The Kobayashi Maru Test- what's the point...

Discussion in 'Entertainment and Movie Talk' started by SSgt Burton, Feb 22, 2012.

  1. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    If everyone knows it is only a simulation?

    So from a viewer’s perspective when ST:II opens with the Kobayashi Maru test, “we” don’t know it is a simulation. Everyone is dying and it looks like the ship is lost...

    Until Kirk orders the viewscreen to open up and the lights to be turned back on.


    So the point of the test is for a command track officer to experience extreme stress and even “death” and (I suppose) to see if they keep doing their job or have a mental breakdown.

    But how is this supposed to be accomplished?

    It would make sense if the Cadets were on the Enterprise and were told that they were underway on a training mission, only to encounter the distress call and the attacking Klingons (when in reality the ship never left Spacedock)...

    But they aren’t even on the Enterprise! They are in a simulator room at Starfleet Academy!

    After Saavik's Kobayashi test, Kirk exits the simulator to run into Spock in the hallway. After a brief conversation, Spock says he is headed to the Enterprise (proving the simulator is on Earth and doesn’t involve the Enterprise herself at all).

    So how are you supposed to feel fear, if you know you are in a simulator room at the Academy and it isn’t an actual mission?

    I don’t think they “blindfolded” the Cadets and told them they were being transported to the Enterprise (and snuck them into the simulator). ;)

    Not to mention the test itself has been around for decades (in the exact same form) gaining the reputation of the "no-win scenario." Wouldn't word get around the Academy?

    I mean if you want to play an April Fool's joke on someone (which on a certain level the Kobayashi Maru test is), you don't let on that "it's not real" beforehand. ;)


    Just would like to hear other's take on this.



    Kevin
     
  2. superDrool

    superDrool Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,306
    Point well made, as I see it you are correct and maybe they do or don't realize that it's a simulation. But either way the test is on command character alone, not how real it feels.
     
  3. Vermithrax 4

    Vermithrax 4 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    566
    It's a rather ham-handed attempt at a "test of character" simulation and frankly, I think they've made WAY too much over it throughout Trek since it showed up in TWOK so I'm just plain sick of hearing about it. Nor did I ever buy the idea that it was supposed to indicate how a trainee faces "death", but moreover how they faced a major "failure" on their part, something that some people with large command egos have trouble coming to terms with. But I think it has to be remembered that there are very similar simulations used in the US & British submarine services to train command candidates and they can get VERY high-pressure for the trainees, even though they're fully aware that they're not actually at sea. The realistic feel of the simulator and the knowledge that they're under observation for their performance is a lot of pressure to be under.
     
  4. SmilingOtter

    SmilingOtter Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,560
    I think that's probably it right there.

    IMO Scotty's performance (in the novel Kobayashi Maru) was a better example of cheating than Kirk's, though not quite as stylish (either in Trek XI or the novel.)
     
  5. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    It was a way to kill Spock in the first 10 minutes to go with the rumors he was going to die. Contrived as the day is long.
     
  6. superDrool

    superDrool Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,306

    I've been through all sorts of these type of trainers not as a Commander/Captain though, so I know firsthand what you're referring to which is an excellent example and most likely where it derived from. I see a lot of work related scenarios in Star Trek and I understand them on a different level than most, not that I'm better equipped to handle the hot seat, but most certainly can relate. :cool
     
  7. darthgordon

    darthgordon Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,961
    Battle simulations happen all the time in the military. However, they usually have winners and losers.

    I suppose the whole point is just to see if you fold under the pressure. It might also test how long you last. I also don't imagine the scenario is the same every time. I guess it would be similar to the Academy "stress test" administered for entrance.

    It reminds me of this time I was out in the field (back in the Army), playing "war games." I was left in the TOC alone to watch the radio without any rounds. When I heard a stack at the door. Well... I knew I was dead. So I figured I'd get close to the door, wait in the dark for when they open it and jump out screaming with my unloaded rifle to scare the heck out of everyone. It worked like a charm... and then I went down in a hail of gun fire (blanks, but still an impressive sight in the dark). Probably not the way Saavik should have handled things...
     
