takes place 3000 years BEFORE Star Wars?

[Wingofbenu]

War drives innovation and technology. WW2 for instance spurred much of the advances made in the decades after.

 

Its a pendulum, really. War does drive tech research, yes. But constant war and resource drain eventually means you dont have the sheer resources to continue.

[Ichikitsune]

Star wars Technology has always been backwards. Episode 1-3, the technology was really cool with spinning ships, dual light saber wielding ninjas, and flashing moving billboards... Episode 4-6, commodore 64 graphics, blocky ships, and 1970's flashy futuristic lights.

QUOTE]

 

Being sarcastic right? Considering Episodes 4-6 was created with matting, stop motion and model building along with animation before there was even a commodore 64, which the lack of technology used in those movies made them amazing.

[Pyrasia]

Wrong... War is a real good motivation for technological advancement.

 

Look at WW2. Especially during the end of the war. With low resources, countries tried new method or searched for new resources.

 

Edit: Damn, beaten to it.

Edited January 10, 2012 by Pyrasia

[Cromica]

 

game is perfect.

 

 

LOL not even close

Edited January 10, 2012 by Cromica

[Holt]

http://torforge.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/why-the-future-never-gets-the-sf-right/

[Daisai]

................what then? For 3000 years nobody could come up with better/different technology? I'm to expect the ships basically all look the same 3000 years before star wars? C2N2 is C3PO's great great great great great great great great uncle? Looks like they could be brothers.

 

Just sayin'

 

3000 years ago we connected ships with ropes.

We still do now.

 

Never change a winning concept.

[Ecinev]

not a fan i quess...

 

its another universe... and many things have different styles where it looks a lot older than in the movies. especially when playing kotor.

 

game is perfect. deal with it.

 

 

 

I must beg to differ on that minute part. Jus sayin'

[scopur]

star trek is a better example of "pure science fiction" ? AHHAHAHHA

 

does "pure science fiction" = pure deus ex machina where technology contradicts itself on a constant basis to make the story work ?

 

we can never go faster than warp 10!!! well except for those times when for the plot we need to get somewhere faster than warp 10 in which case we spew out nonsensical techno-babble and do it anyway then later ignore what we just did and go back to saying we can't do it...

 

or or the best "Lets travel into the past, constantly talk about how we can't change anything because of the dire results, then change major events and they will have no impact whatsoever when we travel back forward in time"

 

if Star trek followed any reasonable way of advancement everything in it's universe would come stock with a "change polarity"switch.. since in ST that is basically an "I WIN" button for 99 percent of situations

 

Dude...it's called science "FICTION" because it's fake but still plausible because it's based on a rationalization of what we already know. Star Trek is WAY more plausible than Star Wars, even the time travel bit has some merit but again...fiction...keyword here.

[Kabjat]

I'm a firm believer, that if the universe ever reached the level of technology that is portrayed in the game, there would be a plateau. And in the case of the game and the way the storylines work, 3000 years isn't that long of a time frame.

 

Yes, I realize Earth's technology has changed DRASTICALLY over the past 3000 years, but we are one planet. With a universe, I do think it would slow way down at some point.

 

Earth's technology has changed drastically in the last 50 years lol

[Wingofbenu]

Wrong... War is a real good motivation for technological advancement.

 

Look at WW2, we have gained a lot from it over only a few years.

 

It is. Until you no longer have the ability to purchase resources and materials to use those advancements outside a military application. protracted wars kill empires for a reason.

 

Take France. One of the greatest war powers of its day, but they got so wrapped up in beating england, they practically bankrupted the nation funding the USA colonists just to spit in Britain's face. The Colonies won the war thanks to the french...and the sheer monetary costs the French incurred doing it led to the peasantry revolting and murdering the king and nobility wholesale.

[Mannic]

I look at it like this; just like any other society wracked by almost constant war, technological progression in Star Wars has happened slowly and revolves almost entirely around war-capabilities. So, 3000 years in the future you have things like planetary shields and beams that can destroy planets that don't exist in this era. But the day-to-day life of regular people isn't all that different.

 

And really, when you think about it, how much is left to improve once you have anti-gravity, artificial gravity, AI, cloning, Kiolto, Cybernetics, and the ability to travel vast distances in space at speeds FAR greater than the speed of light in comfort, as if you were on a luxury yacht?

Edited January 10, 2012 by Mannic

[Liquidacid]

Dude...it's called science "FICTION" because it's fake but still plausible because it's based on a rationalization of what we already know. Star Trek is WAY more plausible than Star Wars, even the time travel bit has some merit but again...fiction...keyword here.

