’t have the money to throw at every project that gets pitched, so it comes down to a question of priorities. If any Star Trek projects will get the go-ahead in future, which ones should be at the top of that list? Is a Picard movie even in the top ten?
It wasn’t clear to me from Sir Patrick Stewart’s interview how far along this project might be – nor who was responsible for it. It could be an official project with Paramount’s backing that’s about to enter pre-production… or it could be something a lot more speculative. There’s no guarantee that it would get made even if it were something paid for by Paramount, as we saw in 2022 with the whole “Kelvin sequel” debacle. So maybe we’re getting ahead of ourselves by thinking too long and hard about a project that may never get out of the starting gate!
A Kelvin timeline sequel has failed to enter full production multiple times in the last few years.
Although this isn’t always a comfortable topic, there are also legitimate concerns/questions over Sir Patrick Stewart’s age and thus his ability to take on a challenging new script. One of the weaknesses of Picard, particularly in its second and third seasons, was that its narrative was not well-suited to an older person. Stories threw the character into situations like discovering he had a son, and some of the storylines would’ve been a better fit for a forty-year-old… not someone who’s past eighty.
One of the disappointing things for me about Picard was the wasted potential to tell a story that was well-suited to an older person. Instead of Picard discovering that he had a son and trying to relate to someone who was (allegedly) in his early twenties, a story could’ve been told that was better-suited to an older character in his twilight years. Would a new Picard film go down that road? If so, maybe it would be worth seeing. But if it’s another script that tries to make the character out to be younger than he clearly is… there’ll be that disconnect once again.
Jean-Luc Picard.
If decisions about Star Trek’s future were in my hands, here’s what I’d say. I would absolutely consider any script that featured Captain Picard – or anyone else from The Next Generation. There’s definitely scope to do more with those characters somehow. But at the same time, I’d be careful to balance a one-off project like this with Star Trek’s future prospects. And if it came down to the wire, with tight budgets only allowing for one or two to go ahead… I’m not convinced at this stage that a Picard movie is the one I’d choose to give the green light to. That’s not a definite “no,” because a strong script could absolutely win me over. But it’s not a firm “yes,” either.
I daresay that the details of this script will be kept under wraps for a while. If it doesn’t proceed, we may never know what it could’ve entailed and how good or bad it might’ve been! But if we get any more news – or an official announcement – I’ll be sure to take another look.
Sir Patrick Stewart and Jonathan Frakes during the production of Star Trek: Picard Season 3.
So I hope this has been interesting… and not a horribly incoherent ramble!
I was surprised to hear Sir Patrick Stewart talking so openly about a potential new Star Trek project – not least because Picard Season 3 had been billed as the character’s swansong. Despite its issues, I generally feel that the conclusion of Picard’s final season left the characters in a better place than Nemesis had done in 2002, and in a way I’m content to leave them there, enjoying a break after their last adventure.
But a part of me will always want to see more Captain Picard – and with this script potentially offering the last chance for the character to come back, maybe I’d feel a sense of regret if it didn’t go ahead. If we’d never come to know about it and it didn’t happen, well… no harm done, right? But knowing it’s out there and being worked on in some capacity, and that Sir Patrick Stewart himself seems to be on board with it at least in theory… I can’t lie: a big part of me would love to see it come to fruition.
You can find Sir Patrick Stewart’s interview with Josh Horowitz, in which he discusses a potential Picard movie, on YouTube. Click or tap here to watch the video. The relevant section begins around the 33-minute mark.
Star Trek: Picard Seasons 1-3 are available to stream now on Paramount+. The Star Trek franchise, including Picard and all other properties discussed above, is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Minor spoilers may be present for some of the titles on this list.
Happy New Year! I hope you had a wonderful time on New Year’s Eve ringing in 2024. As we pack away the last of the Christmas ornaments and begin to figure out what day of the week it is, it’s also time to look ahead! As I do every year, I’ve picked out a handful of films, television shows, and video games that I think are worth keeping an eye on over the next twelve months.
And you never know, one of these might make a great Christmas present when December rolls around. Is that the first time you’ve heard someone talk about Christmas 2024? I certainly hope so!
Christmas will be here again before you know it!
2023 was a decent year… at least in terms of entertainment. There were some solid television shows, excellent video games, and exciting films that kept us entertained. Here’s hoping that 2024 can continue the trend!
As always, a couple of caveats before we get started. All of this is the entirely subjective opinion of just one person. There are going to be tons of entertainment experiences to get stuck into in 2024 – so if your favourite doesn’t make the list this time around, or if I include something that sounds atrocious to you, that’s okay! This is far from an exhaustive list, and all I’ve done is pick a handful of titles that appealed to me.
What are you most excited to watch or play in 2024?
It’s also possible that some or all of these titles will be delayed. Between strikes, the pandemic, and other issues, the creative process is more complicated than ever – so no release date can be considered safe or set in stone. Any of the titles we’re going to talk about today could miss their intended release/broadcast date – and some could even slip into 2025 or beyond.
With all of that out of the way, let’s get started! I’ve picked six films, six television series, and six video games that I’m looking forward to in 2024, and I’ll briefly talk about each of them.
Films
I didn’t watch that many films in 2023. As my health has declined, I’ve found it impossible to get to the cinema, so I’m stuck waiting for films to release on DVD or a streaming platform! That being said, I had a blast with last year’s Super Mario Bros. Movie… so I’m hopeful that there’ll be a solid film or two in 2024.
Film #1: Wicked: Part One
I’ve been following the production of Wicked for a while – and the film is due to be released in November, all being well. I was incredibly lucky to see the stage production in London, and I fell in love with the story and its wonderful songs. The musical seemed to be crying out for a proper big screen adaptation, and I’m so glad that it’s finally getting one! The inclusion of Tony- and Grammy-award winner Cynthia Erivo is sure to be fantastic, and I look forward to seeing what Ariana Grande might do with the role of Glinda, too.
At some point in its production, Wicked was cleaved in two. The theatre production is close to three hours long, so splitting it into two films could make sense – depending on how much new content has been added. As long as Wicked hasn’t been over-stretched, I think it should be a net positive, at any rate!
Film #2: Twisters
The 1996 film Twister has long been a favourite of mine. Disaster films are kind of a guilty pleasure for me, and Twister was definitely one of the better additions to the genre from the ’90s. So this reboot/reimagining has piqued my curiosity – though whether I can truly say I’m “excited” about it is an open question! Not every film can be given a sequel, and not every intellectual property can sustain being spun off into a franchise… and for me, Twister is firmly a one-off type of film.
So it remains to be seen whether Twisters can recapture the magic of the original film, or tell a story that will be as enjoyable. But I’m content to give it a chance to impress me, and at the very least I expect to see high-quality visual effects that should make the titular tornado (or might that be tornadoes, plural?) better than ever.
Film #3: Despicable Me 4
Gru and the Minions are coming back for another outing – and I’m quite looking forward to that! I enjoyed Minions: The Rise of Gru a couple of years ago, and while I’m not any kind of super-fan, the Despicable Me series and spin-offs have usually been good for an evening’s entertainment.
Despicable Me 4 will hopefully be more of the same; another wacky adventure with Gru, the Minions, and the rest of the family. I don’t know much about the plot, but it seems like most of the voice cast are reprising their roles. Fingers crossed for a bit of fun!
Film #4: Civil War
Civil War comes along at an interesting time – with political tensions on the rise in the United States. I fear that some of its social commentary may be a little heavy-handed, but I’m willing to give the film a chance. Hopefully it can build up an engrossing narrative either way! Director Alex Garland may not be a well-known name, but he was nominated for an Academy Award for 2014’s Ex Machina, and I also enjoyed his 2018 picture Annihilation. So there’s reason enough to be optimistic!
The film will star Kirsten Dunst, playing a journalist reporting on the “rapidly escalating” conflict. I wouldn’t say I have sky-high hopes… but I’m definitely going to tune in when Civil War makes its way to a streaming platform later in the year.
Film #5: Dune: Part Two
If you’ve been a regular reader for a while, you might remember that back in 2020 or 2021 I said that I was worried about Dune: Part Two! The novel Dune has been notoriously difficult to adapt, and I feared that a lacklustre reception to the first film might’ve meant Part Two would be canned. Thankfully, Dune was one of the best films of 2021 – meaning that its sequel has leapt to the top of my must-watch list!
Picking up where 2021’s Dune left off, Part Two will bring the story to a conclusion. The principal cast from the first picture are all returning, and Dune: Part Two looks set to be one of the year’s biggest sci-fi blockbusters.
Film #6: Alien: Romulus
The Alien series… well, let’s just say it probably has more flops than hits at this point. But I’m still willing to give Alien: Romulus a chance! The film is picking up the baton for the long-running sci-fi/horror series, and its main selling-point right now is that it’s set in between the first two films in the series. There’s scope, perhaps, for an exciting story set in the same universe.
I’m not familiar with any of the cast or crew… but that can be a good thing sometimes! If I’m being realistic, I don’t expect Alien: Romulus to blow me away, but if it’s good enough it might just lay the groundwork for the success of the upcoming Alien TV series or other projects.
Television Shows
Most of the TV shows coming up in 2024 are new seasons of ongoing productions, but there are a few new titles in the mix that sound potentially interesting. 2023 felt like a good year for TV (and streaming series), so hopefully there’ll be more successes this year, too.
TV Show #1: Star Trek: Discovery Season 5
Let’s get the obvious one out of the way first! Although I found myself burning out on Star Trek partway through 2023, Discovery’s fifth and final outing could just be the project that pulls me back in. After four seasons of “the whole galaxy is in danger and only Burnham can save it!!!” Discovery seems ready to finally try out a different premise. It’s unfortunate that the change came too late to save the show – and if Season 5 turns out to be a cut above the rest, we might be lamenting that Discovery’s writers and producers didn’t do this sooner.
I have a specific concern about the series finale – i.e. that it was never written to be a finale, and that worry bleeds over into the rest of the season. This is going to be the crew’s final outing, but if the story wasn’t written that way in the first place… can it be satisfying enough? I guess we’ll have to wait and see!
TV Show #2: Election Night(s)
This one’s a bit “out there,” so bear with me! 2024 is going to be a big political year, with elections taking place in the United States and almost certainly here in the UK, too. Election night programming is incredibly interesting to me, and watching the results come in – often in the middle of the night – can feel quite tense and even exciting.
I find much of the passion and enthusiasm behind individual candidates or political factions to be a younger person’s game; as you see more and more elections play out, the claim of any of them being the “most important in our lifetimes” starts to wear thin! But that doesn’t mean election night programming can’t be fun, and in the United States in particular, there’s a lot on the line. Big questions persist over both the Republican and Democratic parties and their presumptive candidates of choice… so it could be a fascinating night in November.
TV Show #3: The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power Season 2
Season 2 of The Rings of Power was also on my list of things to look forward to in 2023, so it’s fair to say that production is taking a while! After Season 1 had been filmed in New Zealand, production switched to the UK due to pandemic regulations, necessitating some major changes. That partially explains why it’s taking so long… but after a break of potentially two full years, it will be a challenge for the show to pick up where it left off.
Not everyone liked The Rings of Power… and I get that. But I named it my favourite series of 2022 for a reason, and there were some fantastic character-driven stories in the mix – some of which I’d love to see more of this time. With a new production location and several re-cast characters, Season 2 could also be the kind of “soft reboot” that wins over some of the show’s critics.
TV Show #4: Fallout
There are quite a few video game worlds and settings that feel ripe for a big screen or streaming adaptation – and this time it’s Fallout getting the small-screen treatment. The first Fallout games were CRPGs in the late 1990s, but the series was later acquired by Bethesda, who’ve now made or published four 3D action-RPG titles. Fallout is set in a post-apocalyptic future, one in which a major nuclear war has devastated much of the world. But notably, it has a lot of ’50s Americana aesthetic and musical trappings – which have created a unique world ripe for further exploration.
I would expect the first season of an adaptation like this to play things fairly safe – i.e. not to stray too far from the source material. So I think we can expect to see vault-dwellers in blue boiler suits, irradiated mutants, ’50s-inspired designs, and a lot of post-apocalyptic ruins! As to the show’s story, though… we’ll have to tune in to find out!