  8. superDrool

    superDrool Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,306
    Blaze of glory is the only way to go if you're alone and have no other choice to survive. But that's just me. :)

    That scenario sounded pretty nerve racking though. No rounds, means no gusto, but seems like you pulled it off well. :lol
     
  9. JMChladek

    JMChladek Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,306
    What Nick Meyer might have been going for in 1982 was a video game vibe. Anyone who has been caught up in something and has the desire to "win" has experienced it, be it Pac Man, Pong or Call of Duty. So throw in the impossible level and you get more and more frustrated. THEN the true hidden you comes out for all in charge to see. To me, THAT is what the Kobayashi Maru is. So do you blow the crap out of everything and go out with a high body count, do you try to be diplomatic, do you tell the freighter that you can't rescue them because they are on the other side of the border and go on your merry way? It is almost like a more elaborate variation or an inkblot test. Such a test can be effective even if it might not necessarily be a true simulation of "real life".

    Closest real world analogy I can think of is the simulations NASA put their shuttle astronauts and mission control specialists through. They've used the same techniques since the old days of Apollo. After a few normal passes with liftoff, on orbit and landing, they would then throw everything into the simulator to give everyone involved with a workout. It wouldn't necessarily be a "no win" scenario, but it would be pretty intense with some warning or abort light thrown at you every 30 seconds to a minute during an eight and a half minute ride into orbit. The Sim supervisors try to trip up the controllers and astronauts and the goal is to try and "kill" them as death can be very educational so they don't do it when the real mission flies. They do it that way because then it begins to approach the intensity of real life where one malfunction and a necessary split second decision generates the same amount of stress as a bunch of simulated ones since lives are now on the line. And people with big egos like astronauts and mission control specialists do take these things seriously and REALLY don't like failure.

    One true story involving a failed sim was a few days before Apollo 11's liftoff. The crew had a day of landing simulations with mission control. The sim supervisors threw in a curveball of too fast a descent rate on the moon where the only solution was to abort (while throwing in another error to distract the controller so he might not catch the problem initially). Neil Armstrong knew what it was as he had correctly diagnosed it, but he did nothing to see what Mission Control would do since he was testing them. Buzz Aldrin was livid though when they ended up crashing before Mission Control told them to finally abort and was griping about it after. Finally Neil took him aside and explained why he did what he did, because sims were for learning and he wanted to see what Mission Control would do.

    Well, fast forward to a date in July 1969. Neil and Buzz landed on the moon after a pretty hairy bit of going a bit long on descent and almost landing in a big crater until Neil took over and used up precious fuel to bring the fly the ship and bring it down before the tanks ran dry (all while dealing with a computer error code). Everyone did their job though and they got it down.
     
  10. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
    All they have to do is tell the cadets there IS a way to win, and it would look VERY good on their transcripts if they were the first ones to find it.
     
  11. Java

    Java Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,242
    In order to make the whole thing more realistic (fake movie thing aside) the Kobayashi Maru should have been one of many scenarios for the testing. A couple of lines of dialog about some other scenarios "OOoo which one will you get?" you know?
     
  12. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
    ^Good idea. Some scenarios are winnable, but you don't want to get "Kobiyashi Maru"! They're messing with your mind if they give you that one!
     
  13. Vermithrax 4

    Vermithrax 4 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    566
    I think that's the prime reason why I'm sick of hearing about it, it was the only trainee test they ever really mentioned and made a fuss over, when in reality there would have been many different tests for a variety of reasons. I remember a fairly cool one in Next Gen where Wesley finishes up some written exam and as he's coming out of the testing room he encounters the aftermath of some "reactor meltdown" or something, with injured crewmen lying in the corridor and he swings into action to save them. Turns out it was all a simulation to see how he would react. I liked the fact that they sprung it on him totally out of the blue. Would like to have seen a bit more of that sort of thing.
     
  14. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    The problem I have is that there seems to be a lot of emphasis on "facing death" (as in the cadet is led to believe their crewmates are truly dying around them).

