The Way That Star Wars Technology Is Superior To Star Trek

[@JacobLunbeck]

If you are interested, I made a second part to this video dealing with the more mystical side of the two franchises. Link Below. kzbin.info/www/bejne/enW1not_l7aEeMU

[@thedarkcrow9631]

Starwars has teleport and worm hole travel The old republic lore and the lore of the Rakata lore is super advanced and Celestials r also super advanced

[@mattrussell8309]

comparing data and droids doesn't really work what makes data unique is that he can develop his own interest's and drives outside of his programming droids are much closer to star treks holodeck programs with a preprogrammed personality and sense of identity thats hard coded into them.

[@starfleethastanks]

The reason the two are compared is simple. No other franchises have had such a wide-ranging impact on our culture.

[@LegoSnoopDogg]

And they both begin with the word ‘star’

[@plasmawarper5837]

That plus the ICS stats like 200gigaton trubos

[@TRivan-kx2bi]

Also they're both set in space, with aliens and technology far superior to ours

[@whitleypedia]

well said

[@stanchorlton1146]

star trek doesnt have the same impact

[@AltairZielite]

I really thought you were going to say 'hyperspace'. It was calculated that Voyager was going to take 70 years to cross the galaxy from the delta quadrant... The millennium falcon could do it pretty much in one afternoon.

[@spaceflight1019]

The Saurean species (ST:VOY "Distant Origin") could have easily gotten them home in a few hours, but because of their internal politics, they just allowed Voyager to continue on its way.

[@pieselpoloniae]

​@@spaceflight1019sure thing, but on average Star Wars ships are a lot faster (f.e. even the slowest ones (like Mandator I and II Dreadnaughts) would cross the galaxy much faster than 70 years)

[@ouknow1446]

@@spaceflight1019 It was very cold of them.

[@spaceflight1019]

@@ouknow1446 Heck, the Saurean leader wanted to destroy Voyager and imprison the crew until Chakotay talked her out of it.

[@spaceflight1019]

@@pieselpoloniae Sure enough. Pretty much everywhere in the galaxy was accessible in a relatively short period of time. Warp drive is fast, but the galaxy is so large that it takes a considerable amount of time to get anywhere.

[@mike86812]

You cannot compare the two. They have 2 different laws of physics.

[@Foebane72]

What about Babylon 5? That has THE most realistic sci-fi physics of all. And according to the creator of the show, JMS: "no cute kids or robots".

[@thelordofbacon4258]

@@Foebane72 Battlestar Galactica, The Expanse...

[@Foebane72]

@@thelordofbacon4258Babylon 5 came first.

[@thelordofbacon4258]

@@Foebane72 The first version of Battlestar Galactica came out in 1978.

[@Foebane72]

@@thelordofbacon4258 He means the 2000s remake.

[@kevineisele2809]

Honestly, when I first saw the title, I thought you were going to talk about FTL technology. Ships in Star Wars can traverse the galaxy in a matter of days. Star Trek literally did a whole series with the central premise that it would take decades with any technology known to the Federation at the start of the series. It’s really only the Iconians (the trek universe’s elder race), the Borg, and maybe those weird sentient dinosaurs that can match Star Wars hyperdrive technology. None of the usual factions ( The Federation, Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, or even the Dominion come anywhere close.

[@benperez6454]

Absolutely in a war with even numbers of people star wars would have the advantage of travel speed and communications and potentially the Droid. Although I feel like the Corp of engineers may find a way to break them free from programming. Trek would potentially win in the end only because they have free travel as opposed to lanes and not needing agricultural worlds to sustain its population but without even numbers and territory wars Absolutely stomps tng Era trek

[@heshangunarathna3262]

Star trek do have superior FTL but not utilized widely..for example Sporehub drive which can take you to anyware in observable universe , slipstream drive and also transwarp drive ....

[@benperez6454]

@heshangunarathna3262 yup that's why I said the tng Era because those technologies didn't exist for the vast majority of major powers transwarp was for the borg and voth. Slipstream wasn't perfect until after the 2400s started and spore drive essentially doesn't exist until the 32nd century now

[@heshangunarathna3262]

@@benperez6454 makes you wonder about alternative realities where federation adopts sporehub drive in discovery/ original series era...federation would have a bullshit advantage then..

[@benperez6454]

@heshangunarathna3262 they might they'd probably be able to at least hold off the star wars universe just because star wars has millions of worlds and they have a huge numbers adventure like just an insane level of number but the federation would be able to harass the ever living shit out of the star wars factions and make it just not worth it

[@starfleethastanks]

So, okay, I'm the mirror image of this guy. Very much in the Trek camp, but thoroughly enjoy Star Wars and therefore the target audience of this video. Here's my take. The Trek universe has a fundamentally different conception of how AI should exist and be used. Functions performed by Astromechs in SW are done by the ship's computer, universal translators are used instead of interpreter droids. We rarely see people in SW interacting directly with computers at all, the SW universe seems to be stuck in a 1970s notion of how computers work. Data is clearly vastly more advanced in every capability, remember that Soong intentionally limited Data's emotions to keep him from turning out like Lore. It's also implied in Star Wars that there is a similar reason for frequent memory wipes, droids with longer memories are less docile. SW does have Trek in one other department. Hyperspace allows for faster travel than warp. _However_ hyperspace depends on access to hyperspace lanes which are implied to be naturally occurring (created by purgills?) Some areas of the galaxy (i.e. Deep Core, Unknown Regions) are difficult to access because of unstable hyperlanes. Warp drive should allow the Enterprise to access these areas more freely than most SW ships. Also, you're absolutely right about how Picard would react to SW Universe.

[@theturquoisedream9244]

Yes. Yes. Absolutely 👍

[@GGBlaster]

Your point on hyperspace is mostly correct. Hyperspace lanes are the preferred means of traversing the SW Galaxy. However, it is still possible to just jump into hyperspace without a route, lane or even sense of direction. In SW Legends, the Chiss actually use young women of their species, who have strong connection to the Force, to quite literally feel their way through hyperspace. And, for the really daring, one could just jump into hyperspace and hope they don’t fly “through a star or bounce too close to a supernova.” Regardless, you are still correct that Star Trek’s warp drive would be preferred by virtue of its safer navigation of the cosmos. I think even the SW Galaxy would lean towards that, given the option.

[@gabrielfranco1899]

Maybe on 70 era trek but voyager there is at least two faster ways of travel then that

[@c_karis_1]

As far as I understand it, hyperspace lanes are basically long stretches of empty space that have seemingly no obstacles. Some regions have a lot of these stretches of land while others are way more difficult to traverse. Hyperapace is not like subspace in Trek where it is actually a whole other overarching sort of universe. Hyperspace is more like a dimension of normal spacetime. However even Star Trek has something akin to it: Transwarp hubs and the slipstream drive in Voyager.

[@The_Lucent_Archangel]

As others have pointed out there are methods like transwarp or slipstream which match or outpace hyperdrive. We could talk about the silly magic mushroom drive that has zero scientific basis (seriously, even hyperspace travel has more logical thought put into it), but I won't. I also won't subscribe to the silly notion that warp drive remained the pinnacle of FTL engineering as a concept for a thousand years, because that's Star Wars-style stagnation creeping into so-called Trek. I seriously doubt Starfleet wouldn't take all the theoretical and practical data Voyager brought back and not devise a more advanced travel method. Trek doesn't languish in "good enough" territory the way SW seems to when it comes to tech, and Starfleet in particular is renowned for being brilliant at innovation and improvisation. Even as far back as TOS if not for the "adventure of the week" model, it's safe to say that they would have leap-frogged to some ridiculous levels. When it comes armaments and combat, we can dismiss the fanboy wankfest that is Wookiepedia or the even sillier StarDestroyer.net. Even if the weaponry in SW put out that kind of raw firepower, they'd have to be able to hit their target. As early as TOS, Feds and Klingons were shown to maneuver and engage in combat at warp velocities. SW's weapons are with some exceptions line of sight and relatively short-range whereas Trek targeting computers have been able to bull's eye something the size of a phone booth at over 100,000 km, and they can presumably do this while at warp. I don't care how good your gunners are or how big your turbolaser batteries might be, good luck hitting something that's strafing you at superluminal speeds. SW ships would be sitting ducks because they can't fight at FTL speeds and their sublights aren't anywhere close to matching that kind of velocity. They have no concept of combat under those circumstances. Absent them somehow surprising a ship from one of the major powers and capturing it to reverse-engineer the warp drive, they have no chance of countering such an advantage. Sure, if they could map hyperspace routes fast enough then they could instantly jump right on top of a strategic target without warning and destroy it. But mapping routes is not fast and easy by any stretch. There's also no guarantee turbolasers or other weapons are an easy button, either. Kirk's Enterprise was able to tank shots from a Doomsday Machine (an automated craft able to carve and consume planets with an anti-proton beam). That's like superlaser-level destructive potential. Unless shield engineering went down the tubes since the 23rd Century, that would only improve too. And yes, the argument can be made that episode X Y or Z showed the Enterprise, the Defiant, Voyager, etc. lose power after like 2 hits from far less impressive weapons. That's called a contrivance for the sake of plot and narrative. Feats-wise, Trek takes the cake.

[@radioflyer68911]

Considering the androids we saw in TOS, TNG should have been crawling with very convincingly human androids.

