ST Manuals and canon

For all your discussion of canon policies, evidentiary standards, and other meta-debate issues.

Discussion is to remain cordial at all times.
User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

ST Manuals and canon

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Aug 14, 2010 10:37 pm

Following Palp's remark here, I went checking out RSA's canon page abou those books (RSA is 2046 here).
RSA says that Ron D. Moore, as an executive producer for the show, takes precedence.

However, this interview leads me to question such a conclusion:
Star Trek Gamers interview with Viacom's Mr Harry Lang wrote:
For almost a year trek gamers have wondered just what is happening with the Star Trek gaming franchise. Paramount's Mr Harry Lang, Executive Director, Interactive Product Development for Paramount Pictures, and Paramount Pictures themselves have agreed to an unprecedented first interview with a Star Trek gaming fan site...STG. STG would like to thank KnightWaterTiger of the BOTAKnights for arranging this via email, and Mr Harry Lang and Paramount for agreeing to go ahead with the interview.

Questions were taken from posts in the main forum, from the STG staff and from KnightWaterTiger. Interview was a Q&A session via email.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________


STG/:
Which of the companies take a more active role in the game production process, is it Paramount or Viacom themselves and what kind of input do they have?

Harry Lang:
I work for Viacom Consumer Products (VCP) which is the licensing division for Paramount Pictures. VCP is directly responsible for all Star Trek merchandise including games. Viacom is the parent company of Paramount Pictures but does not take an active role in game development. Some of the show creators do consult on various aspects of the process. However it is VCP that is primarily involved in the game production process.

STG/:
Given the slow death of the online community for Bridge Commander, Armada 1 and Birth of the Federation and the vast majority of the gaming fleets of Star Trek who keep the online world alive moving to games outside of Star Trek, what will Paramount (or Viacom) do to get these old time gamers back into the Star Trek fold remembering that a lot of them have simply turned there back on Trek gaming?

Harry Lang:
By creating Star Trek games that make sense. We're working on an initiative that is very exciting and by its nature, embraces the Star Trek gaming community.

STG/:
What do you say to the folks who think that Star Trek gaming is dead?

Harry Lang:
I say wait a few months and they will see it is not.

STG/:
You have said that "things will get better", is there any rough timescale for when things will start to get better?

Harry Lang:
I can't give you a "timetable," I don't want to make promises we can't keep…but there should be news before year-end.

STG/:
What is your own role in the Trek Gaming franchise and how did you first get into it?

Harry Lang:
As the Executive Director of Interactive Product Development, I am directly responsible for approving all aspects of game development including green lighting the concept and approving story, art, technology, gameplay, marketing, packaging, etc, etc…even the actual developer. Basically everything that goes in to the creation and marketing of a game. I work with the publishers and developers to ensure they have the resources they need from Paramount as well as ensure they are making a great Star Trek game. Part of that involves a close collaboration throughout development and contributing to the creative process.

I got a lucky break 7 years ago when an entry-level position in interactive product development opened up at VCP. I was already working for VCP in another capacity. They knew I was a fan of the show and a gamer so it was a perfect fit. Since that time, I have risen to my current position with various training in game development, seminars, conferences, a lot of reading, and learning everyday on the job working with a variety of publishers and developers.

STG/:
What do you see the future of Trek gaming to be?

Harry Lang:
I see it being very focused. You probably won't see multiple publishers out there releasing numerous titles competing with each other. And likewise, you probably won't see all games under one publisher. We're taking a very different approach this time and I'm confident the community will see the benefits right away.

STG/:
Do you have any messages for the fleets, modders and gamers of Star Trek who are feeling lost and bewildered due to the current state of Trek gaming?

Harry Lang:
Don't give up! We have some interesting ideas on how to get the community involved going forward and it is our hope to be able to share this with you very soon.

STG/:
In the past, the fan base of Trek games were kind of out of the loop in a lot of the game design and development. A lot of the fleets want a "special" kind of game which would be able to fit into the budget of the developers. Will there be a chance of new developers and publishers listening to the fans and gaining ideas and input from them?

