• 105 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Posted by DoctorDanger99 (686 posts) -

Ive been having this argument for awile now and i figured i would ask the best goddammed nerds on the internet what they think!

i know its hard to compare the two universes since star wars has alot of fantasy elements and basiclly what boils down to magic, but which is more technologically advanced? warp speed seems faster than light speed and i dont even think alot of the ships in star wars have shields. i mean star trek has fucking transporters for crying out loud and food replicators. but star wars does have a giant fucking space station capable of destroying a planet.

what do you guys think?

#2 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3719 posts) -

Star Trek, obviously. And I'm a Star Wars fan.

#3 Posted by DoctorDanger99 (686 posts) -

@Wrighteous86: im a big fan of both,but gun to my head,id say im a bigger wars fan. i just dont see how the wars universe could compete with the trek universe. then again,cant some jedi/sith pull ships out of the sky?

#4 Edited by TheCreamFilling (1223 posts) -

Star Wars hologram technology sucks.

#5 Posted by outerabiz (645 posts) -

the technology you would need to power a lightsaber is pretty advanced. It's infinite energy contained in a small holster. Not to mention bending the laser or whatever it is. Teleportation is something we have already achieved on a small scale and food replication is pretty advanced but it's basically advanced recycling. Been a while since ive seen either but star trek had True AI right? that's pretty advanced too.

#6 Posted by Skytylz (4023 posts) -

Holodecks bro, it's all about the holodecks.

#7 Posted by DarthOrange (3803 posts) -

Doesn't Star Wars take place in the past? I would hope Star Trek would be more advanced.

Online
#8 Posted by DoctorDanger99 (686 posts) -

@DarthOrange: true but aside from " a long time ago,in a galaxy far, far away." that doesnt give too much intel on how long ago. a long time ago could be a hundred years. it could be 1,000 years. it could be last week depending on your percetion of time.

#9 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3719 posts) -

The Force is magic, or nature thanks to Midichlorians. It doesn't count. Lightsabers are pretty advanced, but don't most of their properties exist through the crystals they're made with? In that sense, a light saber just harnesses the energy from a fantastical gem.

#10 Posted by Sogeman (862 posts) -

@Wrighteous86 said:

The Force is magic, or nature thanks to Midichlorians. It doesn't count. Lightsabers are pretty advanced, but don't most of their properties exist through the crystals they're made with? In that sense, a light saber just harnesses the energy from a fantastical gem.

This. Magic vs Technology. Also, Star Wars sucks but we all know that.

#11 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1796 posts) -

@Sogeman said:

@Wrighteous86 said:

The Force is magic, or nature thanks to Midichlorians. It doesn't count. Lightsabers are pretty advanced, but don't most of their properties exist through the crystals they're made with? In that sense, a light saber just harnesses the energy from a fantastical gem.

This. Magic vs Technology. Also, Star Wars sucks but we all know that.

heeeeeeeereeeeeeeee wwwwwwwweeeeeeeeeeee ggggggggggooooooooooooooo.

#12 Posted by UltorOscariot (170 posts) -

Strictly speaking tech, I'd have to go with Trek. Star Wars has the edge in weapons of mass destruction, whether it's the Death Stars, the Eclipse, the Galaxy Gun, etc. But Trek makes matter to energy conversion common place, whether it's the replicators or transporters. Cloaking technology is also far more common place in Trek as well.

#13 Posted by Animasta (14632 posts) -

@Wrighteous86 said:

The Force is magic, or nature thanks to Midichlorians. It doesn't count. Lightsabers are pretty advanced, but don't most of their properties exist through the crystals they're made with? In that sense, a light saber just harnesses the energy from a fantastical gem.

discussion overrrrrrrrrr

Online
#14 Posted by phrosnite (3518 posts) -

Stargate

#15 Posted by Sarge506 (87 posts) -

Doesn't it take like 100 years to cross the galaxy at maximum warp in Trek? Pretty sure in Wars they can cross the galaxy in 1 movie when travelling at lightspeed.

#16 Posted by Brodehouse (9515 posts) -

I think the actual tech in Wars is more advanced, but all the inhabitants of the galaxy use it like Goddamn cavemen. Like taking a finely tuned assault rifle and using it like a baseball bat.

#17 Posted by Will1Lucky (408 posts) -

As a Star Trek fan I'd probably say Star Wars...I mean christ the average Hyper Drive can go from one side of the Galaxy to the other in a matter of hours. While in Star Trek the average tech available to the Federation would take decades to equal the same feat.

The Death Star was just ridiculous in terms of firepower, the only thing that the Federation has that comes close is Genesis a terraforming device banned because it more or less can completely destroy a Planet full of life.

