with sci-fi there is an expectation that you have to come up with stuff that's somewhat original and that differentiates the setting from other settings, whereas with fantasy you can just churn out elf after dwarf after orc after dragon and everyone laps it up over and over and over.
>Can't you just enjoy the genre for what it is? Why do you need to lie to give yourself a feeling of intellectual superiority? It's fricking pathetic.
It's what the genre has become. The anon spamming pulp can only dream of the day it returns to its roots.
To many Scifi is the anime of western lit, "It's not cartoons mom, it's anime". A hint of intellectualism for those who desperately lack it. If you read the OG scifi and pulps it was all very creative and in some cases markedly impossible. People like to soi out over how many of the ideas have in some form or another appeared in modern society but that's potentially the stories planting the seeds AND writing about things that are convenient.
The author's weren't sitting there trying to justify microchips existing so they could write about handheld devices that could do whatever you needed or capacitance when talking about fricking handheld lasers.
Scifi has become a massive dickhead magnet in the same way fantasy attracts sadsacks.
>No, there isn't. This is blatantly untrue. Sci-fi copies itself constantly.
It isn't copy pasting races to the same extent that fantasy does. Even if they include the classic brute or smart race, scifi authors try to give them interesting quirks. This almost never happens with fantasy
You should be able to rip off Star Trek as easily as fantasygays rip off Tolkien. Muh generic human UN world government Earh Federation type shit is everywhere.
Irrelevant. You can make the world as dense as you like and confine the action to one planet, or one city, or one facility.
Just make it highly illegal to land a FTL spaceship on inhabited planets because dangerous nuke/antimatter/black hole powered spaceship, strict quarantine or security requirements. You have to dock with the orbital station, go through decontamination and body scanning so you can't easily smuggle weapons or contraband in before you can access the hub area.
Or on less developed worlds you take a shuttle down and land at the approved spaceport or get shot the frick down by air defenses.
mud huts and longswords are easier to design than guns and vehicles. granted, FPS gameplay is as brainless as it gets but third person souls-like shit is hardly any more difficult to design
Partially right, you can ripoff sci-fi shit, but fantasy gays just have lower standards, might be cuz most of them are comfyBlack folk, and they all are gullible morons.
Vulcans frick whenever they want, and they do in marriage very frequently as it's a major part of being married. The pon farr is when they got to frick or die.
Proving my point.
Fantasy makes something as simple and relatively tiny as a forest into an entire experience.
Sci-fi trivializes all of it to the point of it not mattering. It's just another landmark to scan and fly over.
It's why every space game is just empty and empty and empty and empty. Even the most densely-populated sci-fi games get mogged by the emptiest fantasy games.
>It's why every space game is just empty and empty and empty and empty.
Good point, I guess the problem comes down to starfield and NMS popularizing procedural generation, which is why later games such as Mass Effect, Kotor, and Halo all have empty open worlds surrounded by a void of nothingness
>I guess the problem comes down to starfield and NMS popularizing procedural generation
you say this but the proceduralism isn't the issue, it's that they don't use it with enough unique assets to define various elements that the procedural worlds encompass.
having proceduralism is brilliant because it gives you access to a large amount of control over how you wanna define a planets landscape arrangement. that isn't the issue. if you tried to handcraft a planet you'd probably have even MORE of a barren wasteland because how the frick are you going to fill a planet with interesting places when the biggest open world games are one continent at most?
the ultimate solution to space/scifi games would be to have the procedural system starfield has, but parameterize the engine enough to allow for more creatures, aliens, cities, and biospheres as a whole to exist, along with more tailored questlines on each planet. that would be a better foundation. going back to just only doing handmade components for EVERYTHING would be a downgrade.
This but unironically. Fantasy became a hit with the normies while sci-fi is still seen as this nerdy, cheesy thing with rubber foreheads and plastic rayguns.
with sci-fi there is an expectation that you have to come up with stuff that's somewhat original and that differentiates the setting from other settings, whereas with fantasy you can just churn out elf after dwarf after orc after dragon and everyone laps it up over and over and over.
I mean elves and dragons are public domain and highly popular. Put them on your cover and people will know what's up. Show them your OCs such as a purple space babe with five eyes next to some cyborganic monstrosity and they'll be like 'wtf is this?'.