[@mdurwin]

They had an issue with genetic engineering and AI that dissuaded them from integrating androids into most society. But as we saw in Picard, they’re employed on Mars.

[@jstilish]

Exactly, remember “What Are Little Girls Made Of?” From TOS? That was like, hyper-realistic

[@thefurrybastard1964]

That was answered in TOS. Humans don't really trust artificial beings, and prefer handling most tasks themselves.

[@JC130676]

Yes there certainly would have been a demand for that in the TNG society. After all, Tasha Yar proved that Data was... fully functional.

[@edwardpate6128]

Oh Andrea! Wow! @@jstilish

[@The-Autistic-Strategist]

Not only do droids have emotions, they are so emotional that it is often suppressed in their programming (not to mention Restraining Bolts) It’s also seen as necessary to regularly wipe your droid’s memory.

[@ouknow1446]

They have a *Lifeforce* . That's what gives them AI not their circuitry or programming. In Star Trek the *Force* is absent.

[@BNuts]

Yup, on the memory wiping. Luke didn't like to reset Artoo's memory because (A) he was an important friend, and (2) Artoo was proficient in tuning Luke's X-wing more to his preferences and abilities, making it perform better than another X-wing, or the same X-wing would perform with another astromech droid. This was despite being an old R2 unit, when more advanced R5's or R7's were available, for example. And Luke was far from the only pilot with a favourite astromech who did this, as there were others like Whistler. _Star Wars_ has a lot of droids in it that we see, from the little MSE (Mouse) droids that squeak and run away from trouble, to much larger battledroids. They all have their programming, as well as their responses, however restricted. _Star Trek_ has the occasional droid and AI, like Nomad and M5, but they tend to be less common. But let's not forget that after _Measure of a Man_ , Data fought for the rights of a race of non-humanoid robots, believing they were just as sentient as he is (forgot their names), and that they also faced similar issues with his daughter, Lal. Then there's the EMH and other photonic beings. _Star Trek Online_ makes it a point that after _ST: Voyager_ , photonic beings became more common, and could serve as bridge officers, or even explore the world and figure out their own lives. Two such are photonic versions of characters from _DISCO_ who were brought back to help deal with issues from that era, Stammets and Michael Burnham. Presumably they're still running around the game world, they just haven't been relevant to the story since. We also saw the Doctor himself in a previous story.

[@zrbytegmail]

​@BNuts in the 32nd century there's at least one ship in the federation that's entirely photonic, not just the crew but the ship itself. If I remember right it's been stated behind the scenes that no organic serves aboard as it would be dangerous for them when the ship travels FTL.

[@ouknow1446]

@@zrbytegmail Silly concept. Holograms exist for the benefit of organics. Otherwise the ship is a mere probe with AI.

[@andrewmalinowski6673]

@@BNuts The Exo-Comps, which were (like droids) going to be reprogrammed since they were supposed to serve as expendable repair units and the resistance to danger because of self-preservation made the scientist think they were malfunctioning. Aside from "Measure of a Man" or "Author, Author" I can't think of any other episode that dealt with synthetic rights, but there was a similar argument in a Season 2 episode of "The Orville" that related to a similar concept with Kaylons having once been service robots to their creators before they rebelled and viewed all organic beings as "expendable" and following a fight with the Kaylon Mercer argues for Isaac's right as an individual saying; "that would make him a slave" when Halsey suggests placing a control device on Isaac to keep him from turning on the Union

[@literalsarcasm1830]

The episode of TNG where Barkley confronts his fear of the transporters by helping rescue people who were trapped in them showed Barkley interacting with other lifeforms while inside the matter stream, demonstrating a continuity of consciousness. Meaning you remain you, even after de-molecularization.

[@DieselsVideos]

I way more like the term "Space Opera" for (original) Star Wars than something with science.

[@VunderGuy]

Both Star Wars and Star Trek are space operas tho. That's the core genre regardless of anything else. And to a lesser extent, planetary romances.

[@popesuavecitoxii2379]

​@@VunderGuy Star Wars is space opera, Star Trek is literal space fantasy with space elves (Vulcans, Romulans, etc.) Orcs (Klingons), teleportation, etc.

[@DieselsVideos]

@@VunderGuy No, Star Treck definitively is not! Star Treck is just normal episodic science fiction.

[@laisphinto6372]

Take any Star wars ship and compared IT to a Star Trek ship . The Star wars ship will Always Look way more realistic than the trek ships, also IT seems you ignored hundreds of Episodes of Star Trek doing a Lot of fantastical bullshit Out of their Ass. Just because they use scientific words doesnt make it any different from a Wizard spell

[@gabiballetje]

Correct, SW isn't Sci-Fi as such, i too would call it a Space Opera, where ST is very much Sci-Fi. Something like Stargate is Sci-Fi, but not as much as ST, and it has more humor in it, or even making fun of itself, not taking itself too seriously etc. But the difference between a Space Opera and a general action series or whatever can be a bit more vague.

[@catcalvin]

"And of course, Star Wars has the force"? I don't know if you are aware of it, but Star Trek has some fellows known as the "Q".

[@BigDictator5335]

Star Wars has the Celestials. It's not like either the Q or Celestials would ever get very involved in the affairs of mortals anyway.

[@damnskippy77]

Not a good comparison. Given the age of the universe, it is entirely plausible that there are some alien races/civilizations out there that are far beyond the humans down the evolutionary road. They would be incomprehensible, perhaps even imperceptible to us unless they make the choice to interact. For example, have an average joe from today take a diesel generator with a couple of drums of fuel, TV+DVD player, a couple of walkie-talkies, a car with plenty of gas, several lighters and an AR-15 with 10,000 rounds and time travel back to the world of 2000 BC and he will be viewed as a wizard with incomprehensible magical powers, perhaps even a god of sorts. And despite the intelligence of animals such as primates, dogs, dolphins, pigs, beluga whales possess, the actions as well as the world of humans are also completely incomprehensible to them. That is a more apt comparison of us humans versus advanced alien civilizations out there in the universe, and none of it is fantasy. It's just science on a scale that simply hasn't been conceived at our stage of development. Now "the Force" is an entirely different story. It is *known* to be present in the Star Wars universe for tens of thousands of years by most of the galactic races but no one has ever come close to understanding how it works despite their access to all sorts of technologies. Beyond that, the Force also has nothing to do with the evolutionary path because many different races can produce force users. As a whole, nothing about the history of the Force suggests that it has anything to do with science and the fact that some Star Wars races can be more "Force sensitive" than others suggest that the Force is some sort of supernatural, perhaps even mythological occurrence.

[@themightybob]

They would erase the sw universe just by blinking, and that's not an over statement!

[@kemas-s7y]

Bruh chill out, the only one that could do that is the author😂

[@FMK03]

@@damnskippy77 Highly agree with the first paragraph, highly disagree with the second.

[@DissociatedWomenIncorporated]

I’m such a Trekkie that as a little girl, it’s Star Trek which taught me the ethical and sociopolitical beliefs I still hold today (TNG being the one that started airing when I was a kid). I’m truly grateful, it made me a better, kinder, more empathetic and more open minded person. But while I’m firmly in the camp of preferring Trek, I _love_ Star Wars. I just got around to watching the final season of Clone Wars and the first two seasons of Bad Batch (I wish that was getting another two seasons rather than just one more), I binged all that in a week or two, and now I’m rewatching through Rebels which I only ever saw the first two or three seasons of. Live long and prosper, my young padawans 🖖

[@DissociatedWomenIncorporated]

@primotef8863 based! Though it was Babylon 5 and Farscape that made _me_ a rebel.

[@jaminallen3119]

what a great comment! I agree that it has a great moral core :D

[@DissociatedWomenIncorporated]

@@jaminallen3119 thank you ❤️

[@VisheshBangotra]

you saw the real Star Trek, a moral and guiding story rather than a SciFi piece!

[@DissociatedWomenIncorporated]

@@VisheshBangotra yes, and as an OG TNG fan, I’m so pleased to see that this moral core persists into modern Star Trek… it would have been so easy to just milk it with little effort for the brand recognition, but the current stewards of the franchise still respect the heart of what made Star Trek so great 😊

[@redmafiapanda]

One thing i'd add to the reprogramming part they dont actually forget everything before they know when they have been reprogrammed unless their memory is wiped but even then reprogramming droids doesnt erase who they are as a personality thats a level of sentience beyond 1s and 0s

[@NextToToddliness]

It's a moot argument to compare the two, like they're real world constructs, when in actuality they are storytelling devices that are designed to help propel or inform the narrative. Star Trek and Star Wars tell two very different stories, in two very different ways. If you look at the Disney sequels, they bent science and technology blatantly, because it served the story. JJ Abrams admitted that the Star Wars universe he's portraying doesn't even have the same physics as our own, which is also evident in the original trilogy, like how there's an atmosphere inside a giant worm living on a tiny asteroid, with Earth-like gravity. Stuff like that negates this argument entirely. Yeah the droids can appear to be more than machinery, but it's stated in background material that most droids are limited by their programming, and that only through accumulated experiences can they be considered even notably "sentient (sapient)". Considering how disposable droids are treated throughout the Star Wars universe, it's obvious many aren't kept around past their usefulness. I mean even Obi-Wan was a douche to droids, and didn't consider them to be nothing more than machines ("Well if droids could think, there'd be none of us here, would there?"). I get that these arguments strike a cord with people's feelings and parasocial relationships with media, but in truth, all these worlds and universes are there to serve a story that's trying to convey themes, feelings and ideas. I think both stories generally accomplish what they are trying to do, with the narrative devices they created. Which is more advanced or superior? That depends on the story.