Harry Lang:
Everyone wants something to fit his or her own tastes and we wish we could offer such an alternative. Unfortunately, developing a specific game for a specific group is very difficult. There are and have been focus groups who give input, I regularly visit a variety of message boards, and the developers will listen to what the fans are talking about and do their best to incorporate a variety of ideas. It is our goal to create great games the fans enjoy. What else is there? It's what we all want.

STG/:
Looking to the world of games outside of Star Trek ... Star Wars Galaxies and games like BF 1942 have lured a lot of the Trek gamers over to there side, a lot of fleets still in Trek games are also playing those games in different divisions of there fleets. Fleets like RS, SFC, RS, RNGD and the likes have all jumped the divide to gain more members. These games are immensely popular ... would a future game for Star Trek have aspects of these games? Like Pay To Play, MMORPG and the likes?

Harry Lang:
It's definitely possible.

STG/:

In the past, the games licenses were split into the actual series. Interplay, Activision, MicroProse, S&S all had there "cut" of the franchise. Due to this multi-spanning games were not really feasible so early games like Starfleet Command, Starfleet Academy, Klingon Academy and even the later games like Armada, and Elite Force had to be tied down to the series that the particular publisher had. Many Trek gamers and modders -- as well as Webmasters of Trek fan sites like STG (*cough*...blatant advertisement...*cough*) would like to see games that would "span" the eras. Much like mods are doing for SFC 3 with multi-eras spanning TOS, TMP and TNG. If Paramount is going for several publishers instead of one, will this same hindrance of single series license packs continue? Or will only 1 single publisher hold all of them?

Harry Lang:
I mentioned above about our intentions to really focus Star Trek game development going forward. Whether or not any future games encompass all eras or just one remains to be seen. We have to consider that many fans prefer one era to another. Will they be disappointed or turned off if a game spans multiple eras? It's something we think about when making our decisions. It's not out of the question but a concept that must be carefully considered.

STG/:
The big issue ... bugs. The last few games for Star Trek have been received poorly by the gamers. A lot of bugs were found in the games which gave ST gaming a lot of bad reviews. Would Paramount take a more tighter control of QC (Quality Control) in any new games which may appear in the future? Or will it be left to the publisher and developer again?

Harry Lang:
Paramount/VCP does not have it's own QC department. Our partners do have QC departments and spend hundreds of hours play testing each game. We also play all the games on our computers. But as you know, there are many, many different computer configurations. We do understand the frustration with bugs and it's our intention to be as diligent as possible in identifying and fixing problems prior to release.

STG/:
The PC gaming industry is really ground level now, but there appears to be much potential in this area of gaming. What will Paramount do to promote PC gaming worldwide?

Harry Lang:
We plan to effectively utilize some of our own divisions and licensees to get the word out and keep more fans up to date. Startrek.com can be a great resource for official information. There's also the Official Fan Club, Pocketbooks, our Star Trek wireless licensee, as well as other licensees worldwide. With a co-ordinated effort we have great resources with which to reach the fans and keep them informed.

STG/:
The European market in many cases appears to be larger than the US Trek gaming market. Are there plans to target the Europeans with future Trek games or will the focus remain always on the U.S. market?

Harry Lang:
The focus has been and will continue to be on a worldwide market. Just as the principles of Star Trek are about bringing everyone together in harmony and peace, exploration and discovery, infinite diversity in infinite combinations - our goal is to recreate this illustrious franchise for all to enjoy.
It appears that some merging took place, as now, VCP is tied to Nickelodeon, as "Nickelodeon/Viacom Consumer Products" or "Nickelodeon & Viacom Consumer Products", called NVCP for short.
You get to find a bit of clarification here:
About Nickelodeon & Viacom Consumer Products

Nickelodeon & Viacom Consumer Products manages the world's third largest licensing business, representing leading properties such as SpongeBob SquarePants and Dora the Explorer, and managing merchandising for Nick Jr., Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, MTVN International, and Spike TV.

Nickelodeon, now in its 30th year, is the number-one entertainment brand for kids. It has built a diverse, global business by putting kids first in everything it does. The company includes television programming and production in the United States and around the world, plus consumer products, online, recreation, books, magazines and feature films. Nickelodeon's U.S. television network is seen in more than 98 million households and has been the number-one-rated basic cable network for more than 14 consecutive years. Nickelodeon and all related titles, characters and logos are trademarks of Viacom Inc. (NYSE: VIA, VIA.B).
And yet, things get reversed...
Before things changed a tad, before Bloomberg Businessweek's page on VCP would redirect to a 404, here's what it had to say about VCP:
Viacom Consumer Products Inc.