    After Spock is "killed", Saavik nearly has a look of despair on her face (which for a Vulcan is another thread altogether :lol)...

    But after her "moment", she immediately goes back to doing her job of giving orders to evacuate the ship.

    But if it she was aware all along that it was a simulation, how did she get "caught up in the moment?" :unsure

    Saavik later accuses Kirk of not "facing death". David (Kirk's son) says that Saavik was right and Kirk never faced death, to which Kirk replies, "Not like this; I haven't faced death."

    And in Trek '09 Spock reiterates that the test is to have the subject "face death."

    Kirk couldn't handle the fact that he failed and missed the point entirely. His A-type personality drove him to reprogram the simulation so he could finally "win" rather than ponder the ability to handle defeat/failure. And so he never did learn to accept "death." Which is why the death of Spock devastated him.

    Of course this doesn't take into account all the redshirts who bought the farm under his command. :lol

    I get that with real life comparisons the feeling of pressure and stress is all there, but I don't think anything can prepare you for your companions being killed.

    I think the only analogy I can think that would be closest to the point of the Kobayashi Maru, is an Air Force war games flight test in which a pilot is led to believe their wingman has truly had a catastrophic malfunction and the lead pilot actually watches the other plane crash...

    Only to be told later that it was a remote-piloted plane and that his buddy wasn't actually flying it. Get what I mean?

    I also think that TNG did a better job of "tweaking" the Kobayashi Maru test-

    Wesley takes the "psychological exam" for his entrance to Starfleet Academy. He sits waiting alone in a room, when there is an explosion/fire in the adjacent room. One crew member is severely injured and unconscious while another is trapped but unhurt. Wesley makes the hard choice of helping the unconscious crewman (although they could potentially die from their injuries), and leaving the trapped crewman behind. He was completely unaware it was his psychological test all along.

    The point being that it didn't actually matter which member he helped, but that he made a decision and acted on it.

    Another take was Troi's "Bridge Command Test", in which the ship will suffer a complete disaster unless she can give the correct order to her crew in time. She couldn't figure at first out how to save the ship and have it not cost any lives in the process. It isn't until she realizes she must order a crewmember to their certain death (in this case repairing a section that will cause death from radiation poisoning) that she passes the test.


    Kevin
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2012
  15. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
    ...or Edith Keeler, or his brother Sam, or the people executed by Kodos when he was living on Tarsus IV... ;)
     
  16. Clutch

    Clutch Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,336
    Everybody was in on the joke except Kirk who was the one being tested.
     
  17. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
    I suddenly heard Dark Helmet saying "fooled you!!"
     
  18. Apollo

    Apollo Legendary Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    5,035
    All our branches of Armed forces have these tests.

    They are used to see how the traineess react.
     
  19. Omnedon

    Omnedon New Member

    Trophy Points:
    2
    Just as a thought ... we don't know that the test "ends" when the door opens. It could conceivably be a character test looking at how you react to an "unfair, no-win" test. Do you pout, shout, moan, cry in frustration, etc. This could be what the test provokes. As a cadet, you don't know what "they" were looking for that would constitute a pass on a no-win situation. If your grade/rank depended on this, as a cadet this could be very stressful.

    Omnedon
     
  20. jedi573

    jedi573 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    716
    I think this is a fabulous discussion. Really thought-provoking stuff.

    Kevin, I like your mention of Troi's commander's test in TNG. She had to accept that she had to order a member of her crew to his death. Powerful stuff there, and applicable.

    There are a few different ways to look at how the students would have known about or considered the test.

    If they knew up front that it was a "no win" scenario, it can still be a valid training point.

    I'll give an example. I work in law enforcement. As with other members here, there are serious life-and-death decisions I've had to make.

    I was doing some "active shooter" training some years back. The scenario was that a gunman had a hostage in a room, gun to her head, and there was only one door in.

    Another officer and I were standing outside the door, discussing with the instructor the appropriate plan of action for how to enter the room. Unfortunately, the situation dictated an immediate response into the room with both of us, to then split off to flank the hostage taker.

