h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Star Trek vs. Star Wars - there can be no comparison.
To be absolutely inane, both have their own merits and distinctions.
I love both - they have action, adventure, romance, comedy, and are very marketable.

Saying that you are a Star Wars fan is socially acceptable and is almost a necessity - when asked whether you like Star Wars it is highly advisable to answer in the affirmitive, and to reply to the question of why? with "the spectacular special effects".(This allows you to forestall any attempts to drag you into an indepth discussion on the significance of use of orange lighting in the fight scene between Vader and Luke in "The Empire Strikes Back",etc.)
WARNING: it is unadvisable to answer "no" to the first question, and
this is considered to be an invitation for all the fans in
the room to attempt to convince of the 'joy and happiness'
that is Star Wars.

The culture of Star Trek is however much stronger than that of Star Wars - Star Wars may have the wider appeal and revenue, but Star Trek has thousands of fans who plan to build Starfleet Academy, who have learnt how to speak the language of Klinghais (which will be very useful when we make first contact with the Klingon Empire), and have taken degrees in the physics of Star Trek.

If it is a social necessity to like Star Wars, then it is a social distinction to be a fan of Star Trek. When you profess to being a Trekkie, or Trekker, people give you that knowing look - they quickly understand something which is the very core and makeup of your being - they know that you know that the starship Enterprise IS up there. To be a Trekkie is to be a different class of human being (or whatever race you may be - Bolian, Vulcan or Pakled).

All things considered, I must say that the merits of Star Trek are still greater than those of Star Wars. Star Trek has survived 33 years, Star Wars a piddly 22. Star Trek has had 4 spin-off series, 9 movies, countless bools, comics, magavines, models...Star Wars has 4 movies (well, will have 6), and a limited number of books, comics and mags, though much more merchandise is sold. Star Trek has cooler wer-sites than Star Wars. Star Trek came before Star Wars, and even developed various scientific ideas/inventions before they were made...etc.

Plus, not forgetting a very important aspect - food. Star Wars only has that blue milk (ANH) and nasty packaged bar-things (RotJ), whereas Star Trek has the replicator, with chocolate sundaes and Samarian sunsets - an alcoholic beverage (*can be made using synthale), which starts as a clear liquid, but when the glass is tapped, the middle of the drink flames like a miniture sun, colouring the drink orange. Not to beaten except by the Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster.

Thank you VVVVVAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRYYYYYYYYYYYY much. I have belived this for most of my life. I am glad that there are people who can think that both shows (movies whatever) have threir pros and cons. I AGREE FULL HEARTEDLY

Star Wars is fa, but so is Star Trek. They are too different to compare and i love them both, going to see the new film tonight it should be good. Every body needs to resd the x- wing books, Wedge is cool and shall live forever in my imagination,

I find myself in a strange position. I love Star Wars (including Phantom Menace) but have no time for Star Trek. I SHOULD do (all my friends love it) but each time I try to watch it I find myself mostly bored and irritated by the very wooden acting/script. I'm not claiming that Star Wars is well acted (mark Hamill is appalling) but somehow that gets lost in the fantasy. Maybe I just romanticise seeing the original film.
Anyhow, the point I'd like to get to is that yes both have various pros and cons. I don't think that liking one necessarily means liking or disliking the other. Just because you like one piece of science fiction doesn't mean liking all. It's all just personal preferences.

If hypothetically, Star Wars and Star Trek did have an all out war against each other: Star Wars will win!

Sun Crusher will destroy the star Sol and Earth along with it- Bye bye Federation Headquarters!

One ship: Star Destroyers... good luck in killing one, fat hopes in killing the entire Imperial Fleet, yet alone the Rebels, pirates, and numerous other countless billions of species' fleets.

Lets see those phazers against swarms of X-wings, Y-wings, A-wings, TIE fighters, TIE bombers, TIE interceptors, you get the general idea.

Note: these comments are definitely biased by a Star Wars fan.
Personnally i enjoy only the Star Trek movies (i.e. after Star Trek VI). Star Trek's greatest strength is in its relation to Science, which Star Wars lacks (e.g. TIE's making whinning noises in deep space). I hope this problem will be solved in the near future.

Star Wars though has room for expansion in its Universe (by individuals apart from the Genius George Lucas who is one of the riches guys around). Countless species exist and more are to be introduced. More variety of cool vehicles and ships. More action with space dogfightes, and most importantly, better computer games and toys!

