• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Science Fiction Fantasy is objectively better than Medieval Fantasy

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
zinfamous said:
there is a very clear distinction, often unrealized because much of what is fantasy is incorrectly labeled as sci fi.

star wars is not sci fi. it is fantasy, for example.

Good sci-fi, real sci fi, deals with what is inherently possible. The best of it happens within the near, indistinguishable future--or even present day.

Fantasy is purely impossible.

Sci Fi, Fantasy, and Sci Fi/Fantasy are rather independent of each other.

"fiction" does not assume "impossible." It never has.

Not surprisingly, "Sci Fi" barely exists today.
Click to expand...
My favorite sci-fi books as a teenager? Jurassic Park and The Lost World (I liked dinos).
 
zinfamous said:
there is a very clear distinction, often unrealized because much of what is fantasy is incorrectly labeled as sci fi.

star wars is not sci fi. it is fantasy, for example.

Good sci-fi, real sci fi, deals with what is inherently possible. The best of it happens within the near, indistinguishable future--or even present day.

Fantasy is purely impossible.

Sci Fi, Fantasy, and Sci Fi/Fantasy are rather independent of each other.

"fiction" does not assume "impossible." It never has.

Not surprisingly, "Sci Fi" barely exists today.
Click to expand...

hmm ok. our disagreement is only in terminology. what you call scifi/fantasy I call soft sci-fi. what you call real sci-fi I call hard sci-fi.

and I agree that good sci-fi is rare these days, though in the realm of novels they aren't that uncommon.
 
dighn said:
hmm ok. our disagreement is only in terminology. what you call scifi/fantasy I call soft sci-fi. what you call real sci-fi I call hard sci-fi.

and I agree that good sci-fi is rare these days, though in the realm of novels they aren't that uncommon.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Lots of people seem to think that fiction = "not a true story" means the same thing as "false" story.

I think it happens amongst readers with limited horizons, but I digress.

Good Sci Fi is, indeed, largely non-existent. It's even worse with film.

I believe it largely died in novel form (the popular exposure of it, anyway), with the death of P K Dick.
 
Ichinisan said:
My favorite sci-fi books as a teenager? Jurassic Park and The Lost World (I liked dinos).
Click to expand...

It's a weird gray area, there; as I was thinking about Chrichton long and hard with those comments.

Jurassic Park truly straddles the line; as much of the science is pretty good science--in that it reflects upon very real, very serious scientific thought at the time, it is widely known to be pure fantasy (the method of harvesting DNA from amber, and replacing with nicked bits with modern frog DNA is, completely, impossible--rather, it would amount to nothing).

However, these projects existed, and where only shown to be the stuff of fantasy after several attempts. Chricton is good stuff, in the end, as his work appeals to real science and expands upon very real possibilities, current thought, and extracts from this engaging, self-reflective, and socially-aware themes.

Dickens is fiction; doesn't mean his work isn't impossible. True Sci Fi understands this distinction, and simply pulls from different resources.
 
part of the thread is also about how Mass Effect on a whole is a lot better than Dragon Age on a whole, even though they're by the same company.
 
zinfamous said:
It's a weird gray area, there; as I was thinking about Crichton long and hard with those comments.

Jurassic Park truly straddles the line; as much of the science is pretty good science--in that it reflects upon very real, very serious scientific thought at the time, it is widely known to be pure fantasy (the method of harvesting DNA from amber, and replacing with nicked bits with modern frog DNA is, completely, impossible--rather, it would amount to nothing).

However, these projects existed, and where only shown to be the stuff of fantasy after several attempts. Crichton is good stuff, in the end, as his work appeals to real science and expands upon very real possibilities, current thought, and extracts from this engaging, self-reflective, and socially-aware themes.

Dickens is fiction; doesn't mean his work isn't impossible. True Sci Fi understands this distinction, and simply pulls from different resources.
Click to expand...

FTFY (I always catch myself doing it the same way)

Anyway, I don't think it's grey-area at all. Most people had never heard of genetic engineering before the books and movies went mainstream, and the scenario was presented as something that was possible in the near future; in THIS universe. I'm not sure if scientists had publicly debunked Crichton's idea at the time, but, from the perspective of the reader, this stuff was presented as a very real possibility. As you pointed out, it's that hook that differentiates true sci-fi from fantasy. If you enjoy it for that reason, it's sci-fi...not fantasy.
 
zinfamous said:
star wars is not sci fi. it is fantasy, for example.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct; Star Wars is pure fantasy. There is no science involved in what goes on in the story.