People who like fantasy want comfort food. They're reliable and predictable customers. The genre being frozen in amber and using the same tropes over and over again is part of its appeal to its audience. Sci-fi fans are less predictable; sometimes they buy a game that you would expect them to like, and sometimes they just don't show up and it's not clear why.
it depends. to me sci-fi is usually very stale and relies a lot on technobabble to explain why you are able to do something whereas fantasy has magic that ironically is just easier to accept.
It's not a proven genre/aesthetic in today's market(John Carter flopping like it did basically confirmed Planetary Romance is worthless in the eyes of Big Media) which means only low budget indies would ever take a risk on it.
A big budget Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers game could be fricking stellar if they ever took a chance with it and leaned as hard as possible into the pulpiness of it. I'd kill for one.
Most game devs don’t know how to design nice looking vehicles and spaceships, whereas with fantasy you can just have characters walk everywhere or ride horses
Sci-fi was always a secondary genre used by media giants to gather conversation about ideas. It was always second best to films like LotR and Indiana Jones. Even financially.
Indiana Jones was popular but it was never as popular as Star Wars. People are also extremely autistic about Star Wars. People think Indiana Jones is cool but they don't RP as characters from the franchise and argue about the lore
Bro, I love Mass Effect but it's absolutely not as popular as Star Wars or LotR. And I say that as someone who prefers Mass Effect to both of those franchises
I'm not comparing popularity, I'm saying SW and IJ both have a ton of old school pulp in their DNA, which most modern stuff like Mass Effect has less of. They are from a particular genre tradition where the line between fantasy and sci-fi is much less distinct, and this is possibly a major reason why Star Wars beat out all other sci-fi franchises to become top dog.
I think so too. Star Wars is really the only sci-fi (I say that loosely) franchise that has any sort of international popularity. Everything else is MCU and LOTR.
Fantasy films were basically nonexistent prior to the 1980s. Before then, all you really had was a short fad of sword & sandal B movies in the early 60s, stuff that nobody really watched or cared about. Star Trek was a cultural phenomenon, and Star Wars was so big that it defined a generation in the same way Pokemon did 20 years later.
It was a culture shock, I agree. But a culture shock doesn't imply popularity either. Yu-Gi-Oh was a cultureshock, as was Toonami and most of Saturday morning cartoons in the 90's—early 2000's.
Not nearly as big. Star Wars was the second-biggest media franchise in the world for most of the 80s, it was the first media franchise to really lean hard into merchandising. Star Wars toys were the best selling toys every Christmas from 1977 until at least 1984. >tripgay
Ah I get it, you're flamebaiting with contrarian shitposts. Nevermind
There are also other problems to consider: Star Wars isn't sci-fi even on a technical level. It's science fantasy which is quoted by George Lucas himself. Star Wars had some resemblance of science fiction in its novelization, but it's also not based on anything. No laws of gravity, spiritualism, religions, pyrotechnics, nothing. It's just a universe saturated in technological advancements. There's no real mythology to the science: it just is.
Secondly, a cultural phenomena partly contributes to the success of Star Wars, but it also is a culture shock that maintained the interest over the years. Arguing that the same people who watched Star Wars in the 70's are the same people who watch it now is shit. It's just shit. You know that and I know that. So in some level of fairness (or imperative), we could say that there are some fans of the original three movies today, but even then those bandwagoners did not suffer the honeymoon phase as the rest of America did during its very real and highly confrontational culture shock which almost killed the genre dead in the 90s.
yes. The 60s in popular media is about the perils or advantages of the future. B-class cinema started out as sci fi slop. All popular media was sci fi (or western). Superhero genre got reinvented as sci fi adjacent with marvel (specially Kirby), science fiction as social critique, specially over nuclear proliferation, was at an all time high.
Fantasy was something of the 20s. The entire 50s-70s period was dominated by sci fi and we don't really see a shift until the tail end of the 80s.
So that means over 50% of boomers knowingly encourage Star Wars as a social commentary, knowing that some of the most influential works existed decades prior?
So that means over 50% of boomers knowingly encourage Star Wars as a social commentary, knowing that some of the most influential works existed decades prior?
This may have had something to do with attitudes of the time.
Apollo 11 was the American spaceflight that first landed humans on the Moon. Commander Neil Armstrong and Lunar Module Pilot Buzz Aldrin landed the Apollo Lunar Module Eagle on July 20, 1969, at 20:17 UTC, and Armstrong became the first person to step onto the Moon's surface six hours and 39 minutes later, on July 21 at 02:56 UTC. Aldrin joined him 19 minutes later, and they spent about two and a quarter hours together exploring the site they had named Tranquility Base upon landing.