 

the whole point is ST is NO more plausible than SW.. if anything it is worse

 

ST is not based on a rationalizations of what we already know... they just mash big science words in (almost always using them incorrectly) and make things up on the fly

Edited January 10, 2012 by Liquidacid

[Revelationjp]

There was actually a conscious decision to tweak a few things to make this game look more like the movies in order to appeal to those people only familiar with the movies. See the republic/empire symbols, uniforms, ship design, etc, none of which really fit the actual lore. they were thrown in to help people relate to the movies. All that aside however, you have a centuries long galactic war going on, planets being decimated and rebuilt, criminal syndicates running unchecked, no power maintaining full control for long, any ruler only in power as long as he can stay there by force etc, and you have the perfect recipe for technological stagnation. It's not unlike a milleniums long dark age really, just taking place in a time when enough tech progress had already been made that little backsliding has happened.

[Ecinev]

the whole point is ST is NO more plausible than SW.. if anything it is worse

 

IF anything this argument could cause some stabbings between serioz fanbois.

[Liquidacid]

IF anything this argument could cause some stabbings between serioz fanbois.

 

I'm sure it already has... the bonus is plastic lightsabers and bat'leth leave no permanent damage so no need to worry

[Ichikitsune]

It's funny how you actually think Star Wars is real or follows any semblance of actual physics or societal evolution in any way.

 

Bet you had no problem at all with the Empire making another Death Star with the same structural and technological weaknesses in a subsequent film. Did you rage call George Lucas and berate him on this matter, or just enjoy the films as the candy-coated popcorn they were meant to be?

 

The second death star was incomplete and thus to be able to destroy the sheild generator had to be taken down, no one knows exactly what technology went into it. Who's to say they were going check the contractors work this time and eliminate or fix the exhaust ports to let gas out but nothing in?

[Sumwun]

 

Things dont stay in fashion for 3000 years.

 

Not on earth they don't, but we aren't dealing with earth. I can understand a plateau as stated above, more importantly, I think BW wanted to make sure this game could register with people who only watched the movies.

 

I think they did an awesome job.

[rhirne]

Untrue. The Millenium Falcon can travel .5 past light speed. And could even do the Kessel run in under 12 parsecs, if you can believe it.

 

OHHHH - was wondering when this argument was going to turn up .....

 

See, that's were another difference comes into play. There are 2 possibilities to that argument..

 

1. The "Falcon" could indeed go faster than light or

2. The ships computer could more accurately predict a shorter flight path thus arriving faster.

 

For you, answer #2 is the correct answer. "Kessel Run" was 18 parsecs. When the Millenum Falcon was spoken of as compeleting it in under 12 parsecs, It was being said "Instead of my ship having to fly 18 light years from start to finish, it can do it in under 12 light years." The statement itself bears to the fact that The Falcon could calculate a shorter route by flying closer to stars / black holes. So it may have "looked" faster, when in fact it was going same speed, just a shorter distance.

 

 

As far as technologies go, you can only go so far with a technology before you can't go any further with it. For instance: Why are manhole covers round? Because a circle is the only shape that will not fall into itself. So apaprently, for centuries, kessel Run was 18 parsecs, but a way was found around that to make the travel shorter and more accurate.

 

Brass is made the exact same way it was made thousands of years ago. Copper + Zinc = Brass. How Egyptians made it, how the romans made it, the greeks, the Isrealites, the Persians, - and the process hasn't changed to this day. Is it more refined.. yes, but the process itself is the same.

 

Same can be said about Star Wars. How many death stars have they built... At least 4 that I can think of along with a couple of prototypes. It took them from BEFORE Ep.1 until EP 4 (at minimum 20 - 30 years) to complete it. Then it gets destroyed an in a short span of what... 5 - 10 years tops.. They had 75% complete. So they've obviously become more efficient.

 

To top it all off... They can build a DEATH STAR (that's a spaceship AS BIG AS A PLANET)... I'm thinking they are probably near the top of the mountain or looking down on everyone else from the summit.

[CrazyTexan]

Maybe this answers your gripe?

 

"The Kardashev scale is a method of measuring an advanced civilization's level of technological advancement. The scale is only theoretical and in terms of an actual civilization highly speculative; however, it puts energy consumption of an entire civilization in a cosmic perspective. It was first proposed in 1964 by the Soviet Russian astronomer Nikolai Kardashev. The scale has three designated categories called Type I, II, and III. These are based on the amount of usable energy a civilization has at its disposal, and the degree of space colonization. In general terms, a Type I civilization has achieved mastery of the resources of its home planet, Type II of its solar system, and Type III of its galaxy."

 

In 1964, Kardashev defined three levels of civilizations, based on the order of magnitude of the amount of power available to them:

Type I: "technological level close to the level presently [1964] attained on earth, with energy consumption at ≈4×1019 erg/sec.[2] Guillermo A. Lemarchand stated this as "a level "near" contemporary terrestrial civilization with an energy capability equivalent to the solar insolation on Earth, between 10 to the 16 power and 10 to the 17 power Watts."[3]

 

Type II: "a civilization capable of harnessing the energy radiated by its own star (for example, the stage of successful construction of a "Dyson sphere"); energy consumption at ≈4×1033 erg/sec.[2] Lemarchand stated this as "a civilization capable of utilizing and channeling the entire radiation output of its star. The energy utilization would then be comparable to the luminosity of our Sun, about 4 x 10 to the 26 power Watts."[3]

 

Type III: "a civilization in possession of energy on the scale of its own galaxy, with energy consumption at≈4×1044 erg/sec."[2] Lemarchand stated this as "a civilization with access to the power comparable to the luminosity of the entire Milky Way galaxy, about 4 x 10 to the 37 power Watts."[3]

 

Type IV: Uhh gods

 

 

It is believed that technological progress will be present but slow between the different types. It is possible for 3000 years to go by without significant technological progress due to limitations on the type of energy needed for such progress (or other things like thermodynamic problems).