Truth be told we don't know too much about the Star Wars Universe in terms of tech, while Star Trek has numerous episodes and films we only have a few films and the Clone Wars series for Star Wars. And to make matters worse in a sense from Star Trek we see a wide variety of difference species, classes and the different tech they all have access to. Star Wars by comparison only focuses on the Empire/Republic and the Rebels. It doesn't really go in depth with the tech at its disposal.

#18 Posted by Crash_Happy (653 posts) -

@Wrighteous86 said:

Star Trek, obviously.
#19 Posted by rentfn (1275 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

Doesn't Star Wars take place in the past? I would hope Star Trek would be more advanced.

@Sarge506 said:

Doesn't it take like 100 years to cross the galaxy at maximum warp in Trek? Pretty sure in Wars they can cross the galaxy in 1 movie when travelling at lightspeed.

IT'S A TIE!!!!

#20 Posted by Sarge506 (87 posts) -

@rentfn said:

@DarthOrange said:

Doesn't Star Wars take place in the past? I would hope Star Trek would be more advanced.

@Sarge506 said:

Doesn't it take like 100 years to cross the galaxy at maximum warp in Trek? Pretty sure in Wars they can cross the galaxy in 1 movie when travelling at lightspeed.

IT'S A TIE!!!!

...Fighter?

#21 Posted by Kerned (1169 posts) -

@rentfn said:

IT'S A TIE!!!!

*fighter

#22 Posted by Inkerman (1448 posts) -

Star Trek we see more technology, but I'm a bit skeptical about whether or not they're ahead of Star Wars. In Star Wars small ships (like the Millenium Falcon) can travel across the Galaxy in a matter of days, I'm not sure, but I don't think Star Trek ships can do that. Furthermore, the Death Star actually reveals more than just having a giant laser. The most important thing it has in regards to indicating technology is power. It would take a huge amount of power to fire that laser, let alone move the dam thing at all, let alone interplanetarily. Another thing is the life support systems on the thing must be unfucking believable. Another point to note that while it appeared not many ships had shields, the Death Star did and unlike Federation ships, the thing was effectively impenetrable, the rebels could not just shoot the thing till it overloaded.

I'm gonna say Star Wars. Remember in Star Trek what we see is the height of technology, in Star Wars, particularly the original trilogy, we see only backward places with limited technological access. It would be like going to sub-Saharan Africa and assuming that was the level of technology that the rest of the world had.

#23 Posted by Jack268 (3387 posts) -

Well Star Wars people travel at FTL speeds like it's nothing while we're constantly reminded of the tech powering it in Trek which makes it seem like it was invented a week ago or so. It's also generally slower I think? And the lightsaber tech is pretty advanced. 
 
I always felt Star Trek was kind of unbalanced technologically, I mean they can teleport people but they use primitive trash like a holodeck instead of hooking their brains up to PCs? Bitch please. 
 
Although I guess that's kind of true for Star Wars too with going several times faster than light but still having shitty holographic transmissions.

#24 Posted by vikingdeath1 (925 posts) -

Star Trek is more advanced. They take our Poo and turn it into WHATEVER!

But I think A Star Wars could beat a Star Trek in a fist fight.

#25 Posted by Phyrlord (171 posts) -

I'm very surprised no one has mentioned the replicator. That alone seems more advanced the any tech in star wars.

#26 Posted by Ryanmgraef (226 posts) -

Fuck man,the future is awesome!new Star Trek and Star Wars movies on the horizon.yes!

#27 Posted by Clonedzero (4037 posts) -

star trek easily.

and i prefer star wars over trek.

i mean they got replicators, warp cores, matter / anti-matter reactors, replicators, transporters (that im still convinced that it kills you everytime you pass through one and leaves a copy of you on the other side).

#28 Posted by Pr1mus (3772 posts) -

In Star Trek they have this machine you talk to and it can get you any food you want. That's really all i care about.

#29 Posted by TheSouthernDandy (3759 posts) -

@DoctorDanger99 said:

Ive been having this argument for awile now and i figured i would ask the best goddammed nerds on the internet what they think!

i know its hard to compare the two universes since star wars has alot of fantasy elements and basiclly what boils down to magic, but which is more technologically advanced? warp speed seems faster than light speed and i dont even think alot of the ships in star wars have shields. i mean star trek has fucking transporters for crying out loud and food replicators. but star wars does have a giant fucking space station capable of destroying a planet.

what do you guys think?

Most ships have shields actually, all the capital ships, the rebel fighters all did, TIE's didn't, they sacrificed the shields for maneuverability. It's not really represented as well in the movies as it is in Star Trek though. That being said Star Trek probably was more advanced, replicators, transporters and all that. Star Wars stuff looked cooler though. I'd rather fire a blaster rifle then something that looks like a TV remote.