[@leightoncressman6188]

Let’s also not forget that in Star Wars they also utilize fully equipped ground armies, which is something the Federation stupidly doesn’t.

[@CJ-442]

I think it’s because in Trek planetary shields aren’t that common, so if there’s a military target on a planet they want to destroy, they’ll just snipe it from space. Though there was that one episode in DS9 where Sisko and Co. had to hold off that Jem Hadar ground assault.

[@generalhux1818]

what did you think redshirts are???

[@aluimmumitat]

@@CJ-442 But what do you do if you wan't to occupy a planet. Are you going to destroy whole cities and continents? The amount of civilian casualties would be mind boggling

[@Subhumanoid_]

@@aluimmumitat "Precision" is a super-important concept in ST.

[@Barnuses]

They show multiple times where they will beam a small strike team directly into or near key locations to damage or disrupt systems. Don't need to have a permanent presence when you can drop in whenever and wherever you want.

[@biostemm]

The technology in star wars is mundane; it is a means to tell the story or a macguffin to propel our heroes. That being said, things like transporters or replicators are rarely used in imaginative ways, and there are numerous instances where some phenomenon or relatively common material prevents their use.

[@HeatRaver]

Yeah, Trekkers like to tout how scientific and realistic their franchise is, but transporters and replicators are really little more than deus ex machina plot devices to be ignored, or rendered inoperable, for convenient reasons as the story demands.

[@laisphinto6372]

Also Star wars more fantastical aspects are way more removed from the Star wars technology . Star Trek fantastical aspects are in the ships

[@HAXRLITSXY]

@@HeatRaver see, the issue with that is technically realistic, radiation is a bitch.

[@leonqubick7716]

just modify the forward deflector array ! it can do anything!!!

[@chaselaurence8783]

dont forget USS Voyagers cheese allergy

[@aidankeys8534]

And here I was thinking this would be about Hyperspace and it's ability to cross the galaxy in a matter of days at most.

[@katakisLives]

I had a quick look at wookiepidia and they're saying that the star wars universe has had FTL for about four thousand years! so while humans on earth were building pyramaids and such they were travelling faster than light already

[@Barnuses]

Most faster than light travel in Star Trek is effectively A to B travel by warping space. Hyperspace is a whole other dimension of space that a ship dips into and emerge elsewhere. Star Trek also has several versions of that kind of travel, it's just generally not utilized by the Federation. Either due to scarcity of resources required to utilize it or inefficiency for widespread use. Or in the case of "Underspace" and Transwarp Conduits, there are hostile aliens in them so trying to use them would be an act of war.

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Wars would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@salaciousBastard]

@@Mark-in8ju 1) Hyperspace needs a hyperlane mapped out. Warp drive doesn't. You can fight at warp speed in and around your planet. That whole slow speed chase in The Last Jedi doesn't happen. And if you're fighting the Borg, you don't even have the small advantage that you had against the Federation. 2) Who cares? Transporters and Replicators are far more economically relevant than anything in Star Wars. 3) The handful of force capable people left alive aren't changing much of anything. And please don't the let Q drop by for a visit. Your hyperlanes might vanish.

[@Xyzima]

​@@salaciousBastardhyperlanes arent needed for hyper space, they are just safe routes without stars in the way

[@zyswanson7865]

As a star wars and trek fan, I think this debate is correct. Though now with the new tv show Star Trek Picard's first season, the tec for ai is pretty much the same if not treks is better because they were able to replicate not only feeling for the androids, but also eating, smelling, aging, replicating more humanoid looks, visible expressions, and even dreaming when sleeping. So I'd say yes, Star Wars is still in the lead of the populous of AI, but not on the superior technology anymore on this matter.

[@chaost4544]

Though not a fan of the first two seasons of Picard, it did a pretty good job showing why the Federation was hesitant to use androids.

[@The-Autistic-Strategist]

And don’t forget the deferences between Hyperspace and Warp Drive. Hyperspace is faster, but at least in Warp you can see where you are going. With Hyperspace you have to do all the calculations before jumping (or just download the flight path from a comms relay that keeps an ever updating map of the next section of hyper-lane (or pre mapped path in space with no stellar bodies blocking it)) I grew up on Star Wars (still love it. But am sad about its current state of affairs) when I was a teenager, I was introduced to Star Trek Enterprise and Voyager. Enterprise is what hooked me. And Voyager bridged me into Next Generation (which I now enjoy a bit more than Voyager now, though Enterprise is still my favorite) though I still struggle to get into the original series (not for lack of trying) I play Star Trek Online daily. (Though I’m a solo player) I also play SWTOR on occasion.

[@pronumeral1446]

Yes, Warp Drive is more versatile and easier to use ... but Hyper Drive is thousands of times faster. That said, there are other FTL technologies in Star Trek such as Quantum Slipstream and Transwarp ... they are just not often seen in the shows ... mostly showing up as plot points or enemy tech.

[@shavaughndavidson2257]

it might be faster but it isn't inherently more advanced than a warp drive

[@The-Autistic-Strategist]

@@shavaughndavidson2257 i was more thinking on a tactical and strategic level. In my opinion the pros and cons of each don’t give ether side a definitive advantage. It would have a bigger impact on a 1v1 fight than on a large scale conflict. These 2 means of FTL support different styles of warfare. And if both sides played to their strengths then they’d actually be pretty balanced.

[@theFrozeman]

Old cannon hyperspace was faster by enough that the plot of voyager just wouldn't be a thing. In star wars places aren't hard to get to because they are far away, but because navigation is difficult. New cannon post Ahsoka even stuff like Trans warp may as well be walking. The only thing I can think of in trek that may be faster involved Janeways salamander babies and is best forgotten.

[@johnmiller7682]

Hyperdrive is not faster. I know people think it is, but it's not. Star Wars has never actually given a known size of its galaxy, and that's a problem. But, they have made it clear that it is possible to travel from one star system to another, without hyperdrive. This fact makes the Star Wars galaxy considerably smaller. At The Falcon can make .5 past light speed, while in hyperspace. And that's considered fast. This would suggest that it goes 1.5 x the speed of light. Star Trek ships travel so much fast than this. Plus, there are subspace corridors and transwarp corridors, that ships can travel through. And though the Federation doesn't have the technology to use these regularly, there are species that do.

[@scifinerddpk8220]

Anti-gravity technology seems to be more common in Star Wars then Star Trek

[@transtubular]

not really...i think its just not used all over due to fx budgets in the show and just not needed for the story in general.

[@ОннокорОктябрь]

Not only anti-gravity but gravity creation like do Interdictor-class Star Destroyers

[@tachyon7368]

@@ОннокорОктябрь nacelle pylons, iconian dyson spheres, ring worlds as seen in lower decks, hell every space station uses some form of antigravity, then there was that gravity catapault in voyager, at the very least the two are comparable in the manipulation of gravity.

[@ОннокорОктябрь]

@@tachyon7368 can you explain what point in antigravity on space stations? For habitants walking on celing?

[@tachyon7368]

@@ОннокорОктябрь i misspoke, the space station one was an example of gravity manipulation rather then antigravity

[@JeanLucCaptain]

Fun fact: STO just released the Rex-Class Frigate for the Khitomer Alliance which is a Dominion Starfleet Hybrid ship. it also has the 501st legion symbol of its namesake on the top. which is awesome because we know the Dominon uses a Clone Army that has literal Star Trek Star Destroyers. so: The shroud of the dominion has fallen, BEGUN THE CLONE WAR HAS. ALSO: the Borg Transwarp conduits are literally premade hyperspace routes with a borg green glow.

[@chaoslord8918]

I was thinking about this from a storytelling perspective, and how the limitations in Star Wars allow for more story elements like you describe. Just like how there's no transporters or replicators, in Star Wars, money is an issue even for queens and Jedi knights, apparently, and there's no time travel or alternate universes like in Star Trek, which for me makes the world feel tighter and more structured.

[@ertymexx]

Agreed. In my book a franchise that starts with alternate dimensions and timelines has already failed.

[@tortenschachtel9498]

There is some form of time travel with the "World Between Worlds".

[@sdagonz67]

Star trek tech. In very scientifically plausible, Star wars is pure space fluff ,that had redundant plots with weak characters. later

[@John-fk2ky]

@@sdagonz67 Plausible? Have you lost your mind? The more I look at Trek (despite being a fan) the more I question if it’s sci fi at all. It’s most iconic tech, transporters, are the ultimate in “this is completely impossible”. You’d have to completely rewrite physics to make them work. Replicators are also impossible, at least as depicted, because they’re absolutely insane in terms of inefficiency. Do you have any idea how much energy it would take to materialize something out of pure energy? The artificial gravity is a necessary break from the laws of physics for even impulse engines to work. There’s just so little that is even vaguely plausible that I’m surprised the shows were anyone’s gateway into science. Stepping back and just looking at them from a storytelling perspective, Star Wars pre-Disney (movies 1-6 and the Expanded Universe, now labeled Legends by Disney) is far superior Star Trek (and I say this as a fan of everything up to and including Enterprise for Star Trek; everything after that goes in the same junk pile as the Star Wars sequel trilogy). Physics-breaking or not, the rules of Star Wars are consistent and don’t require anything to break except for whatever caused the initial problem to tell an interesting story. Star Trek has to constantly come up with reasons for why the transporter can’t be used to solve whatever the problem is instantly.