 

Think of Star Wars as type 2 mixed with type 3.

 

The Infinate Empire (Rakata) was Type 4.

Edited January 10, 2012 by CrazyTexan

[Oneirophrenia]

Star Wars has never really offered explanations as to why stuff "works" or what the universe, origin of the races and the science behind everything is based on.

 

That is until George Lucas f'ed it up by bringing Midi-Chlorians into the movies. He is the single best thing and the same time, the single worst thing, to have happened to the Star Wars universe.

 

I swear that in secret, he actually despise the fact that he created this Star Wars beast. Sort of like how William Shatner hates Trekkies. Anyways, this is why Lucas is employing a scorched earth tactic on everything Star Wars related. Not even the original trilogy was spared.

Edited January 10, 2012 by Oneirophrenia

[nitan]

Well.. Yes i see your point not much have evolved..

 

But keep in mind The Jedi Order, as we know in the game is over 22.000 years old, than TOR timeline.

 

And it is still around, so they have had MANY years to evolve in, and scientists were also known at that time..

 

Some day you just reach the technological limit, and i think thats what happened here, their is only some "minor" tunings to be done.

 

Take a look at this site, tells you a bit more about the Star Wars timeline.. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_galactic_history

[Revelationjp]

It's funny how you actually think Star Wars is real or follows any semblance of actual physics or societal evolution in any way.

 

Bet you had no problem at all with the Empire making another Death Star with the same structural and technological weaknesses in a subsequent film. Did you rage call George Lucas and berate him on this matter, or just enjoy the films as the candy-coated popcorn they were meant to be?

 

Actually, the 2nd Death Star would have been almost twice as large, without the structural weaknesses, with considerably more firepower and defensive capabilities. Which is one of the reasons the rebels rushed to destroy it while it was still being built. If you want to argue Physics inconsistantcies, at least use a plausible example like lightsabers or space ships without directional thrusters or atmospheric lift mechanisms.

[scopur]

OHHHH - was wondering when this argument was going to turn up .....

 

See, that's were another difference comes into play. There are 2 possibilities to that argument..

 

1. The "Falcon" could indeed go faster than light or

2. The ships computer could more accurately predict a shorter flight path thus arriving faster.

 

For you, answer #2 is the correct answer. "Kessel Run" was 18 parsecs. When the Millenum Falcon was spoken of as compeleting it in under 12 parsecs, It was being said "Instead of my ship having to fly 18 light years from start to finish, it can do it in under 12 light years." The statement itself bears to the fact that The Falcon could calculate a shorter route by flying closer to stars / black holes. So it may have "looked" faster, when in fact it was going same speed, just a shorter distance.

 

 

As far as technologies go, you can only go so far with a technology before you can't go any further with it. For instance: Why are manhole covers round? Because a circle is the only shape that will not fall into itself. So apaprently, for centuries, kessel Run was 18 parsecs, but a way was found around that to make the travel shorter and more accurate.

 

Brass is made the exact same way it was made thousands of years ago. Copper + Zinc = Brass. How Egyptians made it, how the romans made it, the greeks, the Isrealites, the Persians, - and the process hasn't changed to this day. Is it more refined.. yes, but the process itself is the same.

 

Same can be said about Star Wars. How many death stars have they built... At least 4 that I can think of along with a couple of prototypes. It took them from BEFORE Ep.1 until EP 4 (at minimum 20 - 30 years) to complete it. Then it gets destroyed an in a short span of what... 5 - 10 years tops.. They had 75% complete. So they've obviously become more efficient.

 

To top it all off... They can build a DEATH STAR (that's a spaceship AS BIG AS A PLANET)... I'm thinking they are probably near the top of the mountain or looking down on everyone else from the summit.

 

Pretty sure a parsec is a measure of length, not time. So there goes that argument

[grandmthethird]

Do you like how in Empire Strikes Back Vader had to test carbonite freezing on Han to see if a person could survive it even though 3000 years before it was so common that people had the walls of their offices decorated in frozen people and it was belsavis' primarily form of incarceration for violent prisoners?

 

did you know that the romans were using concrete and plaster and even had central heating in there building design. technology that we lost in the dark ages and didn't discover again till the industrial revolution

[Riotus]

well in the movies tech drastically increases from the prequels to original series. you have the development of the death star, the development of imperial walkers, etc.