TV Show #5: Manhunt
Not to be confused with a film or several other TV series of the same name, 2024’s Manhunt focuses on the aftermath of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and the search for his killer, John Wilkes Booth. American history – and the Civil War in particular – has been an interest of mine for some time, so Manhunt is exactly my kind of show!
The story of John Wilkes Booth’s attempted escape from justice is an interesting one; he broke his ankle immediately after firing the shot that killed Lincoln, struggled to escape the Washington area by boat, and was eventually cornered in a barn. The miniseries will focus on the chase – and how federal officials were able to track down the most wanted man in the country. It should be a fascinating retelling of the story.
TV Show #6: Star Wars: The Acolyte
Could Star Wars finally be stepping away from the time period and characters that we’re most familiar with? It seems so, because The Acolyte is purportedly set a full century before The Phantom Menace, tying into Disney’s “High Republic era” that has been featured in a few novels and comics. That alone has piqued my curiosity, as I’ve argued for a long time that what Star Wars needs to do is explore different settings and new characters.
I haven’t been overly impressed with Star Wars on Disney+ so far. The exception was The Book of Boba Fett, which I genuinely did not expect to enjoy as much as I did! But there’s potential in The Acolyte… and I shall be tuning in with my fingers crossed!
Video Games
2023 will undoubtedly be remembered as a good year for gaming as a medium! There were some fantastic titles released over the last twelve months… so how will 2024 compare? My pick for “game of the year” ended up being a title that wasn’t even on my radar… so there could be some surprises in the mix, too!
Video Game #1: Expeditions: A MudRunner Game
MudRunner and SnowRunner are unique titles, carving out their own very particular driving simulation niche. Expeditions looks set to build on the off-road driving gameplay of those earlier titles, while adding a few new features into the mix, too. Off-road driving can be difficult to get right – even in racing titles – and the way it’s been handled in this series so far has been fantastic.
The addition of a scientific element to Expeditions could help it stand out from its predecessors, as will things like piloting a drone. But at its core, driving a variety of off-road trucks and vehicles through incredibly challenging environments is going to remain Expeditions’ bread-and-butter. And I think it’s going to be a blast! These titles have always been fun, challenging, and something a little different – so there’s a lot to look forward to as the series continues.
Video Game #2: Little Kitty, Big City
If you aren’t excited to play Little Kitty, Big City… do you even have a heart? Jokes aside, the game looks adorable! Players will take on the role of a black cat who’s trying to get home after getting stranded in a city, and developers Double Dagger Studio have promised that we can make friends with other animals, wear cute hats, and cause chaos! What’s not to like?
After Stray took the “playing as a cat” idea in a somewhat serious direction a couple of years ago, Little Kitty, Big City looks to be a more lighthearted affair. A bright and cartoony art style feels pitch-perfect for this game, and I’m crossing my fingers and hoping for some cute and adorable kitty cat fun!
Video Game #3: Star Wars: Dark Forces (Remaster)
I’m quite interested to see what Nightdive Studios can do with one of the Star Wars franchise’s best-remembered titles of the ’90s! Dark Forces was a “Doom clone” first-person shooter, one that had a fairly strong story set in between Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. This remaster won’t transform the game, but will make it playable on modern machines and offer things like widescreen support and higher frame-rates.
It’ll be a blast to replay Dark Forces for the first time in… well, a long time! Some recent Star Wars games (and films) haven’t lived up to expectations, so stepping back in time to one that did feels like it should be a sure thing. As long as Dark Forces can avoid being released in a broken state, this feels like a guaranteed hit.
Video Game #4: Open Roads
Open Roads sounds like a title that could offer quite a different experience. Billed as an “interactive movie,” and sporting an art style that looks almost hand-drawn, the game will feature a mother-and-daughter duo on a road trip… with elements of exploration and mystery. Publisher Annapurna Interactive – who are responsible for titles like Donut County and Kentucky Route Zero – promise that the game will feature a “unique and engaging interactive dialogue system,” which sounds pretty fancy!
The clips and images that I’ve seen of Open Roads so far have definitely piqued my curiosity, and I’ll be interested to see what the “interactive movie” feels like to play when it’s released.
Video Game #5: Banishers: Ghosts of New Eden
Hunting ghosts seems to be the name of the game in Banishers: Ghosts of New Eden. The game promises to be emotional and atmospheric, with dual protagonists and a story where player decisions can lead to “dramatic consequences.” I’m always up for a bit of ghost-busting… and as a new property, Banishers might just be a title that stands out in a gaming landscape littered with franchises and sequels.
Developers Don’t Nod have pedigree, having created acclaimed titles like Life is Strange and Vampyr. At least in terms of graphical fidelity, Banishers: Ghosts of New Eden looks set to be the developers’ most impressive – and challenging – title yet.
Video Game #6: Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024
Flight Simulator 2024 is already controversial in some circles, coming so soon after the most recent entry in the series. The current Flight Simulator was supposed to be supported for longer, but it seems as if development switched pretty quickly to a new title instead. Hopefully, though, Flight Simulator 2024 will be able to push through all of that and represent an improvement over an already visually stunning title.
I’m not a hard-core simulator enthusiast, and what I appreciated about Flight Simulator (the 2020 version; names are confusing) was its level of accessibility to the layperson. For professional pilots the realism can be cranked way up… for those of us looking for more of an arcadey experience, it can be dialed back. Hopefully Flight Simulator 2024 will be equally as accessible!
So that’s it!
How did you ring in the new year?
We’ve taken a look at six films, six television shows, and six video games that I’m looking forward to this year. As the dust settles on 2023 and things start to get back to normal after the disruption of the holiday season, there are already some highlights to look forward to. January can feel like a depressing month, sometimes… but there are definitely things to feel positive about as a new year gets underway!
I hope you had a fantastic New Year’s Eve, and let me once again wish you and yours a Happy New Year!
Trekking with Dennis isn’t going anywhere, and across 2024 I hope to talk in more detail about some of the titles discussed above – as well as anything else that comes along and captures my interest! See you out there!
All titles listed above are the copyright of their respective studio, publisher, broadcaster, distributor, etc. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Beware of minor spoilers for some of the titles below.
Where has all the time gone? We’re just hours away from the end of yet another year – and that can only mean one thing: it’s time for my annual End-of-Year Awards! Today I’ll be handing out some imaginary statuettes to some of the best (and worst) entertainment experiences of the year. I hope it’ll be a bit of fun – and not something to get too worked up over!
As always, I have a couple of important caveats. The first is that I’m just one person – and as such, I didn’t watch every film or play every game that came out this year. Titles have to clear two hurdles to win an award, and the first one is arguably the biggest: they had to convince me to try them out in the first place! I don’t have every hour of the day to dedicate to entertainment, and there are a lot of films, TV shows, and games that were released this year that won’t get a look-in because I didn’t watch or play them. They might be fantastic… but they can’t be included this time for reasons that I hope are obvious!
It’s time to dish out some awards!
Secondly, all of this is my entirely subjective opinion! I’m not trying to claim that these are somehow “objectively” the best entertainment experiences of the year and the only ones deserving of an award! That would be silly – this is just my opinion, and you are free to disagree vehemently with some or all of my choices. I share these made-up awards with the world in that spirit.
I’ve broken down my picks into a few categories and sub-categories, some of which have both a winner and runner-up and some of which just have a winner. I’ll briefly explain what it was that I liked (or didn’t like) about each.
So let’s get started, shall we?
Best Short Documentary
🏆Winner🏆 Now and Then – The Last Beatles Song
Published on YouTube at the beginning of November, this twelve-minute short documentary provided a fascinating look at the complicated production of Now and Then – a song featuring performances by all four members of The Beatles. Billed as “the last Beatles song,” Now and Then reached the number one spot on the charts here in the UK, and learning a bit more about how it came together was genuinely interesting.
Now and Then was a demo recorded by John Lennon at his home some time in the 1970s, but the recording was relatively low-quality and wasn’t deemed suitable for release. In the ’90s, the three surviving Beatles got together, and Now and Then was one of the tracks that they worked on – but again it wasn’t able to be salvaged. It’s only in the last couple of years, with the advent of AI and the ability to isolate and separate various instruments and vocals, that the song was finally ready to be worked on. Performances by John Lennon, George Harrison, Ringo Starr, and Paul McCartney were brought together – and the song was finally released.
Best Documentary
🏆Winner🏆 The American Buffalo
I have a review about this in the works – but it’s gotten buried in the pile! Ken Burns is one of my favourite documentary filmmakers, so any new production of his is going to be on my must-watch list! This year, Burns turned his attention to the Bison – or the titular “American Buffalo” – and looked at the history of the species and its near-miraculous survival from the brink of extinction.
Ken Burns and the team at PBS Studios put together a truly engrossing two-part documentary that goes into incredible depth about the history of the species and how humans have interacted with it. It’s a riveting documentary, perfect for anyone interested in the history of the United States, Native American peoples, the “Wild West,” or the titular “buffaloes” themselves.
Best Web Series
🥈Runner-Up🥈 Imperial War Museums
It’s been a long time since I was able to visit the Imperial War Museum in London. Despite its offputting name, it’s worth checking out if you’re in the area – as are the Imperial War Museums’ videos on YouTube. I’m a bit of a history buff, and although some of the channel’s content is simplified for an audience who might not be familiar with the subject matter, I still found that there was a lot to learn and plenty of interesting facts in the mix.
Imperial War Museums’ videos are well-presented and explained, and in particular I’d highlight some of the channel’s short documentaries about the First World War from earlier in the year. I didn’t know that the Imperial War Museums had a YouTube channel, but I’m glad I found it. There are some genuinely interesting videos here that are well worth a watch.
🏆Winner🏆 Food Wishes
I honestly can’t believe that in more than four years of writing here on the website I’ve never mentioned Food Wishes! This is one of my favourite YouTube cooking channels – and one of the longest-running series on the entire platform. Chef John began uploading videos to the platform all the way back in January 2007, which is almost seventeen years ago! And perhaps the most astonishing thing about Food Wishes is how little things have changed in all that time.
This year, Chef John has continued making recipe videos. The format is relatively simple, but there’s plenty of humour and fun alongside the instructional recipes. With well over 1,000 videos on the channel, you’d worry that there might be fewer interesting or appealing recipes… but somehow that isn’t the case! There have been some incredibly mouthwatering creations this year, and I look forward to seeing what 2024 has in store for Food Wishes, too.
Funniest TV Episode
🏆Winner🏆 Worldwide Privacy Tour South Park
South Park is one of the entertainment industry’s great equalisers. Its creators poke fun at pretty much everyone, from politicians and celebrities to whole industries and nations. In Worldwide Privacy Tour, Harry and Meghan – better known as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex – were firmly in the crosshairs. And the episode was absolutely hilarious, lampooning the hapless, talentless duo for simultaneously crying about “privacy” while jetting off to California to live as celebrities.
I’m no monarchist. In fact, I’m a small-R republican, which in a British context means that I’m someone who wants to see the outdated and corrupt monarchy abolished. But even I find Harry and Meghan to be grating, at times – even while I’m pleased that some of their statements and escapades are eroding support for an institution I’d like to see the back of. The pair are among the most privileged people on the planet, but they’re also useless hypocrites. Whether it’s lecturing people about climate change before hopping on a private jet, complaining about being bullied while being a serial harasser of servants and staff, or whining about “privacy” while sitting down for an extensive interview and writing a tell-all book, Harry and Meghan deserved everything they got from South Park… and then some.
Best TV Miniseries
🏆Winner🏆 The Fall of the House of Usher
It’s relatively rare – in this age of franchises, sequels, and spin-offs – for a big budget to be afforded to a one-off miniseries. Netflix’s The Fall of the House of Usher, which is based on the works of American gothic horror author Edgar Allan Poe, is one of the year’s best examples. I don’t usually go for horror, but with Halloween approaching I decided to give The Fall of the House of Usher a shot – and I’m glad that I did!
The miniseries keeps the tense and disturbing atmosphere of Poe’s stories, but changes many of the characters and plotlines, as well as setting things firmly in the modern day. You might think that there’d end up being a clash, but the production pulls out a surprisingly coherent and entertaining story. There are moments of gore and a handful of jump-scares, but nothing too offputting for someone who isn’t the world’s biggest horror fan.