[@laisphinto6372]

WE ignored filoni bullshit that idiot brought in way more bullshit than anyone else

[@haddarac1]

Star Wars does have teleportation and replication. The Gree and the Rakartans both utilised teleportation and the Rakartans had the Starforge which utilised the power of a star and the dark side of the force to replicate droids, weapons, fighters capital ships even clothes. The Rakartans used this to replicate an armada they used to almost conquer the known galaxy. Revan and Malik also used the Starforge to wage war on the Jedi.

[@reubzdubz]

Hmm do you think using the Force makes it advanced per se? Or does it make it less advanced?

[@johnhoran9840]

It certainly makes it HIGHLY specialized.@@reubzdubz

[@christopherpoet458]

@@reubzdubz I would argue it was one of the most advanced pieces of tech. The Force is a built in universal magic system in Star Wars and it is not common for technology to tap into or utilize the force. Typically, tech seen to use the force was either highly experimental or it was instead using Dathomeer Witchcraft (which is just a different way of using the Force). And even then, there isn't a lot of tech that utilized witchcraft. The only piece of technology known to be common (until RoT were lightsabers, which both relied on the force user and the mechanics of their construction. So, yea, having a giant space station able to turn a sun into a cloning machine that was able to replicate armies, armada's, and gear to arm your military and supply them is at the top of the tech tree. Might I also ad there is only ONE Star Forge. Just one. Which really indicates just how difficult it must have been to get the one working, let alone consider mass production.

[@cr90captain89]

@@christopherpoet458 not to mention with the star forges force abilities? it had a force powered self repair function meaning it was eternal until it's original form was intentionally destroyed. even in the old republic & modern imperial era it lives on as the rings of lehon, encompassing its creators home world & casting a unseen shadow upon the galaxy.

[@HeatRaver]

But Gree and Rakatan technology are not "mainstream" for that universe like how transporters and replicators are ubiquitous for most of Trek's races. Otherwise if we're including one-race technologies of obscure Star Wars races, the same would have to be done for Trek's one-off episode races too.

[@darrellboggess4954]

Star Wars: "We have the Force." Star Trek: "We have the Hulk...er, I mean...Q."

[@--Braden--]

great minds think alike i just commented: Star Wars: we have an army of space wizzards Star Trek: we have a Q

[@Maddog-xc2zv]

@@--Braden-- SW: we have Celestials....

[@joshfarrow9707]

Data is much more advanced from Droids as they don't have the processor abilities of the positronic Brain. Yes he didn't have emotions on tng but dose later in the movies.

[@joshfarrow9707]

Also in star trek there is AI that's more advanced than Droids.

[@louisbabycos106]

The transporter was created due to budgetary limitations of the shows prodction . It was deemed to expensive to have a shuttle bring the crew down to tge surface of alien planet in all of tge episodes.

[@mincos_outon]

This was the answer i was looking for... How a budgetary conditionant was baked in the worldbuilding of this franchise

[@Celtic_Spartan]

The technologies that are more advanced in star wars then star trek: Droids, Automated engineering, Zero-g engineering, Star ship design, Sensor technology, Sub-light engines, Genetic engineering, Surgery, Medicine & Hyperspace.

[@chaost4544]

Droids and hyperspace are the only things Star Wars is more advanced on that list, especially as Star Trek evolved. Star Wars ship design is actually one of the worst in science fiction.

[@Celtic_Spartan]

@@chaost4544 are we talking about the entire settings or just the "Box art" factions.

[@Celtic_Spartan]

@@chaost4544 also while i largely agree with you on star wars ships having obvious design flaws, star trek varies in ship design with some being better while others are much worse compared to star wars.

[@chaost4544]

@@Celtic_Spartan it's not a visual thing. There's a lot of redundant systems within Federation ships and other species in the Trek Universe that make them extremely durable and have a high survivor rate from catastrophic damage compared to Star Wars ship design which easily kills 20-50K people because Star War ships are poorly designed. In real life we install guard railing on steps as a safety feature; which isn't a thing in Imperial design but a thing still in Star Trek. How many people in the Galactic Empire have been killed because there was a lack of basic safety things we take for granted on a daily basis?

[@Celtic_Spartan]

@@chaost4544 i was more talking about the fact star trek ships have consoles that start exploding if anything hits there shields.

[@6978969]

What a stellar breakdown. As a lifelong Trekkie and massive fan of Star Wars that was a great video essay. Thanks for the video.

[@JacobLunbeck]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@ouknow1446]

What is missing is the omission of religion. The one thing Star Wars has that separates it from Star Trek and impacts its technology. Droids have AI upon assembly because of a *Lifeforce* imbued in them from what Obi Wan Kenobi described. Star Trek has no *Force* in its universe so everything must have a pseudo scientific basis.

[@UltimaOmega]

Faster than light travel is also better in Star Wars. While it's not clear just how fast ships travel in hyperspace, it's clear that it's much faster than warp. In Star Wars is clear that they travel all over the galaxy in reasonable amounts of time. In Star Trek, aside from a few exceptions like worm holes, Borg Conduits, and perhaps Transwarp, travel across the galaxy doesn't happen. But those are not the normal travel methods used. But in Star Wars, hyperspace is the common method. Remember, at max Warp Voyager was 75 years from home. There is one notable limit to hyperspace, for safest travel you have to navigate hyperspace routes because going unmapped is dangerous.

[@ryanjones2297]

I would say its faster, but not necessarily better. After all starfleet ships can engage in combat while still at warp.

[@cr90captain89]

@@ryanjones2297 yes, but that combat is only capable explicitly because any warp factor is at sub light speed, at FTL combat while in transit is untenable & a waste of energy as any munitions fired will miss the target by the time it reaches the initial coordinates because the sheer velocities involved.

[@ryanjones2297]

@@cr90captain89 I have no idea the point you are trying to make here. And it sounds all wrong. Starfleet ships can and do engage in combat in warp, which is faster than light, not sub light. But you don't even need warp for this, their sub light engines full impulse speed is 3/4 lightspeed, Or 4 billion km/h. Most star wars ships are stuck in the thousands of Km/h at best. Then the weapon systems on starfleet ships can accurately engage targets hundreds of thousands of Km out, while traveling 4 billion km/h OR at warp. And it isn't a drain to use those weapons at warp either.

[@ryanjones2297]

@cr90captain89 except that isn't the case because we see several times on screen where two ships engage in combat at warp and hit each other with weapons fire. Then even if you were right a vessel at warp would have no issues doing strafing runs on a sunlight vessel. We see that on screen too

[@cr90captain89]

@@ryanjones2297 onscreen battles happen purely for entertainment value, in lore engagements happen at the ranges I've mentioned. nevermind that sw ships can track & target ships through hyperspace while keeping them targeted when they exit, kind of hard to evade fire at warp when the projectiles being fired at you are going the speed of light (turbolasers) strafing runs at warp only work on a target that is also at warp, hence why combat in st happens at low impulse unless A. a chase is initiated & the participants are not making any other movements or B a fleet formation is forced to scatter. a turbolaser cares not for how fast you are, because its projectile is the conventional universal speed limit. going to warp against a sw ship will simply make your ships movement extremely predictable as mobility in other directions will be severely hampered & get warheads on a forehead.

[@Because-Linux]

The force? Star Trek has the Q.

[@Because-Linux]

Hyperdrive is faster than warpdrive, but the Caretaker Station can yeet things faster than hyperdrive.

[@AndersonNeo12]

Star Trek vs Star Wars Babylon 5 & Stargate enter the scene: "hello there" 😊

[@MaxRamos8]

Battle Star Galactica shows up with rifles

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Trek would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@pollexx8844]

As a trekkie, I admit that on average, the baseline abilities of Star Wars are better, (Faster FTL, Stronger weapons, bigger stations, Droids, and super human abilities) Star Trek tech is more diverse and sophisticated tech (Transporters, replicators, advanced computers {I know droids exist in star wars, but other than them, the computers seem kind of lacking}, Automated targeting, and less restrictive FTL.) And to clarify what we are comparing, typically it is the empire for Star Wars and Next generation era Federation for Star Trek, just so no one points to god race number 37 from either franchise to make their point.

[@anyonecanart3394]

I thought you would say the hyperdrive. In Trek it would take 100 years to cross the milky way and in wars it's a few weeks. So there is that I spose

[@shavaughndavidson2257]

while it might be faster the science to achieve it isn't more advance.......entering an hyperspce tunnel is alot diffrent from making one

[@selok91]

@@shavaughndavidson2257 well but they have the tunnels so they were made long time ago..... idk tho

[@jaminallen3119]

@@selok91 pretty sure they were discovered - made by a long forgotten race....

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Wars would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@stubbornspaceman7201]

@@Mark-in8ju Really, copy pasting the same dumb argument over and over and over? How intelligent.

[@matt_the_trucker]

As a trek person... You hit the freaking nail on the head... Very well done and put together...

