@pongley: Completely agree. Guess we'll just have to wait and see how the writers wield their super weapon. I hope it's big and badass and so much so that I barely believe it... but I also hope it doesn't make me think, "what... come on, really?"
When people "scienced" the death star they found that it would be an unfathomably, astronomically impossible feat. Of course judging such a thing in the context of our own galaxy (which as we all know is in a different time period and far, far away) is silliness.
@pongley: Well to be fair, Star Wars isn't actually sci-fi. People have always called it that because spehs ships and laz0rz. But it's actually more accurately categorized as fantasy.
Lightsabers are impossible, so "crystals"
The force is impossible, and the one time Lucas tried to explain it (midichlorians) it sounded stupid. It's magic, plain and simple.
There are knights, emperors, princesses, etc.
Basically, I'm just saying, judging Star Wars with a yard-stick of science has been done before and it kind of ruins the fun if you take it too far. Star Wars has always been a plot-driven universe. Not science driven. If the writers want a plot device, they make it -- damn the realism.
@gannonnatasha: Galen Marek, the clone from Force Unleashed, is in fact called Starkiller.
But since Disney has completely wiped all non-movie Star Wars content from the "official canon" I doubt there is any connection between the character and the superweapon.
Starkiller is just a highly self-explanatory weapon now, as far as canon is concerned.
It's called the Starkiller base. It's a giant (more like unbelievably massive) trench cut into an ice planet with a massive laser that can blow up whole stars.
They officially one-upped the good old that's-no-moon Death Star.
spikepigeo's comments