#30 Posted by Tylea002 (2295 posts) -

Star Trek, come on man.

#31 Posted by phrosen (143 posts) -

@vikingdeath1 said:

Star Trek is more advanced. They take our Poo and turn it into WHATEVER!

So 300 years in the future people will finally find a purpose for the Star Wars prequels?

#32 Posted by NTM (7233 posts) -

@DoctorDanger99: You do know that in Star Wars it isn't called 'light speed' right? It's called hyper drive, while Star Trek's is warp speed. I will say this, I'm a much bigger Star Trek fan, but when it comes to this, there needs to be no bias, and I wouldn't be bias anyways regardless of topic. I do like a lot of the things Star Wars has, like its cool planets and technology, but when it comes to the films, that's something I've always, as an adult, have tried to like more than I actually do.

When it comes to space travel and the speed at which they go, warp drive has the potential to go much faster than hyper drive, though neither of them are specific in how fast they go; warp drive since it's never had a limit, while I don't believe hyper drive has ever been completely described, though it has its limit. I'm not exactly sure about the wide array of Star Wars technology, so to say one is better than the other I don't know, but from what I do know, I believe Star Trek has a wider range of tech; whether one is greater than the other in comparison, I don't know.

Here's this though. http://www.bestonlineengineeringdegree.com/eternal-debate/

It doesn't get all of the technology down I don't believe, but there's that.

#33 Posted by fox01313 (5061 posts) -

Between the two it's star trek, especially after seeing the 6 films tied to the star wars universe & looking at the kotor games, the technology in star wars doesn't really change hardly at all. There might be a few redesigns but overall there's not as much change with so many inventive alien races that they seem to technologically settle on what works & not make jumps in the tech levels compared to Star Trek (easy to see the jump going from the original series to DS9 to voyager on the stuff being used).

#34 Posted by project343 (2809 posts) -
WHO NEEDS TECHNOLOGY MOTHERFUCKERS?!
#35 Posted by RE_Player1 (7541 posts) -

@Wrighteous86 said:

Star Trek, obviously. And I'm a Star Wars fan.

This.

#36 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

@vikingdeath1 said:

But I think A Star Wars could beat a Star Trek in a fist fight.

BUUULLLSHHHIIIIIIIIIT

#37 Posted by ImpendingFoil (555 posts) -

Star Trek is obviously more advanced.

Also, Star Wars is just a property that as time goes on the things you loved about it are routinely raped to death.

#38 Posted by huser (1015 posts) -

@DoctorDanger99:Tough to say. If by Star Wars you mean Empire/Rebel canon stuff and by Star Trek you mean the Federation and its allies I'd say its the question of who is more technologically advanced, a culture of super engineers or a culture of super scientists?

Because in terms of scale, whether you are talking destructive power, FTL speeds, populations, moon sized FTL capable WMD's, Star Wars has that hands down.

In terms of insane pulp mad science, whether its time travel, alt dimensions or the "mundane" techs of transporters and replicators, Trek wins hands down.

When I was younger this would have opened a huge flamewar, I hope it doesn't devolve to that here.

#39 Posted by huser (1015 posts) -

@Inkerman said:

Star Trek we see more technology, but I'm a bit skeptical about whether or not they're ahead of Star Wars. In Star Wars small ships (like the Millenium Falcon) can travel across the Galaxy in a matter of days, I'm not sure, but I don't think Star Trek ships can do that. Furthermore, the Death Star actually reveals more than just having a giant laser. The most important thing it has in regards to indicating technology is power. It would take a huge amount of power to fire that laser, let alone move the dam thing at all, let alone interplanetarily. Another thing is the life support systems on the thing must be unfucking believable. Another point to note that while it appeared not many ships had shields, the Death Star did and unlike Federation ships, the thing was effectively impenetrable, the rebels could not just shoot the thing till it overloaded.

I'm gonna say Star Wars. Remember in Star Trek what we see is the height of technology, in Star Wars, particularly the original trilogy, we see only backward places with limited technological access. It would be like going to sub-Saharan Africa and assuming that was the level of technology that the rest of the world had.

Admittedly the Rebels only assaulted the DS with 30 fighters or so. It being designed around taking on a fleet.

#40 Posted by IzzyGraze (849 posts) -

I would say Star Trek but I'm a Star Trek fan. We also have to consider the alien races in Star Trek. People are saying that Star Wars folks can move faster than Star Trek. I don't know if that's true for the federation but it's defnitely not true for some of the alien races. I've been watching a lot of TNG recently and there was an episode where an alien race remotely reprogrammed a human mind to heights of crazy intelligence which allowed him to do some crazy technology shit which allowed him to transport the Enterprise from their current point to the center of the universe in a few minutes! Also, on voyager the whole premise of the show is that a piece of alien technology slingshotted their ship to the other side of the galaxy in seconds!