Company Overview

Viacom Consumer Products, Inc. provides entertainment licensing. It handles properties based on various hit television shows and films. The company is headquartered in Hollywood, California. Viacom Consumer Products, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Paramount Pictures.

Key Executives
Ms. Terri Helton
Executive Vice President of Worldwide Licensing
Ms. Indra Suharjono
Vice President of Asia

Hollywood, CA
United States
So to summarize all the stuff above, Viacom Consumer Products handles the properties... for Paramount Pictures... which is owned by Viacom.

A subsidiary, by wikipedia, is:
A subsidiary, in business matters, is an entity that is controlled by a separate higher entity. The controlled entity is called a company, corporation, or limited liability company; and in some cases can be a government or state-owned enterprise, and the controlling entity is called its parent (or the parent company). The reason for this distinction is that a lone company cannot be a subsidiary of any organization; only an entity representing a legal fiction as a separate entity can be a subsidiary. A parent company does not have to be the larger or "more powerful" entity; it is possible for the parent company to be smaller than a subsidiary, or the parent may be larger than some or all of its subsidiaries (if it has more than one). The parent and the subsidiary do not necessarily have to operate in the same locations, or operate the same businesses, but it is also possible that they could conceivably be competitors in the marketplace. Also, because a parent company and a subsidiary are separate entities, it is entirely possible for one of them to be involved in legal proceedings, bankruptcy, tax delinquency, indictment and/or under investigation, while the other is not.

The most common way that control of a subsidiary is achieved, is through the ownership of shares in the subsidiary by the parent. These shares give the parent the necessary votes to determine the composition of the board of the subsidiary, and so exercise control. This gives rise to the common presumption that 50% plus one share is enough to create a subsidiary. There are, however, other ways that control can come about, and the exact rules both as to what control is needed, and how it is achieved, can be complex (see below). A subsidiary may itself have subsidiaries, and these, in turn, may have subsidiaries of their own. A parent and all its subsidiaries together are called a "group", although this term can also apply to cooperating companies and their subsidiaries with varying degrees of shared ownership.
So the question is, who had the most power here? Moore or Lang?
R.D. Moore, as a writer for TNG and later an executive producer of DS9, or H. Lang, Senior Director in early 2005, at the time of his statement?

The questions is who owns what, and what both of them represented when they spoke about Trek.

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Praeothmin » Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:39 pm

I didn't see anything about cannon...

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Mon Aug 16, 2010 7:24 pm

Praeothmin wrote:I didn't see anything about cannon...
Ain't speaking about guns dude bro man...

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Praeothmin » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:33 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Praeothmin wrote:I didn't see anything about cannon...
Ain't speaking about guns dude bro man...
Well I didn't see anything about canon either... ;)

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:43 am

Harry Lang did make a statement about the manuals being canonical. The point is to know if his statement beats those of RDM, who said they weren't.
That makes a hell of a difference.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by 2046 » Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:49 am

No, Lang does not beat Moore. Just going from basic memory:

Licensing is done by contract with owners. For instance, Gene Roddenberry had Lincoln Enterprises, which shared some Trek licensing rights with Paramount et al. for a good long while. Thus, folks could make things under license granted by Lincoln Enterprises regarding the property of Star Trek, which itself was owned by Paramount.

Suppose that a Lincoln Enterprises "Senior Director" had commissioned new fiction based on Star Trek (or as much Trek as Lincoln had rights to), and had declared it (or something which it was based on, like the TMs) to be canon. Do we care? Nope.

This is pretty much the same thing. The folks making STO are licensees and that license is or was overseen to some extent by Harry Lang. To that extent, he is the Paula Block of games, or at least that's a fair analogy (ignoring variations in rank structure, position, and whatnot between the two groups of license-overseers).