Best TV Series
🥈Runner-Up🥈 Star Trek: Picard Season 3
For the past few years, Star Trek episodes have been afforded their own category when I’ve dished out my End-of-Year Awards, but as I kind of burned out on the franchise midway through 2023, there are a lot of episodes that I just haven’t seen. Picard’s third season was imperfect, containing a villain who was built up only to be discarded, yet another return of an over-used faction, and a story that felt a bit stretched and occasionally muddled. But it also had some incredibly well-executed emotional moments, and I can’t deny that I enjoyed seeing the crew of the Enterprise-D reunited for another adventure.
In the new year – or at some point in the future, at any rate – I’ll talk about what worked and didn’t work in Season 3 in a bit more detail. Because I have thoughts, don’t you know! But for now, suffice to say that Picard’s third season was one of the highlights of 2023… even if it wasn’t perfect. I’m still holding out hope that there’ll be a new Star Trek series taking place in the time period that Picard established.
🏆Winner🏆 Silo Season 1
Silo was an impressive sci-fi series with a distinct air of mystery. I particularly enjoyed its subterranean setting, and the idea that the people in the titular silo didn’t know what had happened on the surface, nor why they were forced to live underground. Playing out against that backdrop was an engaging murder mystery, a struggle for power within the confines of a sealed community, and much more besides.
There were several familiar faces in Silo, including Tim Robbins and Will Patton, both of whom excelled. I greatly enjoyed Rebecca Ferguson’s performance in the lead role, too. A second season of Silo is already in production, and I will be eagerly awaiting its arrival in 2024.
Best Kids Film
🏆Winner🏆 Ladybug and Cat Noir: The Movie
With the major caveat that I haven’t watched Disney’s Wish yet, I want to highlight Ladybug and Cat Noir: The Movie. I don’t think it turned a lot of heads when it was released, but it’s a creditable adaptation of a fairly long-running animated series that offers a new look at its titular heroes. The film could be a great introduction point for someone new to the world of Miraculous, serving less as a reboot than a reimagining of the show and its characters.
The story was easy to follow for younger eyes, but still strong and engaging, and the film had an uplifting message at its core that’s sure to resonate with its intended audience. The idea that anyone can become a hero is always going to be appealing, and the idea of people doing bad things with good – albeit selfish – intentions is likewise important. All in all, a solid film that I enjoyed – and one that I’m sure many kids will, too.
Best Film
🥈Runner-Up🥈 Barbie
I really wasn’t sure what to expect from Barbie. Director Greta Gerwig had pedigree, with titles like Lady Bird earning her nominations for the top awards. But I really didn’t know what she’d do with the world-famous Barbie name and brand. I’m surprised that Mattel, the makers of Barbie dolls, greenlit a film like this – because Barbie really isn’t a film for kids, despite its name and source material. But I’m glad that the film was able to go ahead, because it was funny and clever; a really unique picture.
I daresay Barbie isn’t for everyone; the film can feel quite subversive, challenging the expectations of its audience in places. But it has an important message – and considering that it’s basically a corporate cash-in on a famous brand, that’s actually pretty great. Margot Robbie is, of course, the film’s star – but I’d also say that Will Ferrell was particularly well-cast as the chief executive of Mattel.
🏆Winner🏆 The Super Mario Bros. Movie
I adored The Super Mario Bros. Movie, and although it might seem like a bit of a silly pick, I’m happy to crown it my favourite film of 2023. The film did such a good job of adapting the familiar world of Nintendo’s Mushroom Kingdom for the big screen, while at the same time putting a nice twist on the tired “save the princess” trope. There were cameos and callbacks to many different things from the video games, and a few new ideas that I’m astonished to see Nintendo has failed to take advantage of!
As a film aimed at kids, the main story here isn’t anything groundbreaking. But what there is is just so much fun and is presented in such a bright, vibrant style that I found it impossible not to smile. The Super Mario Bros. Movie is going to become a textbook example of how to successfully adapt a story for the cinema – so other studios should be taking notes!
Most Disappointing Video Game
🥈Runner-Up🥈 The Lord of the Rings: Gollum
Maybe you were never sold on the idea of playing as the contemptible Gollum, but I’d been following the development of this title for years and felt that it could’ve offered something a bit different. You know the story by now, though: Gollum was released in an unfinished, practically unplayable state, and was shredded by professional critics and players alike. I maintain that the game could have found an audience had it been marketed correctly – and, y’know, finished – but unfortunately it wasn’t to be.
As the video games industry seems to be consolidating around relatively few genres and ongoing franchises, what appealed to me about a title like Gollum was that it seemed to be something different. In terms of narrative and gameplay, its developers had a vision for what they wanted to create, and it seemed like something that could have been fun. Unfortunately, for what seems likely to be a multitude of reasons, Daedalic Entertainment lacked the skill, resources, or money to pull it off.
🏆“Winner”🏆 Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
As with Gollum above, Jedi: Survivor was released in a broken, bug-riddled state. The fact that I struggled to play the game even after waiting for several months and after seeing several major patches roll out is shocking, and the blame lies at the door of publisher Electronic Arts. However… there’s more to the Jedi: Survivor story than just bugs. What I found underneath the buggy veneer was a game that was narratively weak and that failed to live up to its illustrious predecessor.
I won’t say too much lest I spoil Jedi: Survivor’s story for you, but suffice to say a major plot point in the game’s narrative felt ridiculously obvious and seemed to be telegraphed from almost the first moment. The return of a major character from the first game was handled poorly, and while I liked some of the customisation options for protagonist Cal Kestis, the amount of these and the way they were unlocked felt ridiculously unbalanced. An open-world setting did not suit Jedi: Survivor, and the game was notably worse for trying to go down this route.
The “I Can’t Believe Anyone Chose To Die On This Hill” Award
🏆“Winner”🏆 Hogwarts Legacy
I was surprised at the number of people who outed themselves as being what I shall generously call “fairweather allies” to the LGBT+ community over Hogwarts Legacy. The game is, by all accounts, a bog-standard open-world affair with a fairly uninspired main story, boring side missions, and a map outside of the main Hogwarts castle that just screams “generic.” The fact that the game is nowhere on anyone’s “game of the year” lists speaks volumes; Hogwarts Legacy turned out to be forgettable fluff.
Which makes it all the more sad and upsetting that people ended friendships and got into massive online arguments over this game. Hogwarts Legacy was not worth the hassle, the hurt, or the destruction that it caused. I don’t agree with the “hot take” that says that anyone who played or bought the game is automatically a transphobe – even though the Harry Potter series’ creator has said, on the record, that she considers sales of the game and all other merchandise as being acceptance and agreement with her transphobic views. But for the folks who chose to die on this hill earlier in the year, and who prioritised such a mediocre game over allyship and friendships… I hope it was worth it.
Best Ongoing Video Game
🏆Winner🏆 Civilization VI
I’ve played quite a bit of Civilization VI this year – thanks in part to the game’s ongoing support and the addition of new leaders. It’s been fun to jump back into the game and find several new factions and leaders to both play as and play against, as well as other updates. Although I’ve played Civilization VI on and off since its launch back in 2016, the game can still surprise me – and there are still plenty of Steam achievements that I’m yet to unlock! I finally managed to win a religious victory this year, though, so I can cross that one off my list!
In addition to new leaders, some of Civilization VI’s updates have introduced climate change mechanics and rising sea levels, as well as imaginary near-future technologies and government types. These are a blast, and stomping a city with a Giant Death Robot that I’ve named “The Danger Roomba” will never not be fun! Civilization VI can be expensive to pick up, and I’m always wary about recommending a game with £100+ of DLC and expansion packs. But for the amount of enjoyment it’s given me this year, I couldn’t leave Civilization VI out.
Most Improved Video Game
🏆Winner🏆 Cyberpunk 2077
A little over a year ago, in early December 2022, I said that Cyberpunk 2077 was a fairly average, unremarkable game that was elevated slightly by a solid story. I felt that the game’s bug-riddled launch actually distracted from its real mechanical flaws – and in a perverse way, that probably helped CD Projekt Red. But a year later, it’s stunning to me just how many of my complaints have been fixed! To coincide with Phantom Liberty, the game’s first and only expansion pack, a major update was released that completely reworked entire gameplay mechanics and systems, improving the game dramatically.
A review of Phantom Liberty is still a ways off, but I hope you’ll stay tuned for my full thoughts sometime in the new year. For now, suffice to say that Cyberpunk 2077 is much closer to that original vision, and a far, far better game than it was a mere twelve months ago. The transformation may seem subtle at first, but when you start levelling up your character and getting into combat encounters, you’ll see a huge difference.
Game of the Year
🏆Winner🏆 Baldur’s Gate 3
If you’re a regular reader, you’ll have seen this coming from a mile away! Baldur’s Gate 3 is an absolutely fantastic game, one of the best I’ve played in years. And to think I only bought it because I was looking for something to play while waiting for Starfield! I had no idea what I was getting into, because I’ve never played Dungeons and Dragons, but I ended up having a whale of a time. The game has an incredibly strong story with some great characters – and fantastic voice acting – but it’s a mechanical masterpiece, too. There are weapons and spells galore, and so many choices to make that really do make each playthrough feel unique.
I’m about to kick off a second run through the game – after delaying it for a while – and I’m really looking forward to creating a completely different character and trying new things. There are two large chunks of the map that I didn’t explore last time around, characters and companions that I didn’t get to meet, and so much to get stuck into that it’ll feel almost like a brand-new game all over again. A thoroughly deserved win for one of the best games of the last few years.
So that’s it for 2023!
Did your favourite win a trophy?
I sincerely hope that you’ll join me for more reviews and commentary in the new year – because I’m sure there’ll be plenty of fun things to talk about in 2024!
2023 has been a solid year, entertainment-wise. The disruption of the pandemic seems to be settling down, and we got some decent films, decent games, and decent TV shows to get stuck into. I didn’t get around to seeing or playing all of them… but there’s always next year, right?
What does next year have in store?
Hopefully these awards have been a bit of fun. I enjoy putting these together once a year, and I think it’s important to show off some of the best and most enjoyable titles of the year. We won’t always agree on which ones should win an award… but that’s okay. There should be plenty of room for polite discussion and disagreement – and it’s in that spirit that I share my choices.
Whatever you’re doing for New Year’s Eve, I hope you have a fun (and safe) time ringing in 2024. I’ve bought myself a suitably silly New Year-themed hat that I shall be donning… as I hang out with the cats and possibly watch some of the fireworks on TV! To those of you who’ve been regular readers all year long, thank you for sticking with me! And I look forward to sharing my thoughts with all of you once more in 2024.
Happy New Year!
All titles listed above are the copyright of their respective studio, publisher, broadcaster, distributor, etc. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Beware of minor spoilers for some of the games on this list.
It’s that time of year again! As I do every year, I’ve picked out a handful of discounts on Steam and the Epic Games Store that I think are worth taking a look at! Getting started with a gaming PC can be expensive – but if you reckon that you can often get relatively new games at a steep discount at least twice a year on platforms like Steam, it can be worth it in the long run. That’s my justification, at any rate!
I’ve picked twenty games that I think represent great value now that they’re on sale, and this year I’ve gone for a mix of up-to-date and older titles. I’ve personally played most of the games listed below; one or two are titles I’m less familiar with or aren’t necessarily “my thing,” but I’m happy to add into consideration for one reason or another.
A fancy gaming PC.
Now for the important bit!
All prices are listed below in GBP and were correct at time of writing. These sales end in early January, at which point this list will no longer be accurate. Prices and discounts may vary depending on where you are in the world. And I’m sure there’s some legalese about refunds, price changes, and the like.
As always, everything we’re talking about today is the wholly subjective opinion of one person only. If you hate all of my suggestions, or if I exclude games that you think are the best of the best, that’s okay! We’re all entitled to our opinions, and I share this list with you in that spirit.
Let’s get into the deals!
Deal #1: Starfield Steam: 30% discount, £41.99
For one of the biggest releases of the year – on PC and Xbox, at any rate – Starfield’s discount feels pretty generous. The game only launched in late August, so to get such a steep reduction after a mere four months makes it well worth considering. Personally, I have mixed feelings about the game itself. Starfield is a big game with a lot of things going on, and some experiences – like building my own spaceship – were definitely fun! But there are also limitations to be aware of; this isn’t Bethesda’s magnum opus by any means.
