3 ms·
Yes, my impression is that Star Trek technology is well beyond Star Wars technology in most ways. Replicators and transporters have no equivalent in Star Wars.
by timwiseman 15y ago
Yes, my impression is that Star Trek technology is well beyond Star Wars technology in most ways. Replicators and transporters have no equivalent in Star Wars. Similarly, if we go to TNG and beyond, there is no comparison for holodecks,a nd medical technology in Star Trek seems better.
But one area where SW has a huge advantage is travel speed. In expanded universe material SW talks about travelling from the very edge of the Galaxy to the core in a few weeks, and that fits nicely with the few vague references in the movies. In Star Trek though it takes decades to go from the center of just one quadrant of the galaxy to the center of another (Voyager was entirely about that).
Also Star Wars has the force and Star Trek only has a few species with limited telepathy (unless you count Q of course).
- Jach 15y agoI decided some years ago that it really boils down to the name differences. Star Wars outclasses Star Trek in firepower and speed by far, it's a warlike place. Why launch a planetary invasion when one can just destroy the solar primary? Star Trek has a ton of underutilized technologies, they could optimize a lot but there's a general sense that the trek is more important than the end result. (As just one example, the Federation being perfectly okay with limiting warp speed to factor 5 when they found out warp was killing the fabric of space-time.) Then you have the various Stargate series, which fix up a lot of the underutilization problems of Star Trek. Teleporting nukes into the enemy ship? Of course! Replicators replicating ZPMs, a non-Deathist attitude toward life, and in the late Universe series they had finally explored aliens that don't speak English!