    My training partner remarked to the instructor, "But, one of us is going to get shot this way."

    The instructor responded, "Yes. But one of you won't, and that'll be the one who takes out the bad guy."

    Even knowing that before going in was an important part of the training. The stress was from the knowledge beforehand, not necessarily the physical part of the test itself.

    I think that is arguably an example of how accepting a no-win (or, at least, a solution that's not exactly ideal) might be the best you'll get.

    It's doing it anyway that's the test of character for the Kobayashi Maru. The students who didn't give it their all because they said, "What's the point? It's a no-win," would be graded accordingly.

    Andy
     
  21. 0neiros

    0neiros Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,790
    Trek 09, actually Spock says the test is to make a Cadet feel fear, and gauge how they deal with it. Maybe, just maybe when a Cadet first takes the test, they are told that Failure will not be tolerated, and they will wash out Ala An Officer and a Gentleman. That WOULD really mess with a cadet's mind.
     
  22. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Thanks for all the input guys! The differing views certainly help shed some light here! :thumbsup

    When I was an Air Cadet and was doing senior leader training we had our own versions of "stress" tests. This was all minor stuff (like having a first aid situation and dealing with someone freaking out), or other situations where a monkey wrench is thrown into your plan.

    The point being how well you can improvise, and basically not choke or freeze up.


    After everything discussed I think I'm leaning toward this more than anything else; that you keep doing your job despite everything falling apart around you.

    "If you can keep your head while all around you are losing theirs..." ;)


    Kevin
     
  23. Jeyl

    Jeyl Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,670
    Here's what I thought of the Kobayashi Maru.

    It's a test to showcase how in any given circumstances, there will be conditions where no matter which option you choose, you will always end up with a bad result.

    - Try to rescue the Maru? FAILURE
    - Go on your merry way? FAILURE
    - Attack the klingon cruisers? FAILURE
    - Go in and destroy the Maru? FAILURE

    This is a test about making what you feel to be the right choice even if it will lead to something bad. If you watch Kirk's character in the Wrath of Khan, he believes that you can handle any situation and have it lead to a good result. That doesn't happen in the Wrath of Khan, where Kirk makes arrogant decisions that winds up getting members of his crew killed. This happens again when the Enterprise can't escape the blast radios of the Genesis Effect. Even though there was a solution to escaping the blast, it resulted in Spock's death. Something Kirk doesn't want to accept, but must. That's what the test is all about. Learning to live with the tough decisions you'll have to make as a Starfleet Captain.

    This is one of the reasons why I put Star Trek III on par with the even numbered movies. Kirk and crew are again thrown into a situation where victory seems impossible, but instead of trying to figure out a way to save everything through arrogance that Kirk had shown in Star Trek II, Kirk decides to make a hard choice by sacrificing the Enterprise. For me, this was Kirk's final answer to the test, only now understanding what the test was trying to teach him.

    Of course, that's not what we get in Trek09, where cadets have no choice but to rescue the Maru. And if you read any of the books, comics or any of the games (canon or not), the solution to the test that NuKirk uses in Trek09 is actually THE WRONG CHOICE! I'm not kidding. Making the Klingons easier to kill will result in failure. If you want to know what Prime Kirk's solution was, well, go play "Star Trek: Starfleet Academy" by Interplay on PC or read the comics. His solution is pretty clever and it works with how I thought the simulations were handled.
     
  24. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Yeah I played that over ten years ago. :)

    Kirk reprograms the Klingon A.I. so that when he introduces himself, the Klingons are impressed/intimidated by the mention of his name...

    "Captain Kirk? THEE Captain Kirk?!" :eek

    The Klingons then allow Kirk to escort the Kobayashi Maru back out of the Neutral Zone, rescuing the freighter and avoiding a conflict. His reasoning was that he will have quickly built up a reputation for himself by the time a situation like the Kobayashi Maru should ever really occur.