Still, when it’s on sale I’m happy to recommend Starfield. It could be worth picking it up now, while it’s discounted, and then waiting to see how the promised updates and patches add to and hopefully improve it in 2024. I put Starfield down a while ago (and I’ve actually uninstalled it already), but I’d love to be able to return to it in the future.
The base version of Civilization VI is a mere £4.99 in the current sale, but for less than a tenner more you’ll get all of the DLC, too. I think it’s worth it – especially when you consider that Civilization VI would cost over £100 to buy in full at any other time of year! This is one of my most-played games of the last few years… I’ve literally sunk over 500 hours into it!
Civilization VI is a turn-based strategy title; a digital board game played on random maps. There are a growing number of empires and leaders to choose from, each of which have unique bonuses and play styles. Every single game is different, and even though Civilization VI is now more than seven years old, DLC and updates have continually refreshed it.
Deal #3: Elden Ring Steam: 40% discount, £29.99
Elden Ring is categorically not “my thing.” Souls-like games, with their deliberately punishing difficulty, are just not enjoyable – or even playable – for me… but the overwhelming consensus is that Elden Ring is one of the sub-genre’s all-time greats. Many players picked it as their “game of the year” in 2022, so to get it at a reasonably steep discount just a year later feels pretty generous!
I can’t tell you much more about the game, really… but if you decide to give it a go, I hope you have as much fun as everyone else! I’ll be sitting this one out, but I can appreciate Elden Ring from afar.
Deal #4: Red Dead Redemption II Steam/Epic Games: 67% discount, £19.79
Speaking of games that are considered to be masterpieces, Red Dead Redemption II is on sale, too! Rockstar – the developers of the Grand Theft Auto series – took their signature open-world formula to the late 19th Century, and what results is one of the best games I’ve ever played. Red Dead Redemption II is intense, detailed, emotional, and incredibly fun to play.
With Grand Theft Auto VIstill a ways off – and even further away, perhaps, for those of us who play on PC – Red Dead Redemption II could be a great substitute! If you haven’t played it yet it’s incredibly easy to recommend, and if you have… why not go around again?
Deal #5: Kena: Bridge of Spirits Steam: 60% discount, £12.79
Kena: Bridge of Spirits was my pick for game of the year in 2021, and for good reason! The 3D platformer is fantastic – and deceptively simple. Its story was incredible to follow, and the game was visually beautiful – feeling almost like something you’d expect to see from a Walt Disney film. More than once I found myself just staring at a stunning landscape or vista, almost in awe of how incredible the game looks.
In some ways, Kena: Bridge of Spirits also felt like a throwback to an older style of video game. There are puzzles to solve, 3D platforming elements to challenge you, and at practically every step of the way there’s something to do or watch out for! Narratively, visually, and mechanically, Kena: Bridge of Spirits absolutely excels. For such a low price it feels like a steal – but be sure to pick it up on Steam this year, as it isn’t discounted on the Epic Games Store for some reason.
Deal #6: The Lord of the Rings: Return to Moria Epic Games: 50% discount, £15.84
It hasn’t been the best year for Lord of the Rings in the video game realm. The less said about Gollum the better… but maybe Return to Moria will be the series’ saving grace! For a game that’s only been out for a couple of months, a 50% discount may seem generous – and may speak to the game’s less-than-perfect reception in some quarters. For my money, though, if you set appropriate expectations I think there’s enough going on in Return to Moria to have a good time.
Return to Moria stars the dwarves – and features a pretty basic character creator. There’s base-building, mining, crafting, and most of the things you’d expect from a game that bills itself as a survival title. The addition of online multiplayer could make this a fun one to play with a buddy, and perhaps the addition of friends would improve the experience. Maybe it isn’t the perfect game – but there’s still fun to be had here, especially at this price point.
Deal #7: Ryse: Son of Rome Steam: 65% discount, £2.79
For less than the price of a coffee, Ryse: Son of Rome is incredibly easy to recommend! I paid full-price for the game the day it was released; it was my first purchase for my brand-new Xbox One console. And although Ryse is a relatively short experience, clocking in at around six hours, I had fun with it. At the time I was mostly concerned with its jaw-dropping visuals; graphical fidelity that really highlighted the strengths of what was a new console generation. But there’s a decent story to follow, too, as well as some fun hack-and-slash gameplay.
I took a more detailed look at Ryse: Son of Rome a few weeks ago to mark the tenth anniversary of its release, and you can find that article by clicking or tapping here. For such a low price, you’ve almost got nothing to lose by giving Ryse a try!
Deal #8: Return of the Obra Dinn Steam: 33% discount, £11.22
If you’re looking for a genuinely different experience – visually, narratively, and mechanically – then look no further than Return of the Obra Dinn! The game’s deliberately retro aesthetic helps it stand out from the pack, but that’s just the start. There’s a complex and tragic mystery at the heart of Return of the Obra Dinn, and it plays out in absolutely phenomenal style.
The game’s art style will either grab you or turn you off completely – but I’d encourage you to push through if you fall into the latter camp. It’s a gimmick, for sure… but it’s one that works remarkably well. Return of the Obra Dinn wouldn’t be the same without it.
Aside from its predecessor MudRunner – and upcoming sequel Expeditions – there really isn’t anything quite like SnowRunner! It’s an off-road driving simulation, with trucks and four-wheel-drive vehicles to climb behind the wheel of. There’s a realistic representation of mud and, of course, snow – with vehicles getting bogged down and stuck. Off-road driving in a lot of open-world and even racing games can be way too smooth; SnowRunner is completely different, and driving can be a real challenge!
Most of us aren’t going to go off-roading in a jeep, let alone ever drive a big truck in difficult conditions, so this game offers a unique experience – while at the same time respecting the real-world truckers and drivers who keep society functioning! It’s a blast to get stuck into – literally. And SnowRunner is also a very appropriate game for this time of year!
Deal #10: Banished Steam: 66% discount, £5.09
Banished has become a mainstay of my lists here on the website; I hardly ever miss an opportunity to recommend it! Banished is a deceptively simple town-building game, and it’s a ton of fun. It’s one of those games that feels really easy to get started with… but that’s very difficult to master at the same time. There aren’t a huge number of buildings, nor jobs for citizens… but striking the right balance to keep everyone fed, healthy, happy, and warm is no mean feat!
I always have to point out that Banished was created by a solo developer. That absolutely blows my mind – because the game is so good that I’d be including it on a list like this even if it’d been created by an entire studio! I have a longer piece about Banished, and you can find it by clicking or tapping here if you’d like to read more.
This time last year, I didn’t expect I’d ever be in a position where I could recommend Cyberpunk 2077 to anyone in good conscience! The game’s appalling launch and borderline-unplayable state gave way to a title that was just… pretty average, to be honest. Average in some respects and outdated in others. But then along came the 2.0 update and Phantom Liberty – the first (and supposedly only) major expansion pack.
Most of the mechanical complaints that I had about Cyberpunk 2077, from armour and clothing to police spawning and levelling up, have been fixed, and the addition of a new storyline is fantastic to boot. Best pick this one up on Steam, though, because it’s another case of Epic Games not offering the same discount for some reason.
Deal #12: Star Trek: Resurgence Epic Games: 40% discount, £19.01
Regrettably, I didn’t get around to trying Star Trek: Resurgence for myself this year. I’ve been feeling a bit burned out on the Star Trek franchise in general for the past few months, so that’s partly why. But according to reviews and anecdotal evidence from friends and fellow Trekkies, it’s a great game for fans of the long-running sci-fi franchise. A narrative experience with a strong story in which choices genuinely matter, Resurgence has definitely picked up some positive buzz.
The game was developed by several people who used to work at Telltale Games – the studio behind popular titles like The Wolf Among Us and The Walking Dead – so Resurgence has some pedigree! This is a title I shall be picking up while it’s on sale… and I hope to get stuck into it in the new year!
Deal #13: Gylt Steam: 50% discount, £8.49
When it was first released, Gylt was one of the only titles that was exclusive to Stadia. You remember Stadia, right? Google’s short-lived foray into gaming? Not ringing any bells, is it?
Anyway! Gylt is a surprisingly charming and frightening action-horror-puzzle game in which the protagonist – a young child – must navigate a nightmarish realm while searching for her missing cousin. Seeing things through a younger person’s eyes completely reframes them, and Gylt really nails this aspect of gameplay, giving everything a larger-than-life and unsettling vibe. I’m not usually one for horror titles, but I made an exception for Gylt.
Deal #14: Monkey Island Collection Steam: 59% discount, £20.37
The Monkey Island games are a ton of fun – and the way they’re presented in their remastered form brings them up-to-date. I had a blast playing the first two games in the series in the early 1990s on my first-ever PC – and revisiting them in a new art style decades later was certainly an interesting experience!
The first two games in particular hold a lot of nostalgia for me personally, but the third game (out of a total of five, now) might realistically be the series’ high-water mark. A thrilling pirate adventure awaits ye, should ye choose to venture to Monkey Island!
Deal #15: Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga Steam/Epic Games: 80% discount, £7.99
If you enjoyed playing the Lego Star Wars games (or any other Lego game, come to that) during the Xbox 360 era, The Skywalker Saga is basically more of the same – but shinier! I had a blast with it when it finally launched after several long delays, and while nothing about it feels revolutionary or groundbreaking… it’s perfectly fine for what it is. You know what you’re getting into with a Lego Star Wars game, and The Skywalker Saga is exactly what you’d expect.
I’m not wild about the “character packs” that are sold separately, but I would say that the base game provides plenty of characters to play with and a lot of content. All nine mainline Star Wars films are represented in the game, and characters from all three of the cinematic franchise’s main eras are present. It’s a bit of silly fun, so if you have younger kids or someone to play with on the couch, it’s an easy recommendation!
Deal #16: Jade Empire: Special Edition Steam: 75% discount, £3.74
In between Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect, BioWare developed this underappreciated game! It follows the standard BioWare formula, but it’s set in a world loosely based on China – full of magic and martial arts. I played the game on the original Xbox – where it was a console exclusive – and I was thrilled to see it available on Steam a few years ago.
For such a low price you’re getting a full BioWare role-playing game complete with fun and engaging characters, a story of revenge, and a unique setting. I’d love to see a full-blown remaster of Jade Empire one day… but for now, this version is still perfectly enjoyable.
Deal #17: Forza Horizon 5 Steam: 50% discount, £24.99
I had a blast playing Forza Horizon 5. The Horizon series is the less-serious, more arcadey cousin to Forza Motorsport, Microsoft and Xbox’s flagship racing series. And it’s a ton of fun with hundreds of cars to choose from, a massive open world to drive across in between races, and so many different kinds of races from supercars on racetracks to off-road buggies in the jungle.
Forza Horizon 5 has a really positive and almost uplifting tone to it, one that really goes out of its way to celebrate the different cars on offer. And there really are a lot to choose from! It’s a delightful racing game – and after the disappointment of this year’s Forza Motorsport having so few racetracks, Forza Horizon 5 feels even better by comparison!
The Master Chief Collection gives you the first six Halo titles in one package – and I think it’s great value. I’m more interested in the single-player campaigns – though I enjoyed the first two games for their multiplayer on the original Xbox – but there’s a bustling online multiplayer scene if you’re more interested in that side of Halo.
The consensus seems to be that Halo has gone off the rails with its more recent offerings, so stepping back in time to re-play the first entries in the series might be the best way to enjoy it! The games are all fun, fluid, and fast-paced first-person shooters in an original sci-fi setting. If you’ve been sleeping on Halo, now could be the time to give it a shot.
I didn’t really know what to expect when I booted up Control for the first time – but I had an absolute blast with its eerie setting and mysterious tone. Control is also one of the most accessible games I’ve ever played, with a ton of different features that ensure the game can be played by people with disabilities and health issues. Speaking as a disabled person, I really appreciated that!
Control has a compelling story, as protagonist Jesse searches for her long-lost brother. The human side of the story kept it grounded even as supernatural shenanigans played out, and that was handled particularly well. I enjoyed exploring the game’s world – what seemed, at first, to be a fairly plain office building held a lot of secrets and surprises!
Command & Conquer and Red Alert were great games in the mid-90s – titles that helped to define and popularise the real-time strategy genre. I had great fun playing them at the time – so welcoming them back, in this remastered form, has been wonderful! I was always more a fan of Red Alert than Command & Conquer; I think its factions and setting being based more on the real world is part of the reason why. But both titles are present here.