Also, right before Star Wars came out was a period of depressing nihilistic leftist woody allen oscar bait type shit. It wasn't just sci fi, it created the summer blockbuster forget your troubles kind of movie.
I can only hope we are reaching a similar breaking point now.
I don't think it does, you're probably defining scifi by some absurd standard but there's tons of scifi bullshit out there. Seeing as you used Star Trek I take it you mean scifi has to be some big dumb spacefaring ordeal. But Fallout is Scifi, Resident Evil is SciFi, Armor Core, Pikmin, etc.
Do they? Is that even true? Off the top of my head it seems to be a fairly 50/50 distribution. In fact, never having thought about it before, I am amazed they're so neck-and-neck.
I will also throw out that there's a bit of a false dichotomy here, as there are some games that are both fantasy and sci-fi. For example Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy both predominantly use fantasy settings, but have areas with robots and future tech.
Can you give us clear examples of "real" sci-fi and "not real" sci-fi? Because I think even if you filter out sci-fantasy stuff like Star Wars, there's still a ton of sci-fi shooters out there.
If they wish it to be, but given the Vulcan's hyper logical understanding of anatoy they probably know a pressure point on your dick that could make you cum harder than a photon torpedo
Do they? Is that even true? Off the top of my head it seems to be a fairly 50/50 distribution. In fact, never having thought about it before, I am amazed they're so neck-and-neck.
I will also throw out that there's a bit of a false dichotomy here, as there are some games that are both fantasy and sci-fi. For example Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy both predominantly use fantasy settings, but have areas with robots and future tech.
Chrono trigger and Final fantasy are sci-fantasy, not sci-fi.
Sci-fi. An aesthetic that vaguely conforms to what was considered to be futuristic at the time of it's creation. Constantly shifting as a result. Star wars, halo, blade runner, total recall.
Speculative Sci-fi. A genre concerned with exploring the consequences of future technology/society according to a set of logically consistent rules about how the technology/society works. Can also be done with a fantasy aesthetic although this is rare. I, Robot, Foundation, The Time Machine, Ancillary Justice.
Science Fantasy. An aesthetic which which mixes elements of high, often futuristic technology into a conventional fantasy setting. Many Final Fantasy games, Trails in the Sky, Chrono trigger, some Zelda games. Arguably star wars.
This. OP is fricking moronic. I'm a fantasygay and all I see every time I look through steam is sci-fi bullshit. Even then, I know it's partly due to my own bias because I'm going to be more picky about what is a "fantasy" game while everything that looks like neon vomit will probably get the sci-fi brand. But realistically, it's probably about an even distribution.
Compare Warhammer Fantasy to 40K (ringe). In Fantasy there exists the entire world all in one place. All the many different civilizations, the Empire of Sigmar in the heartlands, the Dwarves in their Karak peaks, the Elves in their forests and islands, the Orcs in their badlands, the Norscans in the far north and so on and so forth. Nice and consolidated, easy to see, actual places that hold weight in this world and are connected. A space setting removes this because everything is so fricking far away, and it's an entire planet compared to the much smaller kingdom or city state. So when you see this garbage of le exterminatus destroying an entire planet it doesn't hold the same value compared to Atdorf or Reikland being decimated because it's a whole fricking planet that just gets blown up by lasers not a desperate defence of knights, footmen and militia against monsters and barbarians besieging their homes. Nobody gives a shit about an entire planet being destroyed because there's no value as there's like ten thousand fricking planets just like it. Not the same when it's an entire city with smaller towns and villages full of people.
So to continue this with a neat little bow on top Fantasy keeps things way smaller to a more connected world with much more filled in factions that all have more stakes and lived in societies instead of soulless grimdark slop. Look at Vermintide and Darktide to see the difference of the two settings and why one is vastly superior to the other. It's not the space game btw.
Compare Warhammer Fantasy to 40K (ringe). In Fantasy there exists the entire world all in one place. All the many different civilizations, the Empire of Sigmar in the heartlands, the Dwarves in their Karak peaks, the Elves in their forests and islands, the Orcs in their badlands, the Norscans in the far north and so on and so forth. Nice and consolidated, easy to see, actual places that hold weight in this world and are connected. A space setting removes this because everything is so fricking far away, and it's an entire planet compared to the much smaller kingdom or city state. So when you see this garbage of le exterminatus destroying an entire planet it doesn't hold the same value compared to Atdorf or Reikland being decimated because it's a whole fricking planet that just gets blown up by lasers not a desperate defence of knights, footmen and militia against monsters and barbarians besieging their homes. Nobody gives a shit about an entire planet being destroyed because there's no value as there's like ten thousand fricking planets just like it. Not the same when it's an entire city with smaller towns and villages full of people.