As a trekkie, I'll agree that the films all brilliant. But as a Star Wars fan first and foremost, I feel compelled to blow holes in you're arguements.

First, judging the two films by their age is the wrong way to do it. Both films are still alive and kicking, and ST is only ahead of SW because it's older. Only when both films are dead can we use this as a comparison.

Second, episodes 456 were the middle selection of a series of nine films. The only reason the last three can't be produced is because the future of the Alliance has already been written, and that the stars all look older than they did at the time.

I'll concede that ST has had four spin of series and SW only two, but only two ST series (DS9 and the next genneration) are any good. And Ewocks and Droids were both aimed at a far younger audience, hench thier smaller impact.

Also, SW is the centre of a huge 100+ books saga detailing the marriage of Han and Leia, the growing up of their three children, and the difficult struggles of the New Republic against the Empire. Now, I know ST has more books, but all of them are based on the series. Where are the proper novels? The ones that aren't mostly tied to crap TV episodes (and you must admit, there are as many bad episodes as there are good)? Every one of the SW books is an excellent original, delicatly grafted into the already written history of the Republic, so that all the books are a seamless chronology of the SW universe, from the birthe of Han Solo to the end of the Empire and all it stands for.

The items served in the bar on Mos Eisley were served in a place where people/aliens only met to do buisness with the universes scum, and would be uninterested in the stuff they drank.

Also, SW provides more diversity in it's alien species than ST where (apart from Bajorans) they are all ruthless and violent.

And, the only thing ST got right was the floppy disk. I have yet to see transporters, replicators and phasers advertised in the Argos catalogue.

And anybody who learns Kilngon is, quite frankly, a pillac. What is the point in learning a language that is only any good for talking to other pillacs?

Amen to the above and May the force be with you.

If you want more evidence that Star Wars is better than Star Trek:
visit www.stardestroyer.net/empire.html

Thanks, Milmot. However, I didn't say that ST is better, just that his arguements for it were unsubstatiated. The two are different types of plots and cannot really be compared.

An overly geeky point but I'm afraid that in all out war Star Wars would be beaten hands down for several reasons. (I am a fan of both and so see this form a point of scientific (ish) Neutrality) The first problem is that all teh ships in Star wars use lasers. Lasers were long ago abandoned by teh federation and in their present state of technology a federation starship can repel laser blasts using its navigational deflectors (ie without raising its shields) federation Phasers would cut imperial shields to ribbons. Regardless of the 1.5 km of an Imperial class star destroyer the measly 200 odd metres of a defiant class starship could easily destroy one. (Fighters are too small and powerless for a starship to bother with)

Star Trek ships can also:

Cloak while retaining sensors and external visuals.
Communicate with shields up.
Teleport troops and supplys.
Warp drive is also far more versatile than a hyperdrive.

geeky arguments I know but its just true if you watch and read teh books. The Deaths stars laser would never get past a ships shields before teh death star was destroyed by a couple of quantum torpedos.

Just a couple of points. I do agree that The star wars Books saga is better executed than the "Continuity?" Star trek books. But it means that one bad decision by an author must be dealt with by Timothy zahn, Ahem I mean another athor. As for spinnofs, part of that problem is George Lucas who has become a victim of being surrounded by Yes men (Hence where the Phantom Meanaces Flaws come in) When In reality he should have been sidelined in the same way that Rodenberry was during the Trek Films.

Violent Cultures, The Ferengi are capitalists but not nececarily Violent. The Cardassians are cruel but not ruthless, teh Vulcans are, odly enough, not ruthless or violent what about Betazoids, hortas, bolians Andorians terralites and the millions of other species that make up teh Federation?

I agree that the Phantom Menace was a mistake, another way of making money. And the novels do contain contridictions...but with so many novels, this is unavoidable.

However, I wasn't announcing that Star Wars is any better. What annoyed me was that the article to which I responded was completly biased, presenting a onesisded view. I simply showed the otherside. I like Star Trek, and think that it has the best film score music ever written, but I dont think that it can be compared to Star Wars. Star Trek is science fiction; Star Wars is Sci-Fi fantasy. They're completely different.