    There were two other "cheat" solutions in the game as well- dumb down the Klingon A.I. so they don't fight at all, or reduce the power of their weapons so they do no damage.


    What "I" don't care for in the Trek09 version is that the instructors actually care about the fact Kirk reprogramed the test at all. He had already taken it two times prior (and failed as he was supposed to). However they all act like it is his first time taking it... I would think they would be more like "Oh here we go; Kirk wants to try the simulation again. Well let's all take time out of our busy day to have this cadet try the test a third time." :rolleyes

    And after he succeeds they should be dumbfounded- but not have a hearing about it; he should already have had his final grade on the test the "first" time he took it no?


    Kevin
     
  25. Jeyl

    Jeyl Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,670
    My issue with the depiction of the Trek09 version was

    1. They're ordered by Starfleet to rescue the Kobayashi Maru, thus eliminating choice.
    2. They're battle cruisers, not warbirds. Romulans are the warbirds.
    3. No smoking, and no eating in the simulator!
    4. Kirk doesn't really do anything in the simulation but bark out general orders.
    5. The instructors don't even consider the possibility that the simulation glitched out when everything turned off for a few seconds. Kirk didn't give any orders nor do anything to his console to indicate he was the one causing this.
    6. Again, THE INSTRUCTORS NEVER CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY IT WAS GLITCHED! This is like if I took a test, the lights turned off, came back on and my test is now perfect. What teacher wouldn't suspect that I switched the sheets during the black out?
    7. Klingons shouldn't have cloaking devices until way past the 2270s. We're still in the 2250s.
     
  26. J Scorn

    J Scorn Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,307
    i cant believe the Kobayashi Maru Test is STILL not apart of the STO game...

    oh well...

    .
     
  27. CessnaDriver

    CessnaDriver Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,375
    Agreed that it was just a plot tool to "kill" Spock since the rumor mill was insane then and it has became way more then it should have.

    But looking back and thinking more on it now, it did "kill" the Kirk TOS character for me in a way, this was a line drawn between Kirk as I knew him on TV, and the film Kirk, which really grew to be a different character.
    TOS Kirk wouldn't have cheated, he was supposed to be a "stack of books with legs" and even needing to be set up on dates with women at the academy.
    He didn't become the youngest starship Captain by cheating to get there.
    These were Roddenberry's enlightened humans afterall.
     
  28. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
    Boy, it worked on me. I forgot all about worrying about Spock dying until he left the bridge to head to engineering. And even then the only reason the rumors came back to mind was because my sister, next to me in the theater, said "enter Spock". :facepalm
     
  29. Kerr Avon

    Kerr Avon Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,841
    But if it's a test that is literally unwinnable, then why not cheat? If the simulation cheats to prevent you winning, then cheating the simulation is the only option if the goal is to win. If there had been a way to win without cheating, I'm sure he'd have found it because that's just how awesome Kirk (not the Pine ripoff) is. He's also the Captain who use the Corbomite maneuver, are you going to complain he lied in a confrontation too?
     
  30. CessnaDriver

    CessnaDriver Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,375

    Kirk was actually using a human "poker" strategy in Corbomite Manuever against the alien intelligence. "Not chess Mr. Spock... poker!"

    Cheating your way out of real danger I'm not certain that is really a possibility. Bluffing, exploiting weaknesses, sure, but I think cheating is very specific meaning, to change the conditions of a controlled test/game such that you benefit unfairly.

    It was no test anymore out there, it was the real thing.

    I don't think Kirk could cheat his way out of danger anymore then the Apollo 13 astronauts could
    have cheated their way home safely.
     
  31. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Have to agree here; Kirk didn't "cheat" Balok, he improvised.


    Kevin
     
  32. darthgordon

    darthgordon Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,961
    I'm not sure where people get this idea that Kirk acted that way at the Academy. He was like that as an instructor at the Academy. That doesn't mean that he was like that during his Academy days. According to Mitchell, he was a tough instructor... and we see the same thing with him as an admiral toward the cadets in Spock's class.