In their remastered forms, Command & Conquer and Red Alert are well worth playing for anyone who missed them first time around! Not only will you be picking up a piece of gaming history, but you’ll be getting two real-time strategy games that are well worth playing in their own rights, too.
So that’s it for 2023!
Merry Christmas – and Happy Holidays!
Christmas Day is getting closer by the hour, so I hope you’ve done all your shopping! If you get a Steam or Epic Games gift card from a certain jolly man in a red suit, perhaps I’ve given you an idea or two for how to spend it. If not, I hope this has been a fun look at a few games that I like or that I think might be worth your time. There are plenty of titles on sale at the moment, and I tried to pick out a selection of mostly single-player titles – because that’s how I like to play – across a few different genres.
I made one deliberate exclusion from this list that I want to briefly address: Baldur’s Gate 3. Technically the game is on sale on Steam, but I felt that its 10% discount – while generous for a brand-new game that’s just won a bunch of the top awards – wasn’t big enough to warrant being included this time. But if you want to pick it up at a slight discount, it’s my pick for game of the year and I can’t recommend it enough!
So that’s all for now. There will be more to come before the new year, though – including my annual end-of-year awards! I hope you’ll stay tuned for that in the days to come. Take care – and Merry Christmas!
All titles listed above are the copyright of their respective studio, developer, and/or publisher. Some screenshots and promotional artwork courtesy of IGDB. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Minor spoilers may be present for some of the games on this list.
The recent trailer for Grand Theft Auto 6 has got a lot of gamers salivating! We really ought to try and avoid boarding the hype train, but with Grand Theft Auto 6 being the long-overdue sequel to the most successful and profitable video game of all-time, a bit of excitement is understandable! However, the game won’t launch until sometime in 2025 – and probably even later for PC players like me, unfortunately – so until then we’re all facing a dilemma: what should we play?
I’ve picked out ten games that I think could be fun substitutes for Grand Theft Auto 6. I’ve tried to avoid the most obvious pick: Grand Theft Auto V! But I’ve selected games in the same open-world space, with comparable driving and third-person action gameplay, or with a focus on crime and criminality. There are bound to be hundreds of “what to play before GTA 6” lists floating around… so you may have seen some of these ideas already. But maybe – just maybe – there’ll be something a bit different in the mix this time!
Vice City after dark.
As always, this list is the entirely subjective opinion of one person only! If you hate all of my ideas, think they’re too obvious, or you’ve seen a far better selection of games elsewhere – that’s okay! There’s no need to take anything too personally or get into an argument.
I’ve already shared my thoughts on the recent trailer for Grand Theft Auto 6, and you can find that article by clicking or tapping here.
With all of that out of the way, let’s get started!
Game #1: Saints Row 2 (2008)
Running and gunning!
For me, Saints Row 2 is where the series managed to strike the right balance between being a pure “GTA-clone” and the utter silliness and wackiness that would come to define its later entries. There was an attempt to reboot the Saints Row series earlier this year, but unfortunately it wasn’t well-received so I can’t recommend it. But if you don’t mind stepping back to the Xbox 360 era, Saints Row 2 could scratch that open-world crime itch!
Saints Row 2 is comparable to Grand Theft Auto 4 in terms of graphics and gameplay – but with a less-realistic physics engine that seemed (to me, anyway) to make driving a bit more arcadey and fun. It also has a bit more of a grounded story when contrasted with later Saints Row games – there’s no visiting Hell or battling aliens from outer space in this one. There’s an open-world city to cruise around, cars to jack, missions to get stuck into, and basically all of the Grand Theft Auto trappings with a less-illustrious name attached. It was great fun in 2008 – and although I haven’t played it in a while, it’s still a game I heartily recommend!
Game #2: Sleeping Dogs: Definitive Edition (2012; 2014)
Wei Shen in Hong Kong.
Sleeping Dogs takes the Grand Theft Auto formula but puts two very distinctive spins on it. Firstly, the player character is a cop, not a criminal – albeit an undercover cop who seems to have no qualms about breaking a few laws! And secondly, the game is set in Hong Kong, not the United States. Both of these elements help it stand out from other open-world crime games!
You’ll occasionally hear Sleeping Dogs discussed in conversations about underrated games – and rightly so! It’s a fantastic title that was criminally under-appreciated when it was released. The game’s underwhelming sales at launch led to the cancellation of a potential sequel – but Sleeping Dogs is still a fantastic standalone experience. If you play on PC, the game is frequently available at a steep discount during Steam sales, and with the winter sale coming up soon, you might be able to pick it up for less than the price of a coffee. Surely it’s worth a shot for a few pounds or dollars!
Game #3: Expeditions: A Mudrunner Game (2024)
Driving up-river!
You won’t have to wait too long for this sequel to Mudrunner and Snowrunner; it’s due for release in March. I’ve had a surprisingly fun time with Saber Interactive’s off-road vehicle simulation games, so if the driving side of Grand Theft Auto is what you liked the most, I’d happily recommend all three. If you’re sick of racing games and are looking for a different kind of vehicular challenge, Mudrunner, Snowrunner, and the upcoming Expeditions could be just what the doctor ordered!
Snowrunner has several large open maps and plenty of vehicles to choose from – and the off-road part of the driving simulation is really the focus of the game. I expect Expeditions will do something similar – but according to the developers, it’ll also be adding new features like a recon drone, metal detector, and of course, new vehicles!
Game #4: Red Dead Redemption II (2018)
Howdy, partner!
Alright, I suppose we couldn’t put together a list like this without talking about Rockstar’s most recent title! Red Dead Redemption II is, in my humble opinion, Rockstar’s magnum opus – and one of the most incredible video games ever made. If you haven’t played it… what are you waiting for? I’ve only played it once, and I’m seriously considering going around for a second playthrough sometime soon.
Red Dead Redemption II takes Rockstar’s open-world formula to the 19th Century, with an incredible map based on parts of the American midwest, the Rocky Mountains, the Deep South, and more. The single-player campaign features one of the best stories ever told in a video game, with incredible characters and an intense, deeply emotional narrative. I can understand being put off by the time period if you’re craving a game set in the modern day… but give it a shot, especially if you can find it at a discount. I really don’t think you’ll be disappointed!
Game #5: Crime Boss: Rockay City (2023)
Outer space exists because it’s afraid to be on the same planet as Chuck Norris.
I’d argue that Crime Boss: Rockay City was unfairly criticised upon release by folks who’d either over-hyped it or had set the wrong expectations. If you go into it expecting a first-person Grand Theft Auto experience with all of the bells and whistles of a Rockstar game… sure, I guess it’s fair to say it comes up short. But if you look at the game for what it is – a fairly straightforward and linear FPS that’s more comparable, in some respects, to the Payday series – there are more than enough charming features to make it worth playing.
Crime Boss: Rockay City has voice acting from the likes of Chuck Norris and Danny Trejo, and its ’90s setting is something a bit nostalgic. The game is also set in a fictional city based on Miami – just like a certain upcoming crime game that we’re all looking forward to! Crime Boss: Rockay City is reasonably priced, and didn’t try to overcharge. That being said, it could well be available at a discount when holiday sales get going this month – so keep an eye on it!
Game #6: Cyberpunk 2077 + Phantom Liberty (2020; 2023)
The view from V’s apartment.
As I said recently, I never thought I’d be in a position where I could recommend Cyberpunk 2077 to anyone in good conscience! However, the addition of the game’s big 2.0 update and the Phantom Liberty DLC has been a game-changer – quite literally! Cyberpunk 2077 had been slowly but surely rebuilding its reputation after a disastrous launch three years ago, and by the time I got around to fully playing through it, the worst and most egregious of the bugs and glitches had been fixed. But the 2.0 update and Phantom Liberty have genuinely transformed the experience.
Many of the complaints that I had about Cyberpunk 2077′s gameplay – from the way clothing and armour worked to how police would randomly spawn in Night City – have been addressed and completely fixed, and the addition of a new story campaign has been fantastic, too. I can understand not wanting to play the game or to support a developer who behaved deceitfully – and we should never forget how CD Projekt Red acted in the run-up to the game’s release. But if you haven’t played Cyberpunk 2077 yet… you are honestly missing out on a great story and a fun experience.
Game #7: Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (2002)
Protagonist Tommy Vercetti.
Is this one too obvious? With a return to Vice City on the cards in 2025, it could be fun to step back in time to see its first appearance! I really enjoyed Vice City at the time – it felt like a step up from Grand Theft Auto III with a bigger map, more vehicles, and a fully-voiced protagonist. I’d go so far as to say that Vice City’s homage to the likes of Scarface and Miami Vice has me genuinely questioning how well Grand Theft Auto 6 will work when it takes the iconic Miami-inspired city out of the ’80s and into the modern day.
If you grew up on Grand Theft Auto V and other games of that generation, stepping back to Vice City could feel like a downgrade – and I fully appreciate that. But the game has a fun story, and if you can overlook the admittedly outdated graphics and the technological limitations that come with a two-decade-old game, it’s absolutely worth playing. I had a blast with it in 2002 – and knowing that that was more than twenty years ago makes me feel absolutely fucking ancient!
Game #8: Shenmue I & II (1999; 2001)
A promo poster showing some of the games’ characters.
Before Grand Theft Auto III came along, the original Shenmue on the Dreamcast was an early open-world pioneer. In some ways, its world is more detailed than even Grand Theft Auto V’s, with a day-night cycle that actually matters to characters’ schedules, dynamic weather, mini-games, and more. I absolutely adored Shenmue back when I owned a Dreamcast – and I never miss an opportunity to recommend the game to players who might’ve missed it when it was new.
Shenmue tells a compelling story of revenge. Protagonist Ryo Hazuki must track down the man who murdered his father, and his quest takes him from his home town in Japan across the sea to Hong Kong and beyond. It’s a relatively slow-paced game with a lot of dialogue and investigating, but these sections are broken up by intense hand-to-hand combat battles that use a variety of martial arts moves, as well as quick-time events… which Shenmue can claim to have invented. For better or worse! Both games are available in one package, and this could be another one to add to your wishlist and keep an eye on.
Game #9: Mafia: Definitive Edition (2002; 2020)
Promo screenshot of Mafia: Definitive Edition.
When I first played Mafia on the original Xbox, I thought it was basically going to be “Grand Theft Auto in the ’30s” – but that hardly does it justice. The game – and its two sequels – have been remade from the ground up in recent years, putting to shame Rockstar’s appalling Grand Theft Auto III Trilogy “remaster” from a couple of years ago. Of the three, the original Mafia is probably the title I’d recommend most highly – but the entire trilogy can be picked up as one set.
All of the elements of a Grand Theft Auto game are present, but the ’30s setting and heavy focus on the titular mob makes for a completely different kind of story. Many of the gameplay elements will be familiar, but different and distinct enough to make this open-world crime title stand out from the crowd. I enjoyed the story of Tommy Angelo, a “made man” in the mob, and Mafia: Definitive Edition is an easy game to recommend to any fan of the GTA series.
Game #10: Baldur’s Gate 3 (2023)
Ready to roll some dice?
I know, I know: this one’s a bit “out there,” as Baldur’s Gate 3 seems to have very little in common with the Grand Theft Auto series. It’s a completely different style of game – but as players, we’re willing and able to try out new experiences, right? If you’re at all interested in games with incredibly strong and compelling narratives, give Baldur’s Gate 3 a chance to show you why it’s my “game of the year.”
A turn-based role-playing game with a branching storyline, incredibly fun characters, and one of the best character creators I’ve ever seen, Baldur’s Gate 3 seemed to come out of nowhere this year and completely blew me away. I had an absolute blast playing it this summer and autumn, and even after sinking more than eighty-five hours into a single playthrough, there are characters I haven’t met, whole areas of the map that I missed and didn’t explore, and so much more to try! I really need to start that second playthrough sometime soon!
So that’s it!
Characters on the beach as seen in the Grand Theft Auto 6 trailer.
We’ve taken a look at ten games to play while you wait for Grand Theft Auto 6. I hope I managed to pick one or two that you might not have been expecting! I’m sure I’m not the only one putting together lists or compilations like this one; there’s a lot of buzz around the next Grand Theft Auto title, and people are definitely going to be looking around for comparable experiences in the meantime. If I helped even one person find one game to try, then I’ve done my job and contributed something positive to the discussion!