[@dariuszanzibar474]

No its not. There are a ton of AI and androids in Star Trek.

[@firebird_5282]

I totally agree with the Science Fiction and Science Fantasy categories. Which is quite obvious when we see a small kid with no real tools create a sentient robot dude in the desert. In Star Trek everything requires a bit more effort and explanation to suit the logic of the universe. But we have seen some very advanced droids in Star Trek too. The reason why they are not used as commonly is due to the moral problems they would have caused in this universe and that most species in Trek dont trust artificial lifeforms. Data is the first of its kind sure and also seems more advanced than a battle droid or C-3PO. Data is by far not the first AI in Star Trek. The Enterprise computers are basic AIs. There is hologramm technology too. These photonic guys are AIs too. And with some tweaks very capable of emotions and even sex. All of this and they cant even be hurt by normal weapons. Thats why they are used as soldiers or security personnel by some species.

[@TheLiberalNerd]

What is about travel speed? Tatooine is in the outer rim, Alderan is somewhere near the galactic center. Voyager, the fastest ship of the federation would need decades to travel those distances, while the Millenium Falcon only needs a few days or maybe even hours.

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Wars would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@sviraz]

"The Force is a complete game-changer" unless, like someone mentioned already, they would bring up Q to the battle, then the Force is... useless, beside, Jedi can be killed. with Q is more complicated @@Mark-in8ju

[@Mark-in8ju]

@@sviraz If Adonalsium can be killed, so can a Q.

[@molybdaen11]

Letz see. 1) Hyperdrive. Yes there are different types of ftl in star trek too but most o them use warp travel which is much slower. 2)A.I. Star trek has a few high advanced androids and computers but in star wars they are common and everywhere. 3)Survivability. Star wars ships are generally very hard to destroy and keep they crew alive even when heavy damaged - while star trek ships have exploding consoles and collapsing shields after every hit. 4) Communication Star wars has a galactic net which enables them to send messages across the galaxy in hours. Best star trek can do is Tachyon messages a few hundred lightjears away. 6) Security. Now this is a low hanging fruit but in star wars every ship has ways to seal areas from intruders or arm the crew. Also every single computer hat (Theoretically) a password. And you need knowledge and training to control a ship. In star trek any random brute could enter your ship, take a seat and be in complete control.

[@KenoshiAkai]

Good video. I think that the most practical reason for a lack of 'droids in the Star Trek universe is because of budgetary restraints. Kind of like for the same reason that most of the aliens look very humanoid. Limited budget limits the possibilities for having robots appear on a regular basis. But I think that it also comes down to an essential philosophy in Star Trek that humanity is interested in bettering themselves. Being that the setting is a post-scarcity near-utopia, humans are focused on being the best that they can be in whatever it is that they are doing. Having a slave class of sapient robots runs counter to that kind of idea. And of course there's the whole ethics angle of that sort of thing, like the narrator said. Any Starfleet officer would be mortified by how 'droids are treated in the Star Wars universe. Though Star Trek has also dealt with that sort of ethical quandary in Voyager with the treatment of intelligent holograms.

[@Dreamfox-df6bg]

There was also the episode where one Starfleet Officer wanted to dismantle Data so they could build more of him. But that's Star Trek for you, pushing the boundaries of space and technology and confronting the problems that come with it. Meanwhile Star Wars is a galaxy that is more or less very set in it's ways for the last 20 or 30,000 years.

[@HeatRaver]

Trek doesn't even need to make sentient robots; none of the regularly-seen races even use robots for mundane tasks, like Roombas. Ruthless races like the Romulans and Cardassians should be using robots as cheap, mass-produceable, expendable weapons at that level of technology they're supposedly at.

[@deadturret4049]

The explanation for the transporter is mostly right, but its worth noting that a person who is being transported retains consciousness inside of the matter stream. They aren't turned into snapshots and then reassembled. Its more like they become entangled in two places. The way you described it more closely matches how wormholes work in Stargate.

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Trek would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@stubbornspaceman7201]

@@Mark-in8ju Really, copy pasting the same dumb argument over and over and over? How intelligent.

[@christopherjennings2830]

Really hate these comparisons two completely different realities. Both work fine in their own universes and it's possible to appreciate both fictional franchises.

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Wars would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@seventh-hydra]

​@@Mark-in8ju Not sure how that's related to what the guy said lol. The point is that it's not really a competition.

[@skeleton1765]

Star Wars technology is reliable enough that you don’t have anxiety about a crewman taking a shuttle to the planet below. My biggest gripe with Star Trek is the technology fucking failing all the time. It’s just generally not a compelling plot device. TNG overused this to hell.

[@mcnultyssobercompanion6372]

I respect it as a genuinely interesting argument, but I personally feel that the droids in Star Wars are not slaves. They're...machines. I would argue they don't feel emotions, not even C-3P0 or R2-D2. They respond to stimuli according to the 1's and 0's of their programming, no matter how much it may _resemble_ human emotions. I'll concede it's kind of brutal, on the surface, for Bail Organa to wipe C-3P0 and R2-D2's memories at the end of "Revenge of the Sith", but I feel, for the sake of the safety of the humans (and other creatures) of the Rebellion, it was unequivocally necessary. And that matters more than any machine. In the end, however fond we may be of them, they're just machines.

[@JPO-jx6nr]

you hit the nail on its head with that. To be honest, this is the only thing I am truly anxious about in regards to real life AI developement. The day people think machines have true feelings because they resemble them via progam, mankind will face a new kind of threat. Imagine UN declared human rights for machines just because they would cry and people would feel compassion for them...

[@gama343]

Droids do have a presence in the Force, to the extent that Jedi can get a read on their intent if they focus hard enough, so I'd say they're more than just machines responding to their programming. The real issue is that it takes years of being 'on' for a droid to develop sentience and personality beyond their programming. In regards to their treatment as being slaves or not, well that becomes a function of whether or not the droid in question is being mind wiped regularly to keep it at factory settings, or allowed to develop into a fully sentient AI. If they get mind wiped regularly, they remain a machine. If they don't, they become a person, but most people who refrain from the memory purges will accept the droid's developing personality and treat them more like a friend.

[@ertymexx]

Just a wee point... Bail only has C3P0's memory wiped, not R2's.

[@jaymullen75]

As someone who loves these two franchises, I agree with the premise of the video. I would also like to propose another video idea: Thrawn with a Federation fleet.

[@WardenWolf]

I also greatly enjoy both Star Wars and Star Trek. A lot of the arguments over which has the highest tech level are kind of meaningless when you look at the whole background of each universe. "Turbolasers" are actually plasma cannons. What you'd alternately call a particle projector, particle cannon, or PPC (Particle Projector Cannon). Consider that multiple species in Star Trek use plasma disruptors in both beams and cannons which are basically the same thing. Then you start looking into the sheer power levels involved just to make something like a Death Star mobile, and you realize they're on a whole different power level; if you can move a Death Star at faster than light speeds, how much power are those individual cannons packing? People wonder why weapons in Star Wars appear to be manually targeted? Maybe their ECM just got that good OR, more likely, they DO have centralized targeting but they have manual local targeting as a backup (like WW2 battleships had) for damage control purposes. Star Wars is a universe where faster than light travel is thousands of years old, as are the other basic technological aspects of life. It all seems mundane and low-tech because to them it is. In the late 1990s, even the best PC was completely obsolete within 4 years, and by the end of that time virtually no components would even be compatible with the latest models. Nowadays, a 10 year old PC, if properly built, can still be viable for basic stuff and still maintain a lot of component compatibility. Star Wars is this on steroids. The technology advancement rate has stagnated and equipment even centuries old is often still viable. No transporters? Well, maybe they simply found it to be impossible and that technology really is science fantasy.

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Wars would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@stabnore]

The droids in Star Wars are comic relief... They are not advanced tech like Data.

[@stainlesssteelfox1]

I don't remember the name, but there was a Star Wars/Star Trek crossover fanfiction where exactly this happened. A Star Wars droid which had developed sentience claimed asylum on a Star Trek Starbase. Though in Star wars droids don't start out sapient, following only their programming. However, over time some droids develop sapience, which is one of the reasons droids are so frequently memory wiped, to avoid allowing them the time to develop that far.

[@bdr32965]

Because otherwise they would become the Cylons and eventually rebel against their creators

[@aralornwolf3140]

@@bdr32965, So far, only _one_ assassin droid rebelled against its owner... Which is why there aren't any more of them. :p

[@--Braden--]

Star Wars: we have an army of space wizzards Star Trek: we have a Q

[@bdr32965]

LOL good one, kind of like Loki saying we have a Hulk to Thanos.

[@Maddog-xc2zv]

SW: we have celestials

[@captainjellicoe1701e]

now I'm more of a Star Trek fan than Star Wars I like Star Wars but another thing where they are more Superior is their form of a space travel hyperdrives are a lot faster than warp drive it seems like

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Wars would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@stubbornspaceman7201]

@@Mark-in8ju Really, copy pasting the same dumb argument over and over and over? How intelligent.

[@Mark-in8ju]

@@stubbornspaceman7201 Hypocrite. I also have more likes than you.

[@bdetert82]

As far as the transporter 2:10. Yep that is pretty much it. It is a murder cloning device. Its best not to think about it.