    Plus, he didn't have to be set up on dates. In fact, he didn't even know he was set up. This is the guy that seemed to find an ex lover of his in every other star system. But that has nothing to do with him being a womanizer. It's because he's lonely and he's given his life to the service... any woman would come in second and they soon realize that.

    Mitchell simply sent her in his direction so he'd get distracted enough and be put in a good enough mood so he (Mitchell) could get through his class.

    Kirk certainly bent the rules on more than a few occasions. He had an almost cavalier attitude toward the Prime Directive. He disobeyed direct orders to take Spock to Vulcan. When ordered to leave his crewman behind by Federation High Commissioner Ferris, he did so without engaging the warp engines to see if there was any hope of finding them.

    So I in no way see Kirk as out of character in Star Trek II, nor do I see any liberties taken with his past.
     
  33. CessnaDriver

    CessnaDriver Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,375
    Kirk flat out cheating just doesn't fit with how I see the character in TOS.
    The fact that he was an instructor just makes it even more out of character.

    Bending rules is one thing over moral concerns or mission goals, cheating is another thing entirely.
     
  34. darthgordon

    darthgordon Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,961
    Ah, but it's semantics, isn't it? Was it cheating or was simply exploiting a weakness with the computer simulation? Apparently, Starfleet saw it as the latter. There was no way to beat the Kobayashi Maru without reprogramming the simulation. He knew that, and so did the instructors. It's not as though it's a winable scenario. So he made it so he could win.
     
  35. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    Excuse me, Kirk breaks the PRIME DIRECTIVE how many times?

    He cheats the NUMBER ONE RULE OF THE FEDERATION all the time.

    Absolutely that started in the academy.
     
  36. CessnaDriver

    CessnaDriver Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,375
    I guess I don't see how cheating applies to actual events with risk and great consequence since to me, cheating means you are taking a test or playing a game and to make up for your lack of skills or knowledge you make it easier on yourself, it's nothing to be admired.

    Breaking rules like the prime directive is not cheating on a test or game.
    You've made a moral choice for whatever reason and will take the consequence.
    Your not trying to make it easier on yourself and make it look like your better then you are.

    You get busted cheating in the military today, your in serious trouble.

    Why would Kirk risk his entire career when he clearly didn't need to cheat on tests?
     
  37. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    "Perhaps 'Because it's there' is not sufficient reason for climbing a mountain." Spock (Leonard Nimoy), Star Trek The Final Frontier.

    Why does any one do anything risky?

    Kirk thought the test was a cheat. Therefore he doesn't consider it a just thing.

    Same reason he destroyed the War computers on Eminiar 7.

    A moral choice just the same.
     
  38. Commander Max

    Commander Max Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,046
    I agree with CD. To make a captain of a starship(or any military vessel) you have to have a character that is above and beyond reproach. Cheating would mean a one way ticket out of the academy(if your caught), if you make it in to the service, you'll never sit in the captain's chair. But I'll bet your cleaning it.

    Really WOK was set up to turn ST into action movies(like SW), so they could make money with the franchise. It marked the end of ST as we knew it. It was a real shame, it's not like you can't combine the ideas of Trek with action.
    That movie had so many plot holes, I'm surprised it was as popular with the fans as it was. I call it a STINO(Star Trek In Name Only).
     
  39. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    You know, I still don't get why it is considered "cheating"?

    Kirk already took the test twice and failed (just like he was supposed to) twice.

    There is not supposed to be a "winning" solution so it's not like failing an Algebra exam two times and then looking up the answers and passing the exam the third time (which would definitely be cheating).

    So since there is no pass/fail grading with the Kobayashi Maru and the simulation is impossible to "win", why wouldn't the first two tries at it be considered his final grade?

    Kirk couldn't accept that he failed. He was driven to find a solution. When he realized the test was unwinnable he wanted to have a notch in his belt by being the first cadet to "beat" the scenario. That meant reprogramming the simulation. Nobody had ever thought of trying that solution.

    Does Starfleet want captains that are robots who follow the rules to the letter, or do they want people who can think outside the box?