Actually low IQ if the scale of a setting filters you this hard
if anything, Vermintide suffers from the smaller scale, at the end of the day you KNOW that everything the Ubersreik 5 does is all for naught, sure, protectinga single planet in a galaxy of millions may not mean much, but .01 percent is better than literally nothing
Yep, it's all about scale and implication of medieval combat being more personal.
The closest to being a famous gunmen are those who get to operate alone like that Finnish sniper during WWII or whoever was the most infanous bandit in Wild West.
Middle Ages had plenty of famous warriors who didn't need to rack up a small village worth of kills because every fight was a struggle, not a coinflip.
when that new Star Trek Stellaris game comes out in the next few days I'm going to immediately genocide the Bajorrans just like how it didn't happen but should have
Obsidian Order? You have me all wrong, I'm just a human of the Federation, and definitely not a Cardassian intelligence operative altered to look like a human! I'm just a really empathetic fellow.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Oh, then that's alright. I'll just send another email to the Department of Internal Affairs, telling them that I made a mistake.
Star Trek slept on delivering a rogueli*e with more combat, diplomacy, archeology, anomalies, fist fights, exploration, away missions, and dead redshirts than you could shake a stick at.
Some games already laid the groudwork. Strange Adventures in Infinite Space sends you on a ten year mission to map out a sector. Crying Suns' execution sucked but the bridge management aesthetics were nice. Renowned Explorers had an extensive stat/perk-based encounter system. There's no excuse.
>Why do regular fantasy games outnumber sci-fi games 1000 to 1?
Women don't care for sci-fi, that's why. No major sci-fi property has targeted women, so it's rare for a woman to like things like space exploration, robots, and trans humanism. In contrast there have been plenty of fantasy media aimed at women and young girls specifically, so it's pretty common for girls to pretend they're princesses or witches, or fantasizing about riding horses or attending grand balls. I'm not saying it's impossible to get a girl to like something that's sci-fi, but usually they like it in spite of it being sci-fi, like liking Edgerunners because of the romance.
TLDR: Fantasy setting appeals to both genders, Sci-fi only appeals to men.
The reason why fantasy is so common though is because early game developers were all D&D nerds because before video games that was the only 'nerdy' game they could play together. When they started making video games, they naturally drew on their experiences with D&D which led to a lot of games having a fantasy setting.
Sci-fi, especially the modern kind, is very gay in that people will accuse you of """speculating wrong""" if they don't like your ideas. Hardscifi is about justification for concepts within the story and or basing it on real sci. People are acting like scifi itself is not valid unless you can expect 'x' thing to be real by citing at least 5 papers which makes it homogeneous and uncreative trash.
The fact that the term Science Fantasy now applies to what was once the foundation of Scifi says everything.
To many Scifi is the anime of western lit, "It's not cartoons mom, it's anime". A hint of intellectualism for those who desperately lack it. If you read the OG scifi and pulps it was all very creative and in some cases markedly impossible. People like to soi out over how many of the ideas have in some form or another appeared in modern society but that's potentially the stories planting the seeds AND writing about things that are convenient.
The author's weren't sitting there trying to justify microchips existing so they could write about handheld devices that could do whatever you needed or capacitance when talking about fricking handheld lasers.
Scifi requires looking toward the future. Fantasy has you looking toward the past. The future is bleak and the past looks rosy compared to the modern day so fantasy is more popular.
>The future is bleak
But the future does not have to be bleak in your fictional story? That's why it's fiction, you can write whatever the frick you want as long as you create some sort of reasonable in-universe explanation.
Doesn't matter. The modern audience fricking hates looking at the future because their future is bleak and there is fathomable no escape short of death. This is also why isekai is such a popular genre, the only way for most people's lives to improve is to fricking die and be reincarnated.
Fiction aside the only hope man has is
a) leaving the planet which will necessarily create divides in power and give us new frontiers and distinctions
b) a massive world war which sets us back thousands of years socially
If we coalesce into a single order shit will get tyrannical (if not immediately then eventually) and tyranny almost always needs at least some outsider involvement to be overthrown. We'll finally reach a point of existential homo-stasis. Ironically after fashioning our philosophy after Prometheus we will become him.