Not surprisingly, "Sci Fi" barely exists today.
Click to expand...

Correct. Go to the nearest bookstore and look in the scifi aisles, and you'll see more cheesy supernatural books than actual scifi. Laurell K. Hamilton, Twilight, etc.

:vomit:
 
I think science fiction can be better because the scale can be so much larger. Many of my favorite sci fi stories involve thousands of worlds with trillions of inhabitants and span many millennium. On the other hand, straight fantasy will usually be confined to a single world and the scale of everything is reduced to fit that. Sci fi will have ring-worlds with the surface area of a million earths created by scavenging materials from an entire solar system, where fantasy story will revolve around a paltry 100 story fortress for some dark lord or other to sit and rule over a speck of land that would barely be visible from the moon. I like the sense of nearly incomprehensible vastness I get from a lot of sci fi.
 
SlitheryDee said:
I think science fiction can be better because the scale can be so much larger. Many of my favorite sci fi stories involve thousands of worlds with trillions of inhabitants and span many millennium. On the other hand, straight fantasy will usually be confined to a single world and the scale of everything is reduced to fit that. Sci fi will have ring-worlds with the surface area of a million earths created by scavenging materials from an entire solar system, where fantasy story will revolve around a paltry 100 story fortress for some dark lord or other to sit and rule over a speck of land that would barely be visible from the moon. I like the sense of nearly incomprehensible vastness I get from a lot of sci fi.
Click to expand...

yeah, this is what I'm talking about.
 
My problem with Sci Fi is that sometimes the setting is just too weird. I enjoy sci fi that is at least somewhat based on a "realistic" line of thinking/theory.

Speaking of which, if anyone has good sci fi book recommendations (anything not star wars/trek), pass em along!
 
Red Storm said:
My problem with Sci Fi is that sometimes the setting is just too weird. I enjoy sci fi that is at least somewhat based on a "realistic" line of thinking/theory.

Speaking of which, if anyone has good sci fi book recommendations (anything not star wars/trek), pass em along!
Click to expand...

Red Mars series. Best thing I've read in a long time.
 
zinfamous said:
Who needs more than 2 boobs when you have Eva Green?

eva-green-camelot.jpg
Click to expand...

Cant agree more. I watched that entire series just for her.

I cant believe no one has mentioned combining the two like "A Song of Fire and Ice" has done.
(Sorry if I missed the point or any references here, maybe the SciFi is missing but the Fantasy and Medieval Times isnt)
 
Last edited:
Red Storm said:
My problem with Sci Fi is that sometimes the setting is just too weird. I enjoy sci fi that is at least somewhat based on a "realistic" line of thinking/theory.

Speaking of which, if anyone has good sci fi book recommendations (anything not star wars/trek), pass em along!
Click to expand...

ringworld
 
SlitheryDee said:
I think science fiction can be better because the scale can be so much larger. Many of my favorite sci fi stories involve thousands of worlds with trillions of inhabitants and span many millennium. On the other hand, straight fantasy will usually be confined to a single world and the scale of everything is reduced to fit that. Sci fi will have ring-worlds with the surface area of a million earths created by scavenging materials from an entire solar system, where fantasy story will revolve around a paltry 100 story fortress for some dark lord or other to sit and rule over a speck of land that would barely be visible from the moon. I like the sense of nearly incomprehensible vastness I get from a lot of sci fi.
Click to expand...

Sounds like Fantasy to me.

:hmm:
 
zinfamous said:
Sounds like Fantasy to me.

:hmm:
Click to expand...

Scifi doesn't have to be confined to near future tech. Other worlds with vast populations, gigantic artificial worlds, etc. are indeed very far removed from the reality in which we live today, but scifi will explain (or attempt to) these things through rational and theoretically possible ways. Fantasy would just explain the world as given, and anything unexplainable is magic. The scale and the scope is not what makes something fantasy, it is the implausibility and lack of a reasonable explanation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top