The only real way to make the case stick is to argue that Roddenberry et al. made Star Trek post 1987 or whatever under license from the owners, thus having creators equivalent to licensing people. But I don't think that argument holds any water, and even if it does hold water I reject it simply because it would require that the people creating the universe were no more highly ranked than people making the coattail-riding fluff retail crap that is based on the universe, not to mention that it would leave canon as a wholly fractured thing.

That said, though, your updates regarding NVCP and all are noteworthy, and if I ever update I'll be sure to give a hat tip. It's rare for anyone else to get that deep in the weeds. Welcome. ;-)

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:58 pm

Seems to be the way it goes. RDM was originally hired for Trek, by Paramount Pictures that sits "above" VCP, and then took a more direct position in its production.
Harry Lang was of a lower rank as he represented the subsidiary organ under Paramount Pictures.
I suppose there's never been any statement from a Paramount Pictures or even a Viacom representative confirming Lang's statement?

Also, I realized that what I typed could be misleading.
See the following quote:
Company Overview

Viacom Consumer Products, Inc. provides entertainment licensing. It handles properties based on various hit television shows and films. The company is headquartered in Hollywood, California. Viacom Consumer Products, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Paramount Pictures.
VCP handled properties based on various hit television shows and films, not the various hit television shows and films.

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Praeothmin » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:17 pm

I just re-read Lang's interview, and I still don't see where he talks about CANON... O_O

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:50 pm

Oh OK I see. The quote can be found at wikipedia's star trek canon page and on RSA's page. The quotes I provided here are to clarify his position in the hierarchy, only that.

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Praeothmin » Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:54 pm

Oh, ok...

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:27 pm

Just for completion, the wikipedia page on Star Trek canon.

Notice how the article, as it presently reads, is misleading, not to say false:
Star Trek writer and co-producer Ronald D. Moore dismisses such official material as "speculation", and says that the writing staff did not consider it canon.[18][19] However, Viacom, the parent company of Paramount, seems to believe differently. In a series of posts to the official Star Trek website's forums, Viacom Senior Director Harry Lang left no doubt that he considers the reference books as canon.[13][20]
I checked the edition history of this article and found that the appearance of Harry Lang's statement happened between those two editions:

00:19, 9 December 2006 Fish and karate (talk | contribs) (14,002 bytes) (See also: rm del article)

20:34, 2 December 2006 Jrp (talk | contribs) (14,046 bytes) (re)

So it's Fish and karate who added this entry.
The passage has not changed since then.

FaK's profile on wikipedia:
About me:

Hi! I'm fishandkarate, or Neil. I am an editor and an administrator here on Wikipedia. I have been around since March 2005. I was formerly known as User:Neil (imaginative) and User:Proto.

If you have anything to ask, please do; my talk page and email are always open. Thanks.

"In Okinawa, all Miyagi know two things - fish and karate."
I couldn't find the original Harry Lang quotation, but you can read RSA's short section about it here.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by 2046 » Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:04 am

That may or may not be the guy who totally revamped the Trek canon wiki article into a rephrasing of my page, which I found amusing.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5835
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:32 pm

Eh, what's this now? Someone swiped your work?
-Mike

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by 2046 » Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:44 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:Eh, what's this now? Someone swiped your work?
-Mike
I prefer to think of it as an homage. It isn't like he lifted text . . . it's just that the tone and order of operation, as it were, went from a normal wiki article to an alternate version of the CanonWars piece, including all the various quotes I'd collected that could be found nowhere else online. No big whoop . . . it's Wikipedia, and I was still linked at the bottom and throughout the text as a source.

(Though now I'm not, so I'm pissed. It looks like someone's decided to excise CanonWars.com altogether. No doubt I can figure out a list of suspects. ;-) )

Out of curiosity, I tracked down my comment on the guy's talk page. Turns out it was from 2007:
Star Trek Canon
I'm the author of CanonWars.com. I just wanted to thank you for carrying my research on the topic to a larger audience with your massive change to the Wikipedia article. Many of the references were very difficult to track down and collect over the years, and it pleases me no end to see them put to more use. DSG2k 09:21, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: ST Manuals and canon

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:20 am

Have you found the one who removed you from the credits list?
And, besides, I thought wikipedia couldn't quote material from fanon websites. Yet the organization of the page is greatly inspired by your work... so we now have what looks like an article similar to your page, without any kudos.

Post Reply