Abupbup, anon. Now we've got RETURNER fiction. Isekai is about bailing out on the shit life and inherently accepting a fantasy (literal) in place of it. Where you're insulated from failure and can find succour in whatever you lacked in the real world be it romance, friendship, autonomy, success or even restfulness.
Returner is the new up and comer which is about the future absolutely going completely fricking batshit but with the MC having been granted revelation either by experiencing it and traveling back, receiving an oracle ect.
There's a combined genre where one iskeais a world with a bad end for the setting or their character personally which combines the two - but it's safe to say people are finally starting to approach the idea of the future being bad but perhaps being surmountable as opposed to fleeing the sinking ship - at least in terms of fiction.
They have a shady intelligence agency that supersedes all other lawful institutions, plus they have plenty of examples of bad faith officers abusing authority. Since they are post-scarcity so it’s exponentially more hopeful than most fiction, but it is detailed how we went through a good share of nuclear biomutant cyber holocausts to get there.
Fair enough. I did sorta forget about their shady intelligence agency On the other hand, I expect that the formation of any utopia or post-scarcity civilization would involve one or more horrific wars beforehand, if only for the combination of war fueling innovation and the destruction of the current civilization so that a new, better one, can be constructed from the ashes.
Scifi requires looking toward the future. Fantasy has you looking toward the past. The future is bleak and the past looks rosy compared to the modern day so fantasy is more popular.
Fantasy has almost nothing to do with looking towards the past you complete spastic. That's why Howard's work was so innovative. >inb4 brainlet take based on comics or films
Read a fricking book >inb4 but muh Tolkien
Yeah he was into history but the series wasn't historically motivated rather it was mythologically motivated. What's the difference? Well you can make a myth of anything you can be as fantastic as you want and you can make the setting more alien than scifi if you please. Historical fiction or pseudo-historical fantasy ala Howard takes a much more grounded approach and anyone reading either work can feel the difference.
The primary issue with fantasy is that the majority wish to ape the feeling of 'rightness' that Tolkien exhibits. That appeal to the central tenants and those ever present beats and symbols that exist throughout all myths. They do this without understanding how those myths were formed and in the large majority of the time, without any appreciation or perhaps even exposure to real theological/mythological literature (which is where the confusion around the significance of history can occur).
Honestly? That's a toughie. Of the Galaxy cover stories? I liked the one about the man whose kids were hyper evolved and eventually just bailed on this entire plane of existence. I'm not sure it's galaxy but despite the hilarity of the premise I found the story about the prison planet where evil was ontologically good and visa versa to be fun.
There's a tonne of little (galaxy) stories I recall, like the head hunting society where everyone got to let their urges out in a lottery where you got to kill or be killed.
It's not pulp but I like 2001 Nights. That's an excellent pulp-like manga which eventually has most of its stories pull together in an extremely satisfying way.
Kenshi. The history and world building are especially compelling. The thought that there might be life on the two other planetary bodies in the sky but you have no feasible way of getting to them is an abstract kind of feel. The people of Kenshi itself might never be able to reach them but if enough knowledge and technology survived on those worlds then maybe they can begin the long process of reconnecting. And rebuilding what was once lost.
Frank Herbert's Dune, A Canticle for Leibowitz, and Roadside Picnic are some of my favorites. Especially the latter one got me: HAPPINESS, FREE, FOR EVERYONE, AND LET NO ONE BE FORGOTTEN!!
My brother from another mother. I'll add in Sphere by Crichton, I read it before Roadside Picnic and it scratches a similar itch. Besides its similar mechanism, I mean. Also, despite all the omissions from the book, the movie is great simply for Dustin Hoffman's and Samuel Jackson's performances.
>Sphere
Thanks for the book suggestion, bro, I'll add that to my (hopelessly long) reading list! I haven't played any of the Stalker games, but I've watched Tarkovsky's movie like four times or so. Amazing what kind of adaptations RP has inspired.
I still haven't watched the Tarkovsky movie but I have the criterion collection disc, was hoping to watch it with bros but never got around to it. RP and Sphere both have a form of mystic quality to their mechanism, though I'd say with Sphere it entirely makes sense by the end. Though maybe RP's does as well and I just haven't clicked it yet. I've only read it once. As far as Canticle for Leibowitz, read any of the other books in the series? And how are they/how do they compare to Canticle? Haven't gotten around to tracking copies down.