Then as everyone has said: replicators, holo-decks(not shitty "your my last hope" holo tech), transporters. I'll add: sonic showers and crazy healing tech(Oh you reattached an arm? That was Star trek's Tuesday. Try growing a spine and replacing the current broken one.).

#41 Posted by huser (1015 posts) -

@IzzyGraze said:

I would say Star Trek but I'm a Star Trek fan. We also have to consider the alien races in Star Trek. People are saying that Star Wars folks can move faster than Star Trek. I don't know if that's true for the federation but it's defnitely not true for some of the alien races. I've been watching a lot of TNG recently and there was an episode where an alien race remotely reprogrammed a human mind to heights of crazy intelligence which allowed him to do some crazy technology shit which allowed him to transport the Enterprise from their current point to the center of the universe in a few minutes! Also, on voyager the whole premise of the show is that a piece of alien technology slingshotted their ship to the other side of the galaxy in seconds!

Then as everyone has said: replicators, holo-decks(not shitty "your my last hope" holo tech), transporters. I'll add: sonic showers and crazy healing tech(Oh you reattached an arm? That was Star trek's Tuesday. Try growing a spine and replacing the current broken one.).

I'm pretty sure that Barclay episode involved travel to the center of the Milky Way, not the universe which doesn't even make sense as the universe doesn't have a center.

#42 Edited by charlie_victor_bravo (919 posts) -

R2-D2 is just a rusty bucket next to Data.

#43 Posted by Jay_Ray (1068 posts) -

Star Trek easily. SW still use lasers, ST uses phasers. In ST lasers do little to no damage to a ship. A small hand held phaser can vaporize matter. A single photon torpedo can destroy a city, so a well armed ship (Enterprise-D or E) could decimate a planet easily. Also Star Trek has a substance to create a black hole, a black hole > a Death Star. Lastly about the speed thing, SW does not take place in our galaxy and therefore we do not know the size of their galaxy, also in ST they have demonstrated tech that allowed instant travel time. Also Q > Jedi.

Online
#44 Posted by TruthTellah (8382 posts) -

@DoctorDanger99: Star Trek, clearly.

Star Wars is more impressive at times because of its addition of spiritual forces or the completely unexplained. Star Trek is more technology focused.

Online
#45 Edited by huser (1015 posts) -

@Jay_Ray said:

Star Trek easily. SW still use lasers, ST uses phasers. In ST lasers do little to no damage to a ship. A small hand held phaser can vaporize matter. A single photon torpedo can destroy a city, so a well armed ship (Enterprise-D or E) could decimate a planet easily. Also Star Trek has a substance to create a black hole, a black hole > a Death Star. Lastly about the speed thing, SW does not take place in our galaxy and therefore we do not know the size of their galaxy, also in ST they have demonstrated tech that allowed instant travel time. Also Q > Jedi.

Can't quite equate the tech trees of different universe. A powerful enough laser is going to kerplode the Enterprise-A, D, or J regardless of what was said in that one episode. It's entirely likely that in Trek, when a species gets advanced enough they find phasers, polaron, disruptor, etc tech and thus anyone still using lasers is shorthand for not advanced, but a rock thrown hard enough will still kill a 29th century temporal Fed agent. Otherwise we get nonsense like the Death Star planet killing laser can't hurt a Trek ship with shields.

#46 Posted by Schatzy23 (159 posts) -

I think you need to clarify in your post which Star Wars vs which Star Trek. Are we talking about the 6 SW movies and the Clone Wars TV series, or we including the EU stuff? Same with ST, we talking about the shows and movies or including EU stuff in there as well? Then, maybe we could have a clearer debate with our parameters outlined.

#47 Posted by MonkeyKing1969 (2521 posts) -

Both are worthless, because either even makes much sense.  They have super advanced tech in some areas and stunningly primitive tech in other areas.

#48 Posted by geirr (2468 posts) -

@Wrighteous86 said:

Star Trek, obviously. And I'm a Star Wars fan.

This, although I enjoy Star Trek more.

#49 Posted by WinterSnowblind (7613 posts) -

No judgement being passed on the quality of either show, but obviously Trek.

Lightspeed being "faster" in Star Wars was obviously done, because they just didn't care about the plausibility and wanted it to sound really fast. That's just one of the reasons why the two universes are so different, it's really pretty much pointless to compare.

#50 Posted by Discoman (154 posts) -

I'd say Star Trek because they have teleporters and Star Wars does not. Automated systems in Star Trek on the ships themselves also removed the air craft carrier swarm you would see in Star Wars.