[@GGBlaster]

So, I have a question for Trek fans: how does communication work in Trek? In SW, there is a system called the HoloNet. As basic as I understand it, SW built -illions of transceivers and hid them in special locations in hyperspace. Messages would pass from transceiver to transceiver via tiny hyperspace tunnels that were almost completely uninterceptable. TLDR: communication was nearly instantaneous across the SW Galaxy, and was very secure.

[@IAMtheSpaceNinja]

As a life long trek fan: It's basically the same in Trek. Wars has "Hyper space", Trek has "Sub-space".

[@adampender3685]

Wasn't as good in Star Trek but is rapidly approaching that good. Voyager was stuck on the other side of the galaxy and originally couldn't communicate with Star Fleet, but eventually communication was established.

[@3Rayfire]

Subspace Relays are located all across inhabited space, usually ranging in size from large probes to small space stations. Subspace relays are short range and slow compared to the holonet. The Horatio Hornblower inspired world of Star Trek means that communication is supposed to be an impediment and Captains have to make decisions without their higher ups have a say in emergency situations.

[@IAMtheSpaceNinja]

​@@3Rayfire All true. Well said, Although the writers in Star Trek have never been afraid to fudge the established lore, be it technology or other, for the sake of the story.

[@3Rayfire]

@@IAMtheSpaceNinja Certainly not.

[@karlmajerus6263]

Hate to rain on your parade, but (1) Star Trek has MACO - Marines that fought hand to hand. (2)In TOS, there were two planets with androids. One where Chapel's fiancee was and where Harry Mudd was

[@unknowngamer37415]

Star wars also operates on much larger scale. The weapons do more damage, the ships are bigger, The battles have more troops, and the federation is smaller than any of the main factions of Star wars.

[@laisphinto6372]

The Star wars universe IS in space since 25000 years compared to Trek civilizations WHO arent around for a thousands years

[@chaost4544]

Trek weapons are pretty powerful, way more accurate, and have greater range than weapons in Star Wars. The yield of a quantum torpedo is 100 megatons which is twice as big as the largest hydrogen bomb ever built by humanity and torpedoes in the Trek universe go the speed relative to what the ship is traveling at meaning at full impulse a torpedo is going 1/4 the speed of light.

[@unknowngamer37415]

@@chaost4544 The empire has hundreds or thousands of Star destroyers all of which can glass continents in a couple hours ( depending on Legends or Canon or New Canon). Now these ships are way bigger and you're right they're far less accurate first floor projectiles. And that's not including the death star, which unlike almost all the planet killers in Star Trek didn't Glass the planet but vaporized it. Starfleet weapons are also known to miss and I don't know how well they'd be able to handle the fighters of Star wars. They're very different settings and I don't really think the Star wars weapons are better just that they have more destructive capacity.

[@chaost4544]

@@unknowngamer37415 the Federation doesn't exactly glass the planet but other species have shown to make quick work of planets. The Romulans, for example, completely annihilated what they thought was the Founders home world in just a matter of hours using their basic plasma weapons. The Federation also has crazy weapons like the Genesis project in their back pocket. On the contrary, weapons in the Star Trek universe are extremely accurate for even the most basic space going species. A reason why there aren't fighters in the Star Trek universe is because their weapons act as point defense weapons and have a long range. The only fighters we see in the Star Trek universe are almost frigate sized and shielded. Coupled with the idea sensor technology advanced as cloaking technology advanced in that universe, Trek targeting is among some of the best in science fiction.

[@unknowngamer37415]

@@chaost4544 The weapons in Star trek (even the phasers) have faster projectile speed but are not really that accurate. I think in every single series some have shots where the main ship takes evasive maneuvers and that results in avoided phasers. If something the size of Voyager can be missed with a phaser they are going to struggle to hit the fighters. The federation doesn't arm shuttles but that's a choice. For every super weapon in Star Trek they can destroy a planet Star wars has won the could destroy parts of a galaxy. ( Center point station, starkiller base and the star forge) With equal men and equal ship mass I think Star Trek would win in conflict. But that's more to do with transporters sensors and ability to circumvent and avoid direct conflict.

[@davidwatts1871]

You forgot the biggest thing, speed of travel. In Trek it takes decades to traverse the galaxy. In Wars the ships can do it in hours or days.

[@We-Are-Canceled]

Hyperdrive is also a huge advantage for sw. They can fly to the other end of the galaxy in a space rv whereas a top technology federation vessel would take 70 years without a wormhole or transwarp conduit.

[@TheRelativy]

Hyperspace is just a network of mapped wormholes or transwarp conduits. Star Wars ships can not actually get anywhere without maped Hyperdrive corridor. I always wiev it like this. If any Star Wars ship found itself in Star Trek universe it is not going anywhere. If Star Trek ship found itself in Star Wars galaxy it can still fly around but very slowly compared to Hyperdrive network.

[@katakisLives]

There's hardly a couple of centuries between the Enterprise D and Zephrame cochrane inventing warp drive so it makes sense that FTL in star wars that's been around millennia would be superior

[@NyloElLobo]

Not anymore, since the federation invented the Protostardrive and Quantum-Slipstream.

[@DojhromTRW]

@@NyloElLobo yup, 75000 ly in 10.4 days!!!

[@Praxus42]

Not true. The ships can navigate with sensors and star positions. The Chiss do it frequently in the Unknown Regions in the Thrawn novels. The travel is slower, but it is very possible to navigate without any hyperlanes. It's just more dangerous@@TheRelativy

[@tsisko3795]

Actually the biggest issue I've seen when comparing Star Trek and Star Wars is that the comparison seems to be limited to only the Federation when looking at the Star Trek universe. If you expand that to include all factions (even just those represented by the TV and Movies) then there is a clear superiority in tech in the Star Trek universe. Even in the case of AI robots. There was an entire race of AI machines so advanced that they don't even recognize living beings as sentient. Yes I am referring to the race that created V'ger. The Federation is not the pinnacle faction in the Star Trek universe. Humans are a lesser race in many ways only made great by their ability to bring many races together to create something greater than the sum of it's parts.

[@laisphinto6372]

A Lot of pro trekkie Arguments tend to imply that any Star wars civilization wouldnt advanced with contact to a vastly different civilization like the federation, the Same goes the other way around. A Lot of Star wars content revolves around civil wars on a Galactic scale

[@owwz9080]

The transporter isn't "recreating" a snapshot, if that was the case a person being teleported would die on his way out and then only a copy of him would be recreated on the destination, which is kinda depressing. The transporter is actually converting matter into energy, sending this energy (basically the person only in a different form) to another location and then converting it back into matter. Yes, it's a stretch, but that's science fiction for ya.

[@trentonbennettVO]

This was fun! I'd also add that Star Trek is tethered to an understanding of our current world and what we imagine as its future, but Star Wars gets to really be untethered--they can build giant death stars, fleets of destroyers and crazy-huge armies of clones, etc.

[@codydillon2144]

This was amazing. I thought you were going to mention the hyperdrive. In star trek, it takes a ship at warp 9 several months to go from ones of the galaxy to the other, where as the hyperdrive in star wars can do the same in less than a day

[@JPO-jx6nr]

in voyager we can see that it wouldnt take only month but 70+ years on warp 9 to go from gamma to alpha quadrant

[@alexanderscott9001]

That was the first thing i thought when he mentioned technology. The hyper drive is far faster than warp. Good point about the droids though. They're ubiquitous in star wars

[@paulholmpileborg6340]

The thing is they dont know how to build hyperlanes, they just use those built in the past. They dont actually access the technology for the whole hyperspace thing, just how to use what some ancient precursor built

[@gabrielfranco1899]

Star wars takes place on one galaxy far far away as far a i know from the movies they can travel the whole galaxy but just that

[@dorianwiesner4477]

@@paulholmpileborg6340 Almost none of that is true. While you are right that the modern hyperdrive is reverse-engineered from the Force-based hyperdrive created by the Rakata, its a fully functional and well understood technology. And how did you come up with the idea that finding new hyperspace routes is impossible and they have to rely on tpre-made routes? There exists a whole branch of hyperspace scouts who map out save and stable routes. It is slow, because you have to make short, blind jumps. Which is extremely dangerous as you could collide with a stellar object or run into a hyperspace anomaly. So you have to move step by step, like you try to move through a full warehouse full of bombs in pitch-black darkness. If you would zoom in a hyperspace route, it would constantly change direction Hyperspace scouting is one of the most dangerous jobs in Star Wars, but also one of the most profitable ones

[@RunnerX13]

Other than making weapons bigger and bigger, SW tech is pretty stagnant over centuries of history, while Starfleet has advanced so much in 30 years, and Starfleet isn’t then the most advanced faction in ST. ST has time travel, inter-dimensional travel, transwarp, slipstream drives, portal technology, and has much more destructive weapons. They can take out an entire star system with little effort

[@homelessend8557]

Theres no point in arguing with warsies dude. Trek is lightyears beyond Wars but many of them cant see that. The only real advantage SW has over trek is FTL speeds... but running away isnt a good option for any encounter.

[@RunnerX13]

@@homelessend8557 and hyperdrive really isn’t much of an advantage. If the Empire found itself in the ST Universe, there are no hyperspace lanes. If the Enterprise was in the SW Universe, they can warp away in any direction and use it offensively

[@DocWolph]

Basically my biggest question to Star Trek: "Where are all the robots?"