I would agree with that. Staw Wars and Star Trek are different. Star Trek was a Humanis look at the issues of teh day in a sci-fi setting. As it matured it became a story about people and humanity in the future. Star Wars is a fantasy epic with its roots ground in fairy tales and saturday morning serials. The advantage with teh books is that they do develop teh characters which the films generally set aside. Star trek also has the TV series advantage in that they can explore the characters over hundreds, possably thousands, of TV hours while Star wars has had about six or seven hours of film time. Still Touching moments in Star Trek II and some nice touches will often do it for me. However, I feel that teh Star Wars Musical scores are often better, far more dramatic. Teh star Trek music tends to be more emotional.

but they would lose out in the weapons department.
the lightsabers can deflect the phaser beams back at the feds

May I point out that Emperer Palpatine also undestimated the threat of single man starfighters, and lost two Death Stars an is life to this.

Also, if all the starfighters were quantam-armoured Sun Crushers (an armour that could only be destoryed bay the combined strength of seven Black Holes) they could ignore the phasers in the same way as the Feds ignore our turbolasers

Incidently, turbolasers are not lasers, but are in fact superheated bolts of plasma, and even Feds are wary of plasma.

A vessel with Hyperdrive could dissapear from sight before the eyes of a Fed vessel, although the feds could virtualy dissapear when they go to warp.

And the 17.5km Eclipse class star destroyer, with a superlaser 2/3 the power of that on the moon sized Death Star, would dwarf and outgun anything in the Feds fleet.

In the shows, transporters often find situations in which they are useless, and can be negated with an artificial field, the name of which escapes me.

Incidently, it's nice to see this forum has expanded so much since my last visit

While I can agree with your arguments of teh hyperdrive Warp drive is more accurate (Try hyperspacing into a planets atmosphere, can't be done.) The Sun crushers armour needs black holes, fair enough, smash a few romulan warbirds into it, they use black holes as a power source. One main other point, You all keep referring to this fight as The empire (Plus a few jedis) vs the Federation, In a star trek VS Star wars its The empire, the republic plus smugglers etc vs The Federation, Romulans, klingons, Dominion, The Kazon, The malon, Spiecies 8472 and of course the borg. As soon as teh borg have assimilated imperial equipment, that which is lesser than their equipment gets upgraded. And I haven't even got around to including teh Q continuim. I am also being nice here by only using stuff which has appeared in The TV series and films. (And not including teh federation ever using teh genisis device as a weapon) if books were involved too I would have another load of races. with extremely high technology to use. If you were to limit Star Wars to teh films (Since Lucas appears to be ignoring teh books for his first trilogy) Star wars is underpowered due to its lower technology. The feds are wary of plasma, but a phaser is a beam of phased plasma. Transporters can be negated with Shields, but when they're down, your armoured hull won't stop teh transport of high explosives or hundreds of Gem-Hadar warriors (Bred only to do battle) To slaughter its crew.

One correction - It's Jem'Haddar, as so it is officially and canonically spelt. Then there's the Caretaker's mate as well, and who can forget Annorax, who could simply erase the attackers from time?

Sorry, but as you can see, I can't even spell "the", aline race names are well beyond me. I actually decided that the Krenimm time ship would be the ultimate weapon. You can't shoot it because it's out of time, and no matter what you do it will undo it. It even retconns a good episode back to the status quo.

Just specific to the books. There are loads of Star Trek Books. yes, lots of novelisations of episodes, and some that follow up or refer heavily to episodes, but thats partly because, unlike Star Wars, there is no real continuity being observed between books other thna that of teh series. So books are not considered cannon continuity. It can sometimes be a bit hit and miss with Star Trek books. Personal recomendations from me go for The dreadnaught books by Diane Carey (Dreadnaught and Battlestations) and the Kobyashi Maru (Also by diane Carey) and the New Frontier books by peter david, Fallen Heroes by Dayfid ab Hugh. The Invasion books were also good. these are the regular paperbacks, as for teh "giant novels" I reccomend the ones gohstwritten for william shatner (the odessy: The ashes of eden, The Return and Avenger and the Mirror Universe Books: Spectre, Dark Victory and Preserver) Federation is good, The mirror universe book and Q-Squared both by Peter David. Just shop around a little and read blurbs.

I agree totally. The X-Wing series is one of the best. And if any one wanted to match the technology of Star Wars to Star Trek, just think two words: "Sun Crusher"

Power of Star Trek over star wars. Two ships

1. The Krenim time vessel I mentioned before, you can't shoot it, 'cause it exists outside normal time space, and it deletes things form time. Sun crusher coudl destroy everything bar this and once it got to teh sun crusher everything it destroyed would be restored. Shields don't work against it unless they are special temporal shields.

2. Two words, The Borg