Because I play on PC – and because Rockstar, despite its insane financial resources, is cheaping out on Grand Theft Auto 6′s PC release – it might be 2026 or even 2027 before I’ll be able to get my hands on it. I might not live that long… but if I do, I hope you’ll swing by Trekking with Dennis for a review! If there’s significant news about the game between now and then, I’ll do my best to cover it and discuss it here on the website. And if you missed it, you can find everything I had to say about the December 2023 trailer by clicking or tapping here.
Have fun out there – and happy gaming!
Grand Theft Auto 6 is currently in development and will be released on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series S/X in 2025. No PC release date has been set. All titles discussed above are the copyright of their respective studio, developer, and/or publisher. Some promotional screenshots courtesy of IGDB. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
If you missed it, the so-called Game “Awards” was broadcast a few days ago. I don’t usually pay a lot of attention to the event – I have my own End-of-Year Awards to prepare for, after all! – but one particularly striking image has come out of the highly-commercial event, and I wanted to share my two cents.
Overshadowing the awards ceremony itself, and even many of the award winners, was a simple phrase that was shown on a massive prompt facing the stage: “Please Wrap It Up.” After being given as little as thirty seconds to speak upon receiving an award, the message would be displayed to developers and award-winners – before music would begin to play and they’d be ushered off-stage. Out of the entire three-hour broadcast, barely ten minutes was given to the award-winners themselves – who are, surely, supposed to be the stars of any awards ceremony. The rest of the time was dedicated to advertisements, trailers, speeches by the presenters, and even musical acts. Some awards weren’t even presented at all, being skipped over in a mere couple of seconds.
The now-infamous sign.
I’m far from the only person to have noticed this, and that’s surely because the Game “Awards” has become incredibly unbalanced. By prioritising trailers and presenters plugging upcoming games live on stage over the actual awards, the Game “Awards” is in danger of losing its audience. People turned up hoping to see their favourite titles of the year being honoured, not ushered off-stage after thirty seconds to make way for an incoherent ramble from an overhyped developer about his latest (completely unseen) title. Yes, I’m talking about Hideo Kojima. Or to make way for yet another trailer or commercial – practically all of which, this year, were entirely CGI creations that didn’t show any gameplay.
There’s a line to walk here. I think a lot of folks would agree that the likes of the Academy Awards and Golden Globes, which honour the best films of the year, can be pretentious and can feel like an industry congratulating itself and inflating the egos of its stars a little too much. Fewer and fewer people pay attention to the Oscars and Golden Globes as a result; those broadcasts have been losing viewers by the boatload over the past few years.
Nicolas Cage at the 1997 Oscars.
But would more people tune in to the Oscars if half of the awards weren’t presented on-screen, actors and directors were given less time to speak, and the broadcast was overstuffed with adverts and trailers? I mean, more than half of the Game “Awards” three-hour presentation consisted of trailers and adverts. That seems excessive, and there has got to be a way to strike a better balance.
The creators and producers of the Game “Awards” are trying to frame the event as video gaming’s equivalent to the Oscars or the Golden Globes… but if the games industry wants that kind of prestige, the ceremony has to be handled better. Right now, it’s an overblown advertisement – worse, somehow, than the likes of E3, because at least with E3 I knew from the start what I was getting into. The Game “Awards,” by putting its emphasis on the statuettes it plans to hand out, feels deliberately dishonest in its marketing. But at least it has that in common, rather ironically, with many of the video games it advertises.
Look, it’s a new Jurassic Park game!
It feels incredibly disrespectful to developers to invite them to a fancy ceremony under the guise of potentially receiving an award – only to then give them in some cases literally no time whatsoever on the stage to accept that award. If these awards are, as the organisers would like you to believe, the most prestigious in the industry… shouldn’t they want to see people receiving them? Shouldn’t that part of the broadcast be the biggest deal? After all, if receiving a Game Award is so unimportant that it’s relegated to a footnote in its own live presentation, why should anyone give a shit about who the winners or nominees are? If the titular trophies are so meaningless to the Game “Awards” itself… what’s the point?
I don’t like to throw the word “scam” around lightly; I think too many people do that these days, leading to the word’s impact and severity being diminished. But if you entice audiences to turn up to your event under false pretences… we’re definitely getting close to “scam” territory. The Game “Awards” pretends to be an Oscars-style ceremony with fancy suits and statuettes, then it flips the script on viewers and shows them basically two-plus hours of ads and barely ten minutes of actual award-winners. What else can we call such duplicity?
Geoff Keighly, principal organiser and presenter of the Game “Awards.”
Maybe some folks like tuning in to watch the trailers – and that’s okay. I like a good trailer as much as the next person, and it can be fun to look ahead to games that we might hope to enjoy in the months and years to come. Some of these trailers can be well-made, with creative visual effects, great soundtracks, celebrity endorsements, and much more. But that isn’t the point I’m making. If I choose to watch ads and trailers, that’s up to me and I can do that all I want. But if the Game “Awards” pretends to be an awards ceremony just to trick me into watching two hours of ads… well, I don’t appreciate that.
And let’s be honest: that’s exactly what’s happening here. The organisers of the Game “Awards” would ditch the statuettes in a heartbeat and make the entire event nothing but trailers, celebrities, and advertisements if they could get away with it. They don’t give the tiniest of shits about handing out awards or honouring the best and most creative titles of the year – all they care about is selling more and more advertising space and making a metric fuckton of cash, and they’ve done that by diminishing and minimising the actual awards portion of the broadcast so much that it feels like a footnote.
Baldur’s Gate 3 won “game of the year.”
So what’s the solution? I don’t really have one, if I’m honest. Maybe the complaints received about the “Please Wrap It Up” screen will prompt some minor changes, and perhaps for the next year or two you might see award recipients being given sixty or perhaps even ninety seconds to speak. But sooner or later the desperation to grab as much cash as possible will overwhelm the Game “Awards” organisers once again, and the excessive ad-to-award ratio will be back.
The only thing we can do, as consumers in this marketplace, is register our disapproval. Don’t tune in to the next Game “Awards” and let the organisers know that we care as little about their made-up trophies as they seem to. If fewer and fewer people tune in, and make it clear that the reason we aren’t bothering to watch is because of how unbalanced the broadcast is in favour of trailers and ads, maybe the message will get through. As we’ve seen with the collapse of E3, no event in gaming is sacred or safe – they rely on our viewership and patronage to remain relevant.
I won’t bother watching another Game “Awards,” because what’s the point? If the organisers care so little about the actual awards, why should I?
All titles mentioned above are the copyright of their respective developer, studio, and/or publisher. The Game Awards can be streamed now on YouTube. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Beware of minor spoilers for some of the films on this list.
I love Christmas – it’s the most wonderful time of the year, don’t you know! And there are some absolutely phenomenal Christmas films that are on everyone’s must-watch list every single year. You know the ones: films that we’ve watched at this time of year for almost as long as we can remember; films that have come to define every aspect of the word “Christmas.”
And I thought it could be fun to take a look at five of them and explain why they’re not really Christmas films!
That’s right, it’s time for a little bit of festive controversy as I pick out five “Christmas” films that aren’t really Christmas films! Instead, I would argue that these films are in other genres entirely, or are only tangentially related to Christmas either by being set at that time of year or even just by association.
Father Christmas is indisputably a Christmas film – which is why it won’t be on the list below!
Before we get into the list, an important caveat: this is just for fun! I don’t think the debate around what is or isn’t a “Christmas” film is something that needs to be taken seriously at all, and I’m making this list with tongue firmly embedded in cheek. It’s also one person’s entirely subjective opinion – so please try not to get too upset if I call out your favourite Christmas film!
I enjoy all of the films on this list, and regularly watch them at this time of year. But for reasons I’ll try my best to explain, I don’t necessarily consider them to be true “Christmas” films in every sense of the phrase. Definitions of what constitutes a Christmas film may vary – and it might be enough to say that a film set at Christmas, released at Christmas, or that has developed an association with Christmas over the years counts. But I’m going to argue that those reasons are not enough – for a film to truly be a Christmas film its plot has to be directly tied up with Christmas!
So let’s jump into the list, shall we?
Film #1: The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)
Jack Skellington.
Wait, this film literally has the word “Christmas” in its name! Not only that, but it sees protagonist Jack Skellington take the reins of Santa’s sleigh on Christmas Eve… so how can it possibly not be a Christmas film? Well, that’s simple: it’s a Halloween film best enjoyed in the autumn.
Most of the action in The Nightmare Before Christmas takes place in Halloween Town, and practically all of the principal characters are Halloween Town residents who are inspired by the monsters and ghouls of horror fiction and folklore. Although the plot touches on Christmas and sees characters visit Christmas Town, those scenes and sequences are told from the point of view of the denizens of Halloween Town – and their take on Christmas is very much a spooky one!
The film is largely told from the perspective of Halloween Town residents.
For that reason, The Nightmare Before Christmas is a great film to watch in between Halloween and Christmas – say, in the middle of November! But as Christmas gets closer, we should really be leaving Halloween behind to focus on what lies ahead. For me, The Nightmare Before Christmas is too strongly rooted in Halloween, and decked out with the trappings of that holiday, to truly be considered a Christmas film.
That being said, I love how the film shows Halloween Town characters discovering Christmas for the first time, and how they work to save Christmas – after putting it in danger! There are some fun moments amidst the frights and scares… but it’s still very much a film that’s best enjoyed before Christmas time fully arrives!
Film #2: Love Actually (2003)
Lost in translation lovebirds!
This is simple: Love Actually is a film set at Christmas, not a Christmas film. Are we clear on that? Good! Wait, what do you mean I have to fill three-and-a-half more paragraphs? D’oh!
As stated, Love Actually may be set at Christmas, but setting alone does not – in my view – make for a Christmas film! Many of this romantic comedy’s storylines have nothing whatsoever to do with Christmas, and the simple fact that they play out in front of an occasionally festive backdrop doesn’t magically make the entire film a Christmas film!
It’s the Prime Minister!
Because of Love Actually’s narrative structure, some of its storylines and characters arguably have more to do with Christmas than others. Billy Mack, for instance, is desperately chasing the Christmas number one single, and the kids are taking part in a school’s nativity play. But other characters really don’t do anything Christmassy at all during their time on screen, with their stories taking them in different directions.
I enjoyed Love Actually when it was released – and to think it’s celebrating its twentieth anniversary this year makes me feel old! But I must confess that I was surprised to see it hailed as a “Christmas” film in the years after its release. To me, it has much more in common with writer Richard Curtis’ other rom-coms like Four Weddings and a Funeral and Notting Hill than it does with bona fide Christmas films.
Film #3: Frozen (2013)
Let It Go!
Frozen just isn’t a Christmas film, okay? It’s set in the middle of summer! And the princesses of the magical kingdom of Arendelle may not even celebrate Christmas for all we know; the holiday isn’t mentioned once!
A lot of people seem to associate Frozen with Christmas for two reasons: it was originally released shortly before Christmas, and it’s full of ice and snow thanks to Elsa’s magical powers. But there’s more to a Christmas film than a magical blizzard – and while Frozen may have a cute winter aesthetic going for it, as well as some well-animated snow, that’s not enough to make me believe it’s truly a Christmas film. And I say that with sincere apologies to everyone under the age of ten!
Snow and ice do not automatically make a film Christmassy.
The story of Frozen is set in the summer time; it’s only Elsa’s magic that causes Arendelle to freeze over. And the snow and ice is presented as a genuine danger to the kingdom’s inhabitants – hardly the carefree presentation of a white Christmas that we’d expect to see in a proper Christmas film! Many films use ice, snow, and blizzards to great effect – but we don’t call all of them “Christmas” films, and with good reason!
As more of the kids who grew up watching Frozen come of age, I expect its status as a “Christmas” film will only be further cemented. We’ve already seen songs like Do You Want To Build A Snowman showing up on Christmas compilation albums and playlists… so this idea of Frozen as a Christmas film clearly isn’t going away any time soon.
Film #4: Die Hard (1988)
John McClane is fed up with this debate!
Uh oh, now we’re really getting into some controversial territory! Look, here’s the way I see it: I don’t dispute that Die Hard is set at Christmas and has some of the visual and musical trappings of the holiday season. That’s indisputable. But Die Hard is an action film set at Christmas time – not a Christmas film.