    They gave him a commendation (at least in the original timeline) remember.

    Again this is why I don't care for the Trek'09 "hearing" for Kirk's actions. The line that he "cheated" stems from David Marcus' line in Star Trek II (not from any "official" Starfleet instructors or Kirk's academy records). Abrams just decided to run with that line and put Kirk on trial rather than having his instructors give him a commendation for original thinking.

    So by changing Kirk's actions on the Kobayashi Maru from a source of success (1st cadet to beat the no-win scenario), to that of conflict (he cheated and was suspended) he wiped out Kirk's backstory of graduating the Academy, being assigned to vessels like the Farragut, and rising through the ranks before being given the Enterprise.

    Not to mention providing our hero with "angst" that the audience can identify with, and a desire to rally against "The Man."

    But again- Trek'09 was about accelerating Kirk's career from (suspended) cadet to Captain in less than two hours.


    Kevin
     
  40. Kerr Avon

    Kerr Avon Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,841
    And that's just the start of what's wrong with that piece of **** from Abrams.
     
  41. Kerr Avon

    Kerr Avon Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,841
    The goal of the mission is to win. The mission can't be won without cheating. Therefore, cheating is the only way to win the mission. Since they've defined it as the only way to win, and your goal is to win, cheating is acceptable.
     
  42. TheDoctor

    TheDoctor Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,036
    It all depends on HOW you "cheat". The brilliant thing about the original is that they never went into details on what Kirk did except to say he changed the conditions and reprogrammed the simulation - it's left to your imagination to figure out exactly what he did (based on Savvak's test, though Kirks would have been very different).

    I imagined:
    - The Simulation was much longer than what was on screen (maybe Savvak had been in there for hours/days before they got to the point of what we saw). It would make sense that they had been evaluating Saavak's OTHER command skills at the same time (such as Diplomacy, etc.) and this part was the "Last Question".
    - There were various scenarios. Not every officer candidate gets the same scenario - this particular version may be a favorite of Kirk's to see how students do with the same scenario he faced.
    - Kirk's solution was probably MUCH more cleaver than anything we can think of (which is why the left it vague).
    - Kirk's solution was probably something the creators of the simulator thought "You know, we didn't think of that option..."

    Which is why I have a HUGE problem with Trek 09:
    - Kirk was so cocky and, let's just say it: an *. Even one of the instructors wondered if he was taking it seriously. The PRIME Kirk would have done it with class and dignity.
    - Showing WHAT Kirk did takes away all of the imagination.
    - Kirk's 'solution' ends up being pretty lame and it clearly is "cheating". It's not a "cleaver solution", etc.
    - SPOCK runs the simulation? Seriously???
     
  43. SmilingOtter

    SmilingOtter Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,560
    Yeah, Quinto's Spock being the creator of the test kind of goes against Spock Prime's comment to Kirk in TWOK that he had never taken the test.
     
  44. Lightning

    Lightning Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    815
    Any scenario where Kirk makes it look like he figures out a solution without changing a test is cheating, he would be hiding facts from the instructors. He needs to make it glaringly obvious he changed the test. Changing the test was his solution not some clever gambit against the Klingons.


    If he's running the test he can't very well take it can he? Testing the simulation after you write it and actually taking the test are very different.
     
  45. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Agreed. Spock was never on the fast track to command, so he never had to take the "no-win" scenario test (in any form).

    A lot of people slam the '09 Kirk's behaviour during the test; that he acted like an arrogant *.

    He did. But I believe that maybe, just maybe that fits right in with what his character may have been like back then.

    "(I) patted myself on the back for my ingenuity."

    The problem is that we were introduced to the Kirk we know and love after he had been a seasoned captain for several years. There are no "flashback" scenes in the TOS to demonstrate to us what he was like (unlike the TNG episode Tapestry that showed us a young "full of fight" Picard). I know it is difficult to accept our hero being a jerk, but who is to say he "didn't" act like that back then?

    How many of us (over 40 like me) believe we acted like idiots in our youth? ;)


    Kevin
     

Share This Page