[@--Braden--]

There on the hollowdeck

[@Mark-in8ju]

1. Hyperspace is many orders-of-magnitude superior to warp speed. 2. Robots/Al are far more prolific and economically relevant in Star Wars. 3. The Force is a complete game-changer that Star Wars would have zero or minimal counter to.

[@DocWolph]

@@Mark-in8ju 1. Cytherian Space folding, Coaxial warp, Quantum Slipstream. One is impossible without a "navigator". One they just don't use. One is sorely nerfed so the franchise doesn't have to stop using Warp. Star Trek has multiple answers for hyperdrives and frequently choose not to use them. 2. There IS a weird knee-jerk omission, not abhorrence or fear, of AI or just robots in Star Trek. This also includes the stupid notion that anything smarter than a toaster HAS to achieve human levels of sentient and sapience (See Exo-comps). Not such thing as simple focused AI. Every thing has to go careening to General AI. In the face of how technology actually works, and with NO ACTUAL CANON CAUSE FOR IT, the omission of robots in Star Trek make ZERO sense. There is simply too much that robots could be doing in the setting to make up for any hand waving and the overt lack off people actually doing those things. 3. Space magic. Not Star Trek's forte. Even when they futz with psychic powers, they really don't want to and it shows. Vulcans however would make absolutely incredible Jedi and terrifying Sith. As it is Star Trek really does not do much with space phenomena or their real form of space magic: Hyper-advanced technology and civilizations. "Technology that is sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic."

[@bdr32965]

Star Trek doesn't need robots because they have the Borg

[@babtech]

I think you forgot a few categories. In Star Wars, they have: Realtime transgalactic communication Same day transgalactic travel In Ahsoka, they jumped in short order to a distant galaxy, using super stardestroyer engines. The ability to consume, contain, and use all the mass, energy, gravity, and heat of a star (Starkiller Base). The ability to build a ring world. They can teleport across space AND time via the “world between worlds.” In Star Trek, they have transporters, and replicators are a spinoff of transporters. But I’d argue that is their only technical advantage.

[@Watcher1134]

I was betting on an FTL tech discussion Starwars Hyperdrives are faster that star trek warpdrives. Using a hyperdrive you can travel galactically in days or weeks. Also, hyperdrives are extreamly common (reletively speaking) compared to Quantum Slipsteam, Transwarp, Protowarp. and the Spore drive technology nd other faster that warp alternatives which are exeedingly rare.

[@JacobLunbeck]

I did consider including that discussion but decided against it for two main reasons. One, I am not nearly as familiar with the types of travel in Trek that you mentioned as I am with Wars so I knew I wouldn't be able to discuss the two adequately. Two, hyperdrives are limited to using hyperspace lanes and the calculations that go along with them which is a drawback. (Unless you have a chiss skywalker but that is a very rare occurrence.)

[@Watcher1134]

@@JacobLunbeck You need an astromech droid for Hyperdrive calculations, in star trek almost all federation ships have a decent Stellar Chartography or Astrometrics Lab so that isn't a problem. However star trek doesn't have the Hyperspace lanes or drives needed. The closest comparison would probably be Transwarp Corridors which are tunnels through subspace weaving throughout the galaxy but only the Borg and Voth have standardised it.

[@thejontao]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@JacobLunbeck Interesting video. I never thought you’d say Droids. In regards to your Hyperdrive comment in the comments: I’ve always been confused by Star Wars fans who insist that Hyperdrives are limited to Hyperspace Lanes. Regardless of what the books might say, Lucas’s films clearly show Hyperdrives being whenever the characters want, regardless of Hyperspace Lanes. It reminds me of the 90’s when it was common for Star Wars fans to say only a Jedi can ignite their own saber, despite Luke using Anakin’s in ANH and Han using Anakin’s in ESB… and then Lucas coming out with the prequels where anyone can use anyone’s saber. When the books and Lucas’s movies disagree, we kind of have to go with Lucas for “canon”, don’t we? I mean, without Lucas there is no Star Wars.

[@GGBlaster]

@@Watcher1134That is interesting that Trek managed to solve their interstellar travel with charts. I don’t know what the charts were like, so bear with me, but since everything in the universe is moving in one direction or another, static charts would have to be replaced pretty regularly for optimal accuracy. But, I might be assuming wrongly; it could be that Trek’s charts automatically refresh and update to keep up with where everything is at.

[@Watcher1134]

@@GGBlasterA Scene in Star Trek Generations where Picard and Data are in stellar chartography. Starfleet has some of the best scanning tech (partially because other governments have cloaking devises) so their maps are constantly updated.

[@Outrageon]

I am ashamed to say it. I never even considered the droids as proof of the superior technology SW has over Trek. But you're right. Subbed @ 187 subscribers

[@dariuszanzibar474]

No he's not. He just doesn't know enough about Star Trek to know about the less famous androids and AIs that are all over the place.

[@somthingbrutal]

erm data and holographic beings like the voyager doctor

[@lunaris08]

Bah, droids! What about the hyperdrive? It's way faster and more impressive than warp drive. Just my two cents.

[@allovett6246]

People seem to forget or not realize that the Star Wars universe take place "A long time ago..." Even though it is futuristic from our POV, all SW technology is ancient. Now imagine what that universe looks like now in the present day such as Stargate SG-1 or what it could look like in a future setting of the 22nd century as the Star Trek or Babylon 5 universes.

[@novaprime3647]

it's a long time ago by human calender, but it also has technology that's evolved over millenia so the comparison of the technology being ancient is only considered so by human standards. in star trek for example, iconian technology is ancient but it is also massively more advanced than anything the current trek timeline has. extrapolating what the SW univers would look like in modern day or star trek future is irrelevant as it could be the entire glaxy has been purged of life, or species fell backwards in technological standards or any number of other situations. also Wars technology doesnt seem to advance much from Old republic era to skywalker era.

[@Gunnar001]

Star Wars technology is stagnant. For example, the Republic was around for tens of thousands of years and made basically no major technological progress after all that time. In some areas it’s regressed. It’s doubtful it would look any different. On the other hand, after only a few hundred years, the Federation has incredible technologies like space folding, time travel abilities, etc.

[@laisphinto6372]

The federation Tech advanced so fast because IT encounters constantly new Things meanwhile the Republic rarely encounters new stuff in These times , Most of Star wars content are civil wars Just bigger. The equilivant IS the federation Maquis conflict but on steroids that IS Most of Star wars content

[@emilsinclair4190]

Its imposisble to compare both since both work under different physics. However i also don't consider both to be in different categories. Star trek basically has the advantage in sensors and gine manipulation (replicators and teleporters being the same thing) while star wars has the advantage in speed and just pire power/advancements.

[@themightybob]

One way I've always explained the technology difference Star wars is set a long time ago Star trek is set centuries in the future Star wars technology hasn't changed for thousands of years whereas star trek tech is always advancing and improving more and more, and tbh star trek tech is easily more advanced just by looking at it, Don't get me wrong I love some good buttons and analogue tech, but touch screens and computer chips are just much more advanced Holograms also, you can tell the difference between holo tech in the two franchises and I'm pretty sure star trek has that one in the bag One thing I will say is that, both franchises have advanced in their own way, each has choosen its own technological path to walk down and that's just how it is But I know I'll probably get a flood of "nuh uhs" from the star wars fans anyway🤣

[@thomassmith6232]

I never liked Data as a character, it always struck me as an attempt to be Spock 2.0. Moreover, it seemed to me that there were dangerous flaws in its programming, and that under the correct circumstances it would ignore Picard's or Riker's orders and take over the ship for what it would consider the good of all concerned. Even the 'artificial people' of the Alien franchise were more trustworthy. In Star Wars there are no such dangers. As far as The Measure of a Man episode in TNG, the writers very carefully avoided asking some very pertinent questions. Had they done so, the next time we saw Data it would have had a number like the androids in I, Mudd from TOS.

[@johnhoran9840]

The episode 'Brothers' bears out your theory. Data takes over the Enterprise quite easily, and no one can unlock the main computer.

[@dawall3732]

Another area, they are a bit more advanced than the federation is the ability to land large ships. Or objects on a planet's surface. In the voyager show, it was actually a big thing that the voyager, a moderately small ship by Star Wars comparison, was capable of landing on the surface of a planet and taking off. That is considered cutting edge and state-of-the-art mechanical and levitation technology in the federation in the Star Trek universe. In the Star Wars universe, it's just something people do to move large cargo shipments around.

[@chaost4544]

I don't think "Picard" is a particularly great series, though season 3 is S tier, it does the best job in the Star Trek universe explaining the android issue and the potential problems. Not only did it become a slavery issue in the Picard era when the Federation started using androids on a regular basis but it created huge AI problems. One problem I have with the Trek vs. Star Wars debate is often TNG is the comparison point; mostly because it's what everyone knows. However, TNG era was very much a golden age that's different from the current Trek timeline. In the DS9 and Voyager era, the Federation doctrine changed pretty drastically and the ships, weapon, systems, etc. pack a lot of bite to match up against the Borg and Dominion. Federation ship design and technology is pretty mean and unfair at the moment.

[@JacobLunbeck]

Figuring out the comparison point is difficult when comparing any franchises of these sizes. It's a little easier for Star Wars since most people would just stick to the movie time frame, but if you want to bring the Old Republic and the EU/Legends into it then it becomes a whole other story. I myself really struggled to enjoy Picard, though season 3 was the best.