A couple of years ago, I saw somewhere online a homemade Christmas ornament featuring protagonist John McClane crawling through the ventilation ducts at Nakatomi Plaza. That was creative and cute – but the action movie trope of sneaking around in a crawlspace isn’t exactly something that screams “Christmas” to me!
Alan Rickman as terrorist leader Hans Gruber.
One of the best tests of whether something can truly be considered a Christmas film is this: can you comfortably watch it outside of the Christmas season? I’d have no issue watching Die Hard in the middle of summer – because its plot doesn’t hinge on Christmas, its characters aren’t interested in Christmas, and fundamentally, nothing about the film would change if its office Christmas party was instead a birthday party or a Fourth of July celebration.
And that’s the key to understanding Die Hard’s place on this list. It’s an action film with a few incidental Christmas trappings, and it’s been hyped up by fans as a “Christmas” film on the internet in recent years – but it isn’t. Being set at Christmas does not automatically make for a Christmas film!
Film #5: Trading Places (1983)
An ’80s Christmas classic – but rightly so?
I’ve only seen the comedy film Trading Places a couple of times; I think it’s more popular in the United States than it is over here. But it’s a film that’s often discussed in a Christmas context – and seems to be on many people’s list of Christmas favourites!
As with Die Hard above, though, Trading Places is definitely a film set at Christmas time… but that doesn’t necessarily make it a true Christmas film. It’s a comedy, it’s a wacky adventure, and it’s a film that calls out and criticises racism as well as the weird excesses of wealth and capitalism. And those are all good things; Trading Places is funny! But again, that doesn’t make it a Christmas film.
A happy ending!
The Christmas setting and the film’s annual airings on television in December have combined to make it a film that a lot of folks associate with the holidays. If you grew up watching Trading Places every year, there’s no doubt it’s become a part of your household’s festive tradition! We all have our own little Christmas traditions that we stick to – and that’s totally okay.
But for me, Trading Places is another film that can really be watched and enjoyed at any time of year. Nothing in its story is exclusive to the festive period – and that’s actually a good thing! It means Trading Places is a film that can be enjoyed on its own merit year-round.
So that’s it!
A festive cat!
We’ve picked out five not-really-Christmas films! But I can already think of several more… so come back next December to see which other so-called “Christmas” films are going to be targeted!
As I said at the beginning, I hope you’ve taken this list in the spirit of festive fun. It’s meant to be a bit of silliness as the big day approaches – and while I will make the case for all five of these films not really being 100% Christmassy, I’m not about to die on that hill – or get into a massive argument about it!
So I hope this has brought you a bit of light-hearted festive cheer as Christmas draws nearer. The big day will be upon us before we realise it! I have a couple of other festive ideas that may (or may not) make their way onto the website before then, so please stay tuned! And Merry Christmas!
All of the films discussed above are the copyright of their respective studio, distributor, company, etc. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Just when I thought I’d said everything I was ever going to say about Starfield…
Bethesda’s customer support/public relations team has had to handle some absolute nightmares over the past few years. The line “we aren’t planning on doing anything about it” in response to a complaint about the Fallout 76 “canvas bag” fiasco will be forever etched in my mind – and that’s just the start! I used to work in the games industry, specifically in marketing, so this kind of story is right up my alley… so to speak.
If you haven’t already heard, Bethesda’s PR team has begun posting replies to negative reviews on Steam… and it’s going about as well as you might expect.
An example of a response to a negative review of Starfield from Bethesda. (I have redacted the developer’s username for the sake of privacy.)
Here’s a great rule of thumb for any developer, publisher, or creative of any kind: don’t reply or respond to reviews. Ever. Period. End of story. Just don’t do it – it never goes well, and ends up coming across as whiny, arrogant, or both.
There are legitimate points of criticism in practically any work of media, and there are always going to be differences of opinion even among professional critics and journalists. A developer might think that they’ve made the “perfect” video game – but it’s a universal truth that even the absolute best of the best receive the odd negative review. Going after critics and players who have something negative to say is just a bad look – and it shouldn’t happen.
A view of New Atlantis in Starfield.
If Starfield was some obscure indie title made by a couple of amateur developers, I’d still encourage them never to reply to negative reviews – but I could at least understand, on a purely human level, where such responses were coming from. If a project that I’m passionate about and poured a lot of work into suddenly seems to be coming under attack, it’s natural to want to react to that, either to try to convince reviewers to change their minds or to “fight back.” It’s still a bad idea, but at least it’s understandable in that case.
But Bethesda is a big company, and it’s backed up by Microsoft – one of the largest and most valuable corporations on the planet. For these companies to literally pay some of their employees to use official Bethesda developer accounts to reply to negative reviews is just… well, it’s pretty shocking, to tell the truth.
Another response to a negative Steam review. (Developer username redacted.)
Whether you think Starfield is the “game of the year” or a dumpster fire, you have to accept that other people have different points of view. And Steam reviews are one way in which players can express their opinions about the game. A company the size of Bethesda has to accept that not every review can be positive – and they kind of have to take that on the chin when it happens. It’s a reality of the games industry.
The internet has democratised media criticism – and that’s a fantastic thing. No longer are reviews the sole domain of professional journalists with university degrees; anyone can now offer up their half-baked thoughts and opinions on films, games, and TV shows. And I think that’s absolutely wonderful. One of the best things that Steam does – and other platforms like Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes do, too – is aggregating reviews, presenting audiences with an overall picture of how players feel about the titles on offer. No one individual review is, therefore, a deal-maker or deal-breaker; players are now able to consider a much broader range of opinions.
The internet has opened up media criticism to anyone with a keyboard – and there are going to be a whole range of opinions on practically every video game, film, and TV show.
But the fact that any old idiot can set up a website – or post a review on a platform like Steam – means that not all reviews are going to be fair, accurate, or even relevant. Some reviews of Starfield criticised the game for absolutely silly reasons, and again on a human level, I can understand wanting to react to that and scream “it’s not fair!” But as a corporation, Microsoft has to be better than that. Bethesda and Xbox have to be professional.
Telling a player that they’re “wrong” to feel the way that they do about Starfield is bizarre – and it doesn’t do anything to endear Bethesda to its fans. Many reviews of Starfield echo my own thoughts on the game: people genuinely wanted to enjoy it, but found it to be visually last-gen, narratively weak, repetitive, and so on. Those criticisms may feel harsh to the talented developers who put a lot of time and effort into creating Starfield… but telling players that they shouldn’t feel that way or they just “don’t get” what Starfield was meant to be is an incredibly silly way to react.
Computer panels in Starfield.
There are two good ways to respond to criticism. Firstly, Bethesda and Xbox can prioritise fixing commonly-noted issues with the game. Rolling out updates and patches that, for example, improve the quality of the in-game map or reduce the frequency of copy-and-paste levels and environments would be a good place to start. Saying to players “we hear your concerns and we’re acting on them” is the appropriate reaction.
Look at what Hello Games did when No Man’s Sky came in for some absolutely ruthless criticism upon launch. Instead of lashing out at players, telling them to appreciate what the game had to offer, they knuckled down and got back to work. That game has received more free updates and patches than I can count – and it’s now in a far better and more enjoyable state than it was when it launched. Hello Games prioritised adding features that players wanted and fixing issues that players criticised – and the result is that, several years later, the game can claim to have made a comeback.
Bethesda could learn more than one lesson from Hello Games…
The second way to react to criticism is to make sure that the things players don’t like won’t be present in the next game a studio creates. While I personally wasn’t offended by Starfield’s abundance of loading screens, it’s one of the most common complaints about the game that I’ve read over the past couple of months. I don’t believe it’s possible to remove the loading screens in Starfield – thanks to the game’s reliance on the outdated Creation Engine that Bethesda has been using, in some form, for close to a quarter of a century – but it *is* possible for Bethesda to acknowledge the way players feel about loading screens and ensure that they won’t be present to the same extent in The Elder Scrolls VI.
Although the first Mass Effect game was well-received, it picked up criticism in 2007 for its inventory management and weapon overheating. By the time Mass Effect 2 rolled around a few years later, those problems had been fixed. Inventories were streamlined, weapon overheating was gone, and players had a much better time with the game. BioWare took those criticisms on board and worked to ensure that the things players didn’t like were gone from the next game in the series.
Inventory management was criticised in Mass Effect 1 – so BioWare streamlined it in Mass Effect 2.
When Bethesda responds to criticisms of Starfield being “boring” – in the subjective opinion of one player – by saying things like “When the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there. They certainly weren’t bored.” it feels incredibly arrogant and smug. Trying to shut down “wrong” opinions about the game by attacking players – some of whom spent dozens or hundreds of hours playing before leaving their reviews – is genuinely shocking coming from a major studio. I’ve never seen anything quite like it, in fact – not on this scale, at any rate.
So Bethesda, here’s some free advice from someone who used to work in video games marketing: just stop. Stop what you’re doing – and if possible, apologise to the players you attacked. Refrain from ever responding to reviews again, and take the criticism as it comes. Even if you’d made an impossibly perfect game, there’d still be some people who didn’t like it or felt it wasn’t for them. That’s the way it goes, and you can’t afford to be so thin-skinned in this marketplace! You are doing actual damage to your reputation by retaliating in this way – so stop it.
A custom spaceship landing on a planet in Starfield.
What a mess, eh?
I really felt that I was done talking about Starfield until this came along. I was quite content to put the game back on the shelf, perhaps returning to it in a year or two to see if expansion packs and updates had improved it. But never in a million years did I expect to see Bethesda lashing out in this way. It’s unprofessional, petty, thin-skinned, and just plain wrong. It has done nothing to address legitimate points of criticism of the game, nor has it helped the reputations of either Starfield or Bethesda itself. I’m genuinely shocked to see this.
Somewhat ironically, given Starfield’s copy-and-paste buildings and “points of interest,” at least some of these reviews seem to have themselves been copied-and-pasted… or perhaps written by an AI bot. I hope Bethesda learns another lesson from this mess and doesn’t keep up this attack on critics of Starfield. No matter how great you might think the game is, and how much fun you had with it, you have to concede that not everyone feels the same way, and that there are genuine reasons to be dissatisfied, underwhelmed, or even downright pissed off at Starfield.
Do better, Bethesda.
Starfield is out now for PC and Xbox Series S/X, and is also available via Game Pass. Starfield is the copyright of Bethesda Game Studios, Xbox Game Studios, and Microsoft. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
With the big day edging ever closer, I thought it could be a bit of fun to talk about one of my favourite Christmas TV specials. There are a growing number of films and TV programmes set at Christmas time, and a lot of them can be rather repetitive to say the least! If you’re looking for somewhat of a different take on Santa Claus – both visually and narratively – then the 1991 animated TV special Father Christmas might be just what you’re looking for!
I have to confess something before we go any further. Watching this on TV as a kid when it first aired was borderline traumatising thanks to one scene in particular! Seeing Father Christmas getting drunk, hallucinating, and rushing to the toilet was… well, let’s just say it’s something that’s still etched in my mind all these years later! What I’m trying to say is that if you have little ones – or even older kids who are particularly sensitive – there’s at least one sequence in the film that I remember being shocked by when I was a wee bairn.
This sequence might not be the best for sensitive eyes!
That being said, Father Christmas is one of those TV programmes that I’ve found myself drifting back to Christmas after Christmas. I may have missed it one or two times, but it’s a perennial festive favourite in my house – and it has been ever since I first watched it. Christmas is a time for tradition and memory – and this TV special has become one of my personal traditions, even as my memories of that first viewing aren’t entirely positive!
In 1982, Raymond Briggs’ kids’ book The Snowman was adapted for television by the brand-new station Channel 4. It became a smash hit, and is Father Christmas’ better-known cousin; the films even take place in the same “shared universe.” After The Snowman had won a BAFTA TV award and been nominated for an Academy Award, it only makes sense that Channel 4 would’ve wanted to commission another adaptation of Briggs’ work!
Father Christmas and The Snowman share a setting.
Father Christmas is based on two children’s books: Father Christmas and Father Christmas Goes On Holiday, and it amalgamates the plots of both into a single story. It’s charming in its own way, answering a question that few other festive films have really tackled: what does Santa do for the other 364 days of the year? It follows Father Christmas – as he’s known in the UK – around the world, visiting different countries and cities as he takes a break from his busy work.
