Which is better: Star Trek or Star Wars?

[Pasi Nurminen]

Yeah, I know it's not really a good comparison, but the Star Trek ships seem to go from fighter straight to cruiser, nothing inbetween. The only thing that seems to fight the size of an interpid-class starship are those pod-shaped republic cruisers, like the ones on hoth. But even that's smaller than a intrepid class starship, i believe.

But Star Wars ships can only go 1x the speed of light.

Most Star Trek ships can go at least 5x.

Yea, I mean you're right, Star Trek has no ships of frigate or destroyer size, I mean that Miranda class destroyer/picket ship starship (the longest running class in terms of service and production life in the Star Trek universe) was nothing.

 

[IroquoisPlisken]

I don't really care for either. Well, I find Star Trek pretty stupid, but Star Wars is OK...I guess...

Now Stargate, otoh, THAT's a show.

 

[ComradeDavo]

I like Star Wars, Star Trek and Stargate all equally, and I like them alot.

Thus, I don't feel the need to debate which ships/weapons could destroy what

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

I prefer Star Wars, but I like Star Trek: TNG also. I watched all 7 seasons during the course of this (um, last) year and enjoyed them. I have never seen any other ST though, apart from a couple of episodes of Voyager which I didn't like very much.

 

[Evil Tyrant]

I like both, if I had to choose, I would say Star Wars. To be quite honest, I don't think the federation is very realistic, it strikes me more as a socialist utopia than an actual political system. Star Wars has it's problems to, but in my opinion, it is a tad more plausible. All the same, they are fun to watch.

 

[Scratcher]

Well, I was 7 years old when star wars was released and the film just blew me away. But at the same time I could watch star trek (the original cast) religiously every week on tv.

So, I think both were pretty spectacular at their time.

 

[josephstalin]

Star wars. I can not watch star treck.

Edit: 500th post!!! Hurrah!!!

 

[IronMan2055]

okay in star treck it took a decade to goe through one quadrent one measly quadrent in star wars if they jump to hyper space they can traverse half the galaxy in hours or a day depending on the ship

now some more stats the personal on the death star is as follows

152,276 gunners
485,560general crew members
1,295,950 troops
127,570 storm troopers
75,860 starship support staff
334,432starship pilots and crew

imperial star destroyer which there are thousands of
Length 1,600 meters
manufacturer kuat drive yards
type cruiser
weapons
Turpolaser emplacements 60
ion cannon batteries 60
tractor beam projecters 10 and a array of defensive shields and sensors
each carries 72 tie fighters to each star destroyer 8 lambodo class shuttles
15 storm trooper transports five assualt gunboats along with skipray blastboats gamma-class assault shuttles planatary assault teams with landing barges drop ships 20 at-at walkers 30 at-st scout walkers and nine thousand seven hundred ground troops

and nurmenin didn't i all ready say that you can't compare these since thier from two different fictional universes

 

[Mathilda]

Star Trek or Star Wars?
There's a difference

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

Don't get me started!

 

[Yuri2356]

Of the two, Wars.

An entire planet is destroyed in a single blast, simply to gain leverage while interrogating a prisoner.

The words "F*** Yeah" come to mind.

Trek has nothing to stand up to that level of awesome.

 

[Winner]

None of the crappy Star Trek ships cant stand the chance of the mighty Death Star which can destroy a planet with a single shot!

Did we actually see that? No, just some fake videoclip fabricated by Darth Vader

 

[Riesstiu IV]

I do believe they explained this in the Next Generation, that way back when a master race (that looked even more generic than the human race) seeded the galaxy's planets with advanced life forms or something like that, and used themselves as a template. This nicely explains the similarities.

Not really. It sounds like an easy way out to explain why they could be bothered to make bizarre aliens. Klingons and Cardassians are good examples of thought out and detailed aliens, but all to often Star Trek writers are uncreative when it comes to designing some new alien culture. Sorry but adding a third opening on a nose or giving someone a funny looking hat does not cut it for me.

Of course, you Star Wars idiots wouldn't know that, because you can't be bothered to look anything up and need stupid bullfeathers fairy tale stories about knights and dark lords.

Aren't we a bit hostile? How do you know I’m a “Star Wars idiot” or that I’m even a fan of the movies? I do sometimes enjoy Star Trek but I'm not devoted fan of either. I recognize the strengths and weakness of both series. I was simply pointing out that Star Trek like many other science fiction genres suffers from unbelievable plots, hence the use of the word “fiction” in front of science. Star Trek has too many repetitive plot devices, declining script quality, and scientific psychobabble that rarely makes any sense. Neither series are realistic in any way.

I remember every so often a Star Trek crew will encounter some primitive race that is hostile and still uses lasers, and the crew goes "hahahaha those won't even scratch our windows," the same lasers and turbolasers Star Wars uses.

I really don't care.

 

[Narz]

Star Wars winning? Unbelievable!

 

[The Condor]

Are you being sarcastic or serious?

 

[Archbob]

Star wars --- Minus the first 3 episodes.

 

[Narz]

Are you being sarcastic or serious?

A little of both.

I tend to believe though that Star Wars is perhaps the most overrated movie series ever (close 2nd is Lord of The Rings). The Star Trek characters (especially in "The Next Generation") were far more interesing IMO.

 

[The Condor]

Yeah, I saw four of the series the first four and just never liked any of them. Star Trek was a lot better. Also, it was nice to see that it doesn't take some bloated budget over a few million dollars to make a good show (like Star Wars) since the people at Star Trek ran on a few thousand and constantly ran out of money but were able to crank out good shows. However, I will admit some were cheesy but over all they were better than Star Wars. I mean like who ever heard of starships that say "Pootowie" or something like that in the vacuum (sp?) of space!

 

[IronMan2055]

i must admit they pulled off some good affects for their budget in star trek they acculay shot film of a rock for a scene where they are aproaching the planet

also i will admit phantom menace was crap but with the budgets episode four had a budget of ten million and they turned that to one of the most beloved movies of all time and a movie that turned many into star wars fanatics

now many are insulting others just because they enjoy one series more than the other that doesn't mean we don't like the other series i find star wars ecxiting does that mean a hate star trek in every shape and form no they are one of the only besides star wars to create huge back stories to thier work

 

[Triarii]

I'd say Star Wars appeals to a wider audience than Star Trek. This is becuase Star Wars originally intended to appeal to the mass market whereas Star Trek was Gene Roddenbery's brain child.

As for saying that Star Trek has no light crusier or destoryer ships, that's just completely inaccurate. The Intrepid, Defiant, Steamrunner, Norway, Sabre and a number of those odd DS9 and Wolf 359 kitbash ships all fall somewhere into the destoryer, escort, light cruiser or picket catagories. There is also the modernised Ambassador class but it's more of a medium cruiser.