[@captainharlock3998]

People never mention that in Star Wars, everyone's been space travelling since thousands of years, while Star Trek dabbled for like 200 years in space at most, so their space tech is like in their infancy.

[@laisphinto6372]

Also the reason Star wars tech seems stagnant IS because a Lot of Star wars content are civil wars

[@mcrobielord1503]

A big fan of both Star Wars and Star Trek The reason why I'm Star Trek fan. My parents in the 1980s got tired of me watching Star Wars movies over and over again it was so bad I was known for line for line my parents introduced me to Star Trek. I watched every Star Trek movie and TV series and also watched every every Star Wars movie in TV show I understand both universes some like Han Solo couldn't survive in the Star Trek universe, and people in crossovers wouldn't work because there are three types of fans search create you hate Star Wars and Star Wars and Star Trek and people and there's a third type of people who are fans of both and lore in out cause the Star Trek fans you hate Star Wars would love to see the enterprise blow up the death star, and that some of the Star Wars fans you hate Star Trek would love to see the millennium falcon destroying the enterprise the fans who are both Star Trek and Star Wars would love to see Captain Picard and Han Solo on the same side

[@liamterpenes2288]

I would also claim Star Wars has faster ftl tech

[@GhostWatcher2024]

Comparing Star Wars to Star Trek is like comparing "CSI" to "X Files".

[@caerdbern2428]

7:40 "Such conversations do not occur in Star Wars" Solo: Am I a joke to you?

[@Scifiwriting41]

None of the droids in the skywalker saga have achieved true AI status, for the possible exceptions of a couple IG models and r2.

[@yannicdey1522]

I really like both Star Wars and Trek, I never understood the war between the camps.

[@Barnuses]

Well, Star Wars technology doesn't advance very much. They had droids during the Old Republic days that are virtually identical in processing capabilities after like 30,000 years. Star Trek takes place(depending on the series) anywhere from 150-400 years from present day and technological advancement is pretty steady. Star Trek does sort of create of artificial intelligence with the holodeck. They can create or recreate virtually anyone with the capacity to express a full range of emotion and independent thought. To the point of being nearly indistinguishable from actual people. Which you could say is at least comparable to droids in the Star Wars universe. I think Star Trek holograms and Star Wars droids would probably more accurately be classified as Virtual Intelligence or Simulated Intelligence, but not true intelligence, and that's why they aren't treated as equals. Star Trek: Voyager even explores Holograms gaining sentience(Arguably with the Bynar and Moriarty episodes in TNG, and possibly Vic Fontaine in DS9) with The Doctor. Which lead to a similar arbitration of The Doctor's sentience as Data's Measure of a Man episode. And they even cross through parts of the galaxy that experienced a war with photonic lifeforms(holograms) gone rogue. And, I haven't seen the Picard show, but I think they even deal with rogue A.I. in that as well. TL;DR: Star Trek does have artificial intelligence at least comparable to Star Wars. It just typically comes in the form of holograms and not robots.

[@onryu]

I thought he was going to say Hyperspace lanes vs Warp, ST takes 70-75 years to go from one end of the galaxy to the other, where in SW takes what a day to 12 hours maybe?

[@GenSphinx]

Fair enough, I can't disagree with you at all on that account. Well said.

[@Pokemc0831]

I thought you would bring up how much exponentially faster the hyperdrive is to the warp drive

[@bdr32965]

But creating a static warp bubble is more theoretically plausible than a space lane that is used by space whales.

[@Pokemc0831]

@bdr32965 hyperspace is more akin to the nether in Minecraft than space superhiways

[@toma-st1jy]

Treky here transporters work by: 0.Stand still (stuff getting transported 1.scan matter molecules and arrangement 2.convert it into energy 3.find the wanted location 4.direct the converted energy there 5.reconvert the energy in to matter 6.arrange the matter correctly 7.done

[@Gterr1971]

The transporter kills you then replicates you somewhere else. You are dead. Your clone thinks everything is fine. Couldn't get me in that thing.

[@benjamindorrance1361]

Yeah no your wrong trek tech is much better wars ships may be faster thanks to hyperspace while trek travels at warp in normal/ subspace, while trek shields and weapons are much stronger. Take this quote from captain picard:"laser wont even penetrate our navigation shields" And a death star trench run like scenes has appeared in trek in season 3 of picard. Star wars ships are bigger but one star destroyer would be crushed by a galaxy class starship or a sovereign class starship

[@toastofcinder3547]

Transporter technology has always been a bit generalised. In theory, the computer takes a full scan of your body and stores that information, then the transporter converts your mass into energy, broadcasts it to a specific location (I believe subspace is used for this part) and uses the original scan of you to put everything back together again. When a person is transported, the person who comes through the other end, is the original person, made of exactly the same atoms. However, in theory, it's possible to actually create copies of people as depicted in some episodes, however this is always explained as a malfunction. In truth, you're not supposed to think too hard about it, it works, and the explanation is just about good enough.

[@SephirothsBIade]

World devastators, sun crusher, and force bombs come to mind. I think the star stek equivalents to these would be the borg(never actually shown to consume entire planets), red matter bomb or whatever they had with technology from future timelines, Q? Pretty sure its safe to say some of these are at least partially superior in their function. Now if we are talking Disney's idiot canon then Wars has weaponized all hyperdrives and could therefore win any fight because its an infinite mass and speed narrative error weapon.

[@lpg12338]

This was really good, thanks for sharing, subscribed! 👍

[@doloresvillagomez6465]

In my opinion , I am able to distinctly give each show its giving uniqueness I l Iike both, but I am more a fantasy show fan, Sci-fi has a more realistic bases so is closer to what could be the future. Fantasy is pure imagination that it doesn't even have to have an explanation, but both shows show a truth explain in their own particular philosophy. Thank you !

[@mattsamoto4451]

your right this debate is never ending.

[@johnharris6655]

"Did you mean the mass migration of Star Wars Fans?" "No that was the Star Wars Trek, this was the Star Trek Wars." Great line from Futurama episode about Star Trek.

[@matejkar]

One thing i haven't seen compared is the ships between the 2 franchises. Its an interesting point because Star Wars has undoubtably larger and more menacing ships with at first glance more firepower, but Trek still has the high tech stuff people comment on and could arguably best some Star Wars ships. I think a video on that topic would gather quite a large audience.

[@Taliesin-xd7ke]

Excellent argument put forth by yourself. One of the issues I always felt about Star Wars was the universal treatment of robots, clones and animals by the galactic populace which was if it couldn't be enslaved in some way then it's destroyed. An extremely callous outlook. This, as you reasoned would be beyond intolerable to the Federation and to a lesser extent other alpha/beta quadrant powers. You mentioned Data, but there was also the nanites created by Wesley Crusher, the space whale baby the Enterprise carried, and suckled, until rejoined with it's species, the evidence presented to prove sentience of the Exocomps and the defence of the android world by Starfleet against the Romulans. They are indeed two very different franchises with very different aims. Thank you for that.👏

[@beckhamhome]

It's the writers, but getting past that. It's the pool from which the tech is drawn. Star Trek humans have 300 years of space travel and a few other capable aliens. Star wars has thousands of years and thousands of races. Say I want to go to the moon. I've got very limited options from 40 years of human only tech. Say I want to float on an ocean. I could do it from a raft, boat, aircraft carrier or a submarine. From paddles to sails to nuclear power. I've got thousands of years of still only human options. In Star Wars how much money you have can determine the tech level and or race that builds your gear.

[@Felix24148]

Arguably speaking, Star Wars has better cybernetic technology that Star Trek too. In Trek, you usually only see Borg with cybernetics. But in Star Wars, it's everywhere. And droid parts are easily adapted to being used as cybernetics.

[@PjustP]

Come on now, a universe where there is a weapon that can obliterate a freakn planet with one shot... And what about land battles? Dont know what tech Trek has cause everything happened in space or on a ship or I didnt see em.

[@elitemook4234]

Back in the day the war between Star Trek and Star Wars nerds got so bad it actually started seeping into the lore books. The best example is the guy who got himself hired so he could write crazy numbers in the tech refrence books for his side to cite in internet arguments. One of those books claims an Acclamator turbo laser throws out 200 gigatons of energy per shot.

[@NostalgicGamerRickOShay]

The beaming-teleportation thing was only invented because the original show lacked a budget for smaller transport vehicles.

[@jimmyostler8946]

Thank you! Every time this has come up I've gotten so much pushback about Star Trek technology (admittedly, I am more of a Star Trek fan, but Star Wars is great too) being more advanced in almost every way. Manually aimed turbolasers would seem so primitive to the crew of the Enterprise. And there are so many other examples of this, excepting droids and hyperspace I would say, hyperspace is admittedly much, much faster. Interestingly, I would like to say Data appears to be a lot more advanced than most Star Wars droids, it's simply the rarity and difficulty in getting it that makes Star Wars more advanced. It's so industrialized and easy to make they're a constant presence everywhere. Not that Star Wars couldn't produce a droid like data, but I really don't think it fits the SW aesthetic as well.

[@illusionarygull3844]

Not to mention Warp 10 still isn't half the speed of Hyperdrive but yknow.. ~w~