Father Christmas himself is voiced by the late Mel Smith – a comedian who was a mainstay on British TV in the ’80s and ’90s along with his partner Griff Rhys Jones. Smith also scored an unlikely hit on the music charts in 1987 with a cover of Rockin’ Around the Christmas Tree that he recorded with singer Kim Wilde for charity – so he has some Christmas time pedigree! His vocal performance in Father Christmas is part of what makes this version of the character stand out.
Santa floating in a pool!
Father Christmas, naturally, reaches its narrative climax on Christmas Eve, and after spending much of the year on holiday, it’s back to work for the man in the red suit! There’s a tie-in with The Snowman at this point in the story – and while I’d absolutely recommend The Snowman as well, it’s by no means essential viewing. The story of this TV special is easy to follow, after all.
Hand-drawn animation wasn’t uncommon on British television at the time, but with an abundance of CGI and computer animation nowadays, Father Christmas feels even more special, somehow. The animators, some of whom had also worked on The Snowman years earlier, used a lot of pastels and coloured pencils during the animation process rather than paint – and I think that gives Father Christmas a pretty distinctive look.
With so much computer animation these days, Father Christmas can feel like something a bit different.
Apart from the aforementioned drunken sequence, there are a couple of others that really stand out. The first is seeing Santa living a fairly quiet life in a British town. This version of the character lives not at the North Pole (nor in Lapland) but in the kind of terraced house that you see quite often here in the UK. Catching a glimpse of Santa’s home life is something neat.
A lot of Christmas programmes show Santa on his sleigh on Christmas Eve – and while I’d say that this part of the special is enjoyable and fun, it’s perhaps its least-unique offering at the same time. There are moments of tension as darkness falls and the snowfall gets in his eyes, but by and large it’s nothing you won’t have seen before.
Santa’s on his way!
But the song that accompanies Santa’s flight is hilarious: Another Bloomin’ Christmas is the perfect encapsulation of how this production’s version of the character sees his job and Christmas in general. It’s a pretty fun song in its own right, too!
All in all, this is a particularly British take on Santa Claus and Christmas time – but with the twist of showing Santa’s activities throughout the year in the months before Christmas. After returning from his travels, Santa has to see to the growing mountain of post, take care of his reindeer – and pet cat and dog – as well as prepare for his flight. There’s a fun sequence that shows him racing to Buckingham Palace as dawn nears on Christmas Day, too.
That’s, like, a lot of letters…
The aesthetic of the programme puts it firmly in Britain in the second half of the 20th Century. Many of the things that I remember from my own childhood are present, and I think that’s part of why this TV special in particular triggers a very specific kind of nostalgia: not only for Christmases past, but for the time and place of my childhood in general, and for those things that don’t exist any more. Even on that first viewing in December 1991 – on Christmas Eve, no less – everything about Father Christmas felt, well, like Christmas to me. And it still does thirty-two years later.
As to how you can watch it… well, there are a few options. The special was released on DVD along with The Snowman, and copies seem to still be available on Amazon at least here in the UK. Also in the UK, Father Christmas can be streamed via the Channel 4 website. I think it’s available for purchase via iTunes and possibly via Amazon Video outside of the UK (it’s not on Amazon Video in the UK, curiously). I’ve also seen bootlegs of the special on YouTube and other streaming sites… but be careful of copyright laws if you decide to go down that route!
Father Christmas is a programme I heartily recommend at this time of year. Brits like myself may appreciate the nostalgia factor, but folks from all across the world can take in a different – and distinctly British – take on Santa’s flight and Christmas Eve. I hope you’re able to tune in… and Merry Bloomin’ Christmas!
Father Christmas is out now on DVD and may be purchased digitally via iTunes, Amazon, and other platforms. Father Christmas is the copyright of Channel 4. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Spoiler Warning: Minor spoilers may be present for the Grand Theft Auto series.
One of the first subjects I ever wrote about here on the website was Grand Theft Auto 6. That was all the way back in 2019 – and I said at the time that Grand Theft Auto V felt like it had been hanging around for a little too long! Suffice to say that official news about Grand Theft Auto 6 is long, long overdue – and before we go any further, I think we should acknowledge that.
Rockstar has milked Grand Theft Auto V dry, and the company’s obsession with keeping that game going across three entire console generations has clearly come at the expense of other projects. Red Dead Redemption II’s online mode didn’t get the support it should have, and the less said about the appalling Grand Theft Auto Trilogy remaster the better. Even Grand Theft Auto V’s single-player mode was sacrificed at the altar of Rockstar’s obsession with online multiplayer: the game never received the single-player DLC that had been planned back in 2013.
So we come, belatedly, to Grand Theft Auto 6. The game has one heck of a legacy to live up to – and only time will tell if it will be up to the task.
Lucia and her as-yet-unnamed co-star.
If you’ve followed the story online or on social media, chances are you’ll already be aware of the big leak that hit Grand Theft Auto 6 a year or so ago. Early footage of the game made its way online and has been doing the rounds for months, so in that sense I wasn’t stunned or blown away by any of the reveals in the trailer; I’d seen the outline of the game already. And I have to say up-front that there are a couple of pretty big disappointments.
The first is the game’s setting. Returning to Vice City is just not what I’d hoped to see; it’s too samey and too similar to Grand Theft Auto V’s Los Santos. Both are sunlit, tropical cities by the beach, both are set in the modern day, and while there will undoubtedly be improvements mechanically and visually from the previous entry in the series, I’m just not convinced at this stage that Grand Theft Auto 6 will be able to truly differentiate itself from its predecessor and stand out in the way it needs to.
Another tropical city by the beach.
For me, the game’s world, time period, and overall setting are hurdles that it will have to overcome – and they’re totally unnecessary ones. Grand Theft Auto V stood apart from its predecessor by hopping across the country, leaving a New York City stand-in behind. Red Dead Redemption II likewise made some big decisions in terms of setting, choosing a setting inspired by parts of the Rocky Mountains, Midwest, and Deep South instead of simply returning to the world of the first game. And both titles stood out because of those decisions.
A few months ago I saw a poll somewhere on social media. Unscientific, I know, but I think the results were interesting. The question posed was “where should Grand Theft Auto 6 be set?” and while Vice City put in a creditable showing, it ended up in a distant second place behind the preferred option: “somewhere new.” At least some players agree with me, then: it would’ve been preferable if Grand Theft Auto 6 could’ve been set in a new location, perhaps somewhere other than a sundrenched coastal city decked out in palm trees.
A boat as seen in the trailer.
There’s also a case to be made, I’d argue, that teasing a game that won’t be ready for potentially two full years – barring any major delays – is too early. It’s not as bad as something like The Elder Scrolls VI, which was teased back in 2018 and may not be ready until 2028, but there’s still a lot of work to be done on Grand Theft Auto 6. The trailer, as you can see, wasn’t showing bona fide gameplay but rather a combination of “in-engine footage” and CGI.
Rockstar has been notorious in the games industry for its culture of “crunch” – the borderline-abusive practice of forcing staff to work ridiculously long hours in the run-up to a title’s launch. This happened with Red Dead Redemption II – and although Rockstar has pledged to do better, promising gamers a deadline of 2025 for Grand Theft Auto 6′s release could lead to the same old problems all over again. Although the end of 2025 may seem a long way off, developing a game as large and complex as Grand Theft Auto 6 will surely be a time-consuming and difficult process, and even with some work having already begun, two years – at the very most – isn’t actually all that long when it comes to modern game development. We’ll have to watch this space for leaks from within Rockstar to see how bad “crunch” and working conditions get.
A fabulously festive flock of flamingoes.
One major disappointment for me, as someone who plays on PC, is the apparent lack of a simultaneous PC release. Rockstar’s official press release only mentioned Xbox Series and PlayStation 5 consoles, so reading between the lines that seems to leave out PC. Grand Theft Auto V and Red Dead Redemption II both launched on PC more than a year after landing on home consoles, so Rockstar has done this before… but what are the executives spending all of the billions of dollars that they made from Grand Theft Auto V on if not making sure the new game will be available to everyone who wants to play it?
Cutting off PC players is a mistake – one that I hope can be rectified before launch. Delaying the game on console by a few months, if necessary, would be worth it to get that simultaneous release. Practically every other major release from AAA publishers can manage this, and with Rockstar’s insane financial resources, there’s no reason why they can’t, too. Trying to spin this as some kind of “point of principle” in favour of home consoles over PC is just… stupid. That argument made no sense to me when Rockstar has tried to pull it in the past and it makes no sense now. It’s the company cheaping out, hoping to get away with spending less money on development and testing – and nothing more.
A Mustang-esque muscle car.
So… more Grand Theft Auto. That’s basically the takeaway from this trailer for me. More of the same from a series that could’ve tried something a little different. Having a woman protagonist is great, and I hope that the writers will create an engrossing single-player story that will be fun to see unfold. I’m not a multiplayer gamer, so that’s the side of Grand Theft Auto 6 that I’m interested in.
As for the setting, I have to say I’m disappointed. I knew that this was coming based on the leaked gameplay, but I still half-wondered if Rockstar might’ve had time to change things up and go for something a bit different. I guess the company has decided to not rock the boat too much in light of the rampant success of Grand Theft Auto V… but to me, it feels that Rockstar is playing things a little too safe. I’d have liked to see a bit more boldness in choosing a genuinely different setting – perhaps a city based on Chicago or Washington DC, or setting the game in a time period like the ’70s or the ’90s. That would’ve helped Grand Theft Auto 6 develop its own identity. That’s already a tough task, as the game will be living in its predecessor’s shadow for a long time, but it’s one Rockstar seems to have made more difficult with some of these creative decisions.
The game’s official logo.
Maybe I’m showing my age here, but part of what I felt worked best about Vice City was its ’80s setting. Leaning into the likes of Scarface and Miami Vice for inspiration really took that game to a different thematic place, feeling distinct from Grand Theft Auto III. Taking Vice City out of the ’80s and into the modern day is perhaps a bit of a challenge; there’s an open question as to how well Rockstar’s Miami stand-in will work in a contemporary setting. That’s a concern, too.
Based on what we saw in the trailer, I feel that it’s actually difficult to judge how the game might play. No real gameplay was shown, after all. But knowing that Rockstar is playing it safe with Grand Theft Auto 6, I think we can reasonably make the assumption that it won’t look, feel, or play much different from its predecessor. There will be guns to shoot, cars to jack, and an open world filled with crime to get stuck into.
This camera angle from the trailer is almost reminiscent of the original GTA games!
For me, Red Dead Redemption II is Rockstar’s magnum opus. If I dared to dream, I’d say that I’d hope Grand Theft Auto 6 could reach comparable heights… but I don’t want to put too much pressure on the developers. Some games are genuinely once-in-a-lifetime masterpieces, and asking for “another one like that” probably ain’t gonna happen – as much as we might want it to! So what I guess I’m trying to say is that I want to set appropriate expectations for Grand Theft Auto 6 and not over-hype the game to the moon and back. There will undoubtedly be a lot of excitement for the game as its launch gets closer… but keeping that in check as much as possible is absolutely worth trying. Don’t forget what happened with Cyberpunk 2077! Or Starfield.
To end on a positive note, the release of a new entry in the Grand Theft Auto series is something I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t looking forward to. I played the first game back in the ’90s – along with its London-based spin-off – and had a blast with it at the time. Watching the series make the transition to 3D was also fun to see in the early 2000s. So I’ve been a fan of the series for a long time.
Everybody who’s excited for Grand Theft Auto 6 raise your arms!
The trailer showed off some impressive-looking environments and character models; on par, at least, with those seen in Red Dead Redemption II. Nothing blew me away – but by the time the game has been fully-built and is in our hands, I daresay we can expect high graphical fidelity and a visually pretty title.
So that’s all for now, I guess. I’ll be waiting to see whether Rockstar can be bothered to launch the game on PC in 2025 – if not, it might be 2026 or beyond before I’m able to get my hands on it.
Assuming I live that long, I hope you’ll check back in for a review – and in the meanwhile, if we get more information, another trailer, or more juicy details about Grand Theft Auto 6, I’ll do my best to cover it here on the website.
Grand Theft Auto 6 is currently in development and will be released on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series consoles in 2025. Grand Theft Auto 6 is the copyright of Rockstar Games and/or Take-Two Interactive Software. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.