Science Fiction Fantasy is objectively better than Medieval Fantasy

[Ichinisan]

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.

My favorite sci-fi books as a teenager? Jurassic Park and The Lost World (I liked dinos).

 

[dighn]

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.

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.

 

[arrfep]

I'm only write hard sci-fi.

Crojar: I will kill you like man. With hands. Crojar then cuts off head and other parts and throws in bag..."

 

[zinfamous]

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.

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.

 

[zinfamous]

My favorite sci-fi books as a teenager? Jurassic Park and The Lost World (I liked dinos).

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.

 

[micrometers]

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]

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.

yeah, so no one cares.

 

[Dumac]

Obvious troll is objectively obvious.

Agreed

 

[Ichinisan]

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.

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.

 

[Kadarin]

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

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.

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:

 

[mattpegher]

Reminds me of teh Phineus and Ferb episode "Nerds of a Feather".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAA72528Mgc

 

[SlitheryDee]

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.

 

[micrometers]

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.

yeah, this is what I'm talking about.

 

[Red Storm]

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!

 

[micrometers]

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 Mars series. Best thing I've read in a long time.

 

[thebestMAX]

Who needs more than 2 boobs when you have Eva Green?

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)

 

[Anubis]

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!

ringworld

 

[pw38]

ringworld

The Known Universe should be required learning.

 

[zinfamous]

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.

Sounds like Fantasy to me.

:hmm:

 

[JTsyo]

Weber's multiverse series looked like it would be a cool cross. Magic meets industrial. Too bad he didn't get far. Though I guess it would be much more fantasy than since the tech is about 19th century.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Sounds like Fantasy to me.

:hmm:

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.