NationStates Jolt Archive

The aliens in Star Wars are WIERD, and the aliens in Star Trek are human-looking, with not much (if at all) phisical difference, generaly other then say a prickled nose ridge, as with the Bajorans. Which to you are more realistic aliens?

Star Wars. At least they're different.

All ST aliens are defined by various head bumps. It's like god took an iron skillet to the collective head of life.

I like Star Control aliens.

Star Wars is more realistic to me. I think it's ludicrous to assume that all sentient species must be humanoids. All they ever bothered to do to make aliens on Star Trek was put bumps or ridges on someone's head.

The way they described it in canon, the Star Trek aliens make more sense, but in reality, aliens wouldn't evolve the same way like they did in the Star Trek universe, so I'd say that Star Wars aliens are more realistic. But in reality, neither are very realistic. :)

star wars cos in reality, aliens would be fucking weird... like really weird.
star trek are too human-ish but frankly that doesn't reduce my love or enjoyment of the series (or my preference to it over star wars). besides, isn't there some common-ancestry species between many of the "aliens" in ST? (might be making things up, i dunno :confused: )

If life can only develop on planets similar to this one (which seems reasonable although we have no way of knowing) then the life forms would be pretty similar to the ones here, and star trek aliens are all the same really so they seem more realistic.

I mean what environment did yoda evolve for? and why is he the only one? and where is he from?

And Jar Jar? jesus christ what a stupid alien. natural selection is survival of the fittest not the dumbest.

You've got to remember that Star Wars worked on movie budgets, while Star Trek had TV budgets to deal with. On a TV budget it gets a lot harder (especially since most Trek was done in pre-CGI days) to make alien-looking aliens. Because strangely enough, they couldn't sign on any actual aliens to play the roles and had to use human actors instead. :p

However, if we were to discover (or be discovered by) a real alien race I seriously doubt that they would look even remotely like us.

star wars cos in reality, aliens would be fucking weird... like really weird.
star trek are too human-ish but frankly that doesn't reduce my love or enjoyment of the series (or my preference to it over star wars). besides, isn't there some common-ancestry species between many of the "aliens" in ST? (might be making things up, i dunno :confused: )

Yeah, they had a silly Wesley-based episode of TNG that said that.

besides, isn't there some common-ancestry species between many of the "aliens" in ST? (might be making things up, i dunno :confused: )

Yeah, there was a progenitor race that existed eons before Star Trek that populated various planets in the galaxy. That's why, in canon, Star Trek aliens would make more sense looking identical. There are too many races in Star Wars that are roughly humanoid without an explanation like Star Trek.

To be fair, most Star Wars life is pretty similar to humans as well: mostly bipedal and humanoid, with most of the rest falling very similar to various terrestrial species. And no one has mentioned that as goofy as the idea of a lot of humanoid species in our galaxy is, its even wierder that humans would have also evolved in another galaxy in a way very similar to us.

Yeah, they had a silly Wesley-based episode of TNG that said that.

Dude, it was totally a Picard episode.

Star Wars is more realistic to me. I think it's ludicrous to assume that all sentient species must be humanoids. All they ever bothered to do to make aliens on Star Trek was put bumps or ridges on someone's head.
I agree, this poll is like this because, I thought: "of course 'no-one' would think Star Trek aliens are more realistic then Star Wars one" yet I was wrong, in a post on which movies people prefer, someone said they Star Trek better because the aliens were more realistic.

Are there aliens in ST ? just humans with different skins or hair ...

Dude, it was totally a Picard episode.

Oh wait...I think you're right -- the one where he was working with a Klingon, a Romulan, and a Cardassian. Didn't they also mention it, though, in that one where the energy being (the Wanderer or something like that?) took an interest in Wesley?

neither has realistic aliens. its ridiculous to think that life on another planet would be anything like life on earth.

Oh wait...I think you're right -- the one where he was working with a Klingon, a Romulan, and a Cardassian. Didn't they also mention it, though, in that one where the energy being (the Wanderer or something like that?) took an interest in Wesley?

Maybe. I had a tendency to not watch Wesley episodes. I think I know the episode you're talking about, though. It was the one with the Indians, right?

Farscape. A bunch of different looking creatures and none speak English. As opposed to Star Trek where everyone is humanoid and speaks English. Star Wars is better but barely.

Farscape. A bunch of different looking creatures and none speak English. As opposed to Star Trek where everyone is humanoid and speaks English. Star Wars is better but barely.
good answer!

Yeah, there was a progenitor race that existed eons before Star Trek that populated various planets in the galaxy. That's why, in canon, Star Trek aliens would make more sense looking identical. There are too many races in Star Wars that are roughly humanoid without an explanation like Star Trek.
oh yeah, thats right (need to watch my dvds again :p)

Oh wait...I think you're right -- the one where he was working with a Klingon, a Romulan, and a Cardassian. Didn't they also mention it, though, in that one where the energy being (the Wanderer or something like that?) took an interest in Wesley?
yeah i think so... either when he magically saved everyone from warpcore breach or when the wanderer came and took wesley away (hooray!) ;)

Farscape. A bunch of different looking creatures and none speak English. As opposed to Star Trek where everyone is humanoid and speaks English. Star Wars is better but barely.
they have universal translators in star trek. when they mess up everyone speaks funny languages

besides, at least ST has "real" or "full" languages like klingon or vulcan, and not just nonsense...

