It's such a stupid move on the writers' part, forcing an oversimplified binary choice like this. It goes against everything Star Trek is about. It's especially horrific with Spock right there in the same room, since more than anyone he should know what the correct response is to the queen's question. The obvious answer for any Federation character would be to say neither deserves control of the mines unless the two sides sort out their disagreement and return to peace. This would underline the fact that Spock isn't there for the dilithium, he's there to resolve the conflict. The most powerful weapon the Federation has in the dispute is withdrawal of any trade until the issue is dealt with and assurances are given by both species that no further bloodshed will occur. Starfleet should be using the trade agreement as a means to force peace, not pushing for peace in order to retain the trade. They'd immediately prove to both sides that their claims of prioritising peace are sincere if they backed this up by threatening to pull out and never trade for dilithium again unless the fighting ends immediately. It's such an obvious move to make in the conversation that it's ridiculous the player isn't provided this option. Everything's backwards in this part of the game, and the "one or the other" nature of this specific choice only serves to reveal the poor quality of the game's writing team. The entire point of the Star Trek franchise is that there's ALWAYS a third option. In this case, it's "Neither of you. If you cannot resolve this conflict between yourselves and trade with us as a single, peaceful co-existing entity, then you clearly aren't mature enough for the Federation to continue trading with you. Good day."
You spell out your point exceptionally well. I suspect the point of the game’s writing was to make every ‘decision’ a zero-sum affair- which is jarring where the ethos of Star Trek is concerned.
@@IAmTheAce5 I just had to do this and agree. I remember getting similarly frustrated with the writing of the telltale game of thrones series, for a different reason (every decision you make leads to a bad outcome in the end lol) These games thrive on conflict and I was not happy how I was constantly thrown into zero sum conflict between crew members right from the start. Not to mention some answers lead to different outcomes than expected, since the character adds something in the second sentence that was not implied in the choices.
I thought the game was going to go super deep into the oppressor vs oppressed vs who controls the resources storyline. The binary choice just being something for us to think about at the start before the main story progresses, and you actually make multiple choices deciding the fate of the peace between two worlds. Unfortunately they pulled a Roddenberry and decided that the main villain was ancient advanced beings like Halo 4 or some shit.
This was super weird. There's no diplomatic answer available and the player is forced to make a choice on little to no information.
I was disappointed that the Tkon storyline completely shat all over this interesting moral dilemma
It's such a stupid move on the writers' part, forcing an oversimplified binary choice like this. It goes against everything Star Trek is about.
It's especially horrific with Spock right there in the same room, since more than anyone he should know what the correct response is to the queen's question. The obvious answer for any Federation character would be to say neither deserves control of the mines unless the two sides sort out their disagreement and return to peace. This would underline the fact that Spock isn't there for the dilithium, he's there to resolve the conflict. The most powerful weapon the Federation has in the dispute is withdrawal of any trade until the issue is dealt with and assurances are given by both species that no further bloodshed will occur. Starfleet should be using the trade agreement as a means to force peace, not pushing for peace in order to retain the trade. They'd immediately prove to both sides that their claims of prioritising peace are sincere if they backed this up by threatening to pull out and never trade for dilithium again unless the fighting ends immediately. It's such an obvious move to make in the conversation that it's ridiculous the player isn't provided this option.
Everything's backwards in this part of the game, and the "one or the other" nature of this specific choice only serves to reveal the poor quality of the game's writing team. The entire point of the Star Trek franchise is that there's ALWAYS a third option. In this case, it's "Neither of you. If you cannot resolve this conflict between yourselves and trade with us as a single, peaceful co-existing entity, then you clearly aren't mature enough for the Federation to continue trading with you. Good day."
You spell out your point exceptionally well.
I suspect the point of the game’s writing was to make every ‘decision’ a zero-sum affair- which is jarring where the ethos of Star Trek is concerned.
@@IAmTheAce5 I just had to do this and agree. I remember getting similarly frustrated with the writing of the telltale game of thrones series, for a different reason (every decision you make leads to a bad outcome in the end lol)
These games thrive on conflict and I was not happy how I was constantly thrown into zero sum conflict between crew members right from the start.
Not to mention some answers lead to different outcomes than expected, since the character adds something in the second sentence that was not implied in the choices.
I thought the game was going to go super deep into the oppressor vs oppressed vs who controls the resources storyline. The binary choice just being something for us to think about at the start before the main story progresses, and you actually make multiple choices deciding the fate of the peace between two worlds. Unfortunately they pulled a Roddenberry and decided that the main villain was ancient advanced beings like Halo 4 or some shit.
Bought the game on sale and paused at that scene because I was confused.