I mean what environment did yoda evolve for? and why is he the only one? and where is he from?

There's another one of his species on the Jedi Council in The Phantom Menace, named Yaddle.

I think that some of the best potrails of aliens were in Babylon 5. Same problem with mostly humanoids, but the portails of the different societies and cultures were some of the best on TV.

Well, the reason all the aliens are similar on Star Trek is that the planets were all seeded by an earlier alien race. That's why say, Klingons can mate with Humans to produce fertile offspring.

Also, I accidently voted for the wrong option. Please think of star wars as having one less vote and star trek as having one more.

Star Trek>>>>>>Star Wars in every way possible.

Maybe. I had a tendency to not watch Wesley episodes. I think I know the episode you're talking about, though. It was the one with the Indians, right?
There are a couple with Wesley and the traveller.

There is no such thing as a realistic looking alien. We have no proof that they exist (only speculation though I believe out there somewhere they would have to) and we have no idea of what there appearance would be.

So at the same time neither and both are more realistic.

I like Star Control aliens.
Three words: Zoq-Fot-Pik!

Although the Star Wars aliens seem more realistic to me, I think the most realistic aliens i've ever seem on tv were spiecies 8472 in Star Trek: Voyager.

I like Star Control aliens.

Hell yeah. :)

Three words: Zoq-Fot-Pik!

The cleansing shall soon begin.

The cleansing shall soon begin.

WE ARE THE KOR-AH REBORN!

What the hell are you talking about? You're Czer-za, you just painted yourselves, you ass.

SILENCE!

It's a shame it wasn't in the same league as two.

also, we are *DANCING*

WE ARE THE KOR-AH REBORN!

What the hell are you talking about? You're Czer-za, you just painted yourselves, you ass.

SILENCE!

It's a shame it wasn't in the same league as two.

also, we are *DANCING*

Yeah, number three was crap. But I hear there's a fanmade sequel being made where SC3 was "all a bad dream". :D

Star Wars is more realistic to me. I think it's ludicrous to assume that all sentient species must be humanoids. All they ever bothered to do to make aliens on Star Trek was put bumps or ridges on someone's head.
Star Wars was more imaginative than Star Trek (and had the budget to be), but their aliens are still humanoid - one-headed, two-armed, bipedal, oxygen-breathing creatures. Real aliens are likely to be much more different than that (after all, most terrestrial species are much more different, and yet they're our biological cousins).

Farscape. A bunch of different looking creatures and none speak English. As opposed to Star Trek where everyone is humanoid and speaks English. Star Wars is better but barely.

Somehow, a giant talking turd that speaks in wierd grunts doesn't really strike me as humanoid or english speaking. (Jabba)

But then again, I somehow doubt a race of slugs would get that far on the evolutionary chain anyways.

Hmmm, I'm not too sure that aliens would be all that different from us. I think land-based life has the advantage of being more able to use fire. All land based life, with the exception of insects, has 4 limbs, a tail (or tail stump) and a head with eyes, ears and a mouth. Next, the opposable thumb is of enormous importance to humans and has been extremely important in technological advancements, especially advanced tools. Next binocular eyes are also extremely useful in the coordination of hands, fingers and thumbs.

And with respect to element based life Hydrogen, Carbon, Oxygen and Nitrogen based life seems the most feasible. Ultimately there is no replace for Hydrogen. Silicon just doesn't combine in the same way with itself and H as Carbon does. I don't think it would ever be possible to use silica in a combustion engine. Sulphur just isn't reactive enough to replace Oxygen. The liquid temperature range of Hydrogen Sulphide is -86C to -60C. A quarter of that of Water's. The hydrogen bonding in H2S just isn't strong enough. And Phosphorus as a replacement for Nitrogen just isn't happening. It doesn't combine in anywhere the same way as N does.

Enough of my rant. I'm sure you intelligent people will be able to come up with something to contradict my ideas.

I voted Star Trek as i found some Aliens in Star Wars absured.

Hmmm, I'm not too sure that aliens would be all that different from us. I think land-based life has the advantage of being more able to use fire. All land based life, with the exception of insects, has 4 limbs, a tail (or tail stump) and a head with eyes, ears and a mouth. Next, the opposable thumb is of enormous importance to humans and has been extremely important in technological advancements, especially advanced tools. Next binocular eyes are also extremely useful in the coordination of hands, fingers and thumbs.
Oh, how Earth-bound you are! :) All terrestrial land-based life (or, more precisely, mammals) has 4 limbs, but then all terrestrial life has a common ancestry, so it's hardly surprising.

Given the environment in which we evolved, you're right about all the advantages of our physiology, but I can't help believing that very different routes for life could have taken place here on Earth, let alone on different planets (even within the physics-based limitations you mentioned).

Somehow, a giant talking turd that speaks in wierd grunts doesn't really strike me as humanoid or english speaking.
Big grunting turds - yeah, I've met quite a few of those down the local pub. I think they're classified as humanoid :D