>the Tarkovsky movie
It can feel a bit slow - think of 2001 - but it's one of my favorite films of all time. Everything from the music to the actors and the dreamlike atmosphere just oozes with soulfulness. I did not like Solaris that much, it feels more dated and somewhat "awkward." In any case, if you're going to watch a Tarkovsky film, make sure you can watch it in peace and quiet. >RP and Sphere
What struck me in RP was Redrick's daughter. It is really saddening how she slowly mutates and becomes nonhuman. >As far as Canticle for Leibowitz, read any of the other books in the series?
Can't say I have. I've understood that the sequel is decent but overshadowed by the Canticle. I think I should reread the Canticle because it has been over 10 years since I first read it. Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun probably captures a similar feeling to the Canticle, but I must admit that I haven't been able to finish his books (aside from being busy, his complex prose is a bit of a barrier to me).
8 months ago
Anonymous
Oh I know more or less how the Tarkovsky film feels, though now that you say that and I think again I'll probably watch it on my own this month, yeah. Took my bro to see 2001 in theater last year, he'd never seen it, loved it; we watch slow shit all the time. Solaris on the other hand made me want to kill myself lol. Speaking of slow and dreamlike atmosphere, though it's certainly off the topic of the thread, I'll recommend Angel's Egg. It's my favorite movie of all time. >Monkey's descent
Yeah, that killed me too.
I'll look into Book of the New Sun, thanks. Haven't read anything new this year and been itching for it.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I've watched Angel's Egg (5 years ago or so?) and I like the art style. Should rewatch it. >Haven't read anything new this year and been itching for it
I would also recommend Jack Vance's "The Dying Earth" short story collection (also known as "Mazirian the Magician"). Every story in that collection is worth of reading. Also, if you like fantastical horror, check out Clark Ashton Smith. "The Dark Eidolon and Other Fantasies" is another collection with excellent stories in it.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Very nice, I'll add all those to my list, thank you anon. Time for me to dip but been nice talking to you.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Thank you and have a nice day! Hope to see you in another thread similar to this.
It's also just riddled with plot holes. Why hasn't a nanites swarm killed everything? Why hasn't a bio-engineered plague killed us all? Why haven't robots and or AI killed us all? Why keep the plebs around when you could just replace them with technology? It's fricking stupid. It's why settings like 40k and Star Wars are so popular, they're Science Fantasy, and they play the best when you use handwavium to justify the OP things so they can't be exploite.
Over half the things I mentioned you do on accident, that's the point. Sci-Fi is fricking stupid. The whole point of it is to reach technological singularity, and then everything is pointless.
Sci-Fi represents a dull end for Humanity. Godless, devoid of divine purpose, roaming the empty dying stars, waiting for the heat death of the Universe.
Fantasy represents the hopeful beginnings of Man, brimming with mystery and adventure. Tales of rising up against all odds with the power of love and belief.
sci fi, but really sloppy sci fi. It's the kind of book that's written with the mentality that prose matters above everything, and the writer didn't even bother to hide he was making some Lawrence of Arabia in Space bullshit.
But when it comes to prose, Dune is arguably the best book of the classics.
a) there's no such thing
b) it's sci-fi even if you want to push the spastic dichotomy
>there's no such thing
there is. Space Operas are science fantasy.
Writing-wise, pretty much everything since the 90s is science fantasy because it's merely uses the genres as a coolness-factor dressing for generic YA plots that have nothing to do with either.
How so, c**t? Space Operas are pulp and sci fi essentially derives from fantasy and action writing to the point it's earliest scenes barely distinguished the concepts.
Modern pop culture creators are so afraid of not being unironic they have to pretend all fantasy and sci fi is actually video games or thinly disguised non-fiction about being an urbanite.
>Vulcan women >the physiology but without the mentality of a woman >get to be hundreds of years old so a young one stays young until you die old >fertile dicky >can even cosplay as elves naturally
Since when? Fantasy has armors made of magic ore, magic potions that can cure anything, and magic wands that can conjure anything. Sci-fi has armors made of made up alloys and elements, technobabble medicine that can cure anything, and make-believe power sources that make magic look like parlor tricks. Neither ever needed to explain how any of this is possible.
You're talking science fantasy, sci-fi at least attempts to explain things.
I'll tell you a secret too: bad fantasy doesn't explain how magic works either, which is most of it. Good fantasy resembles sci-fi more than most people will understand.
See this book? Orson Scott Card is one of the most critically acclaimed fantasy and sci-fi authors living. A lot of this book is devoted to having laws of magic upon which to base your world, because the world should resonate with the story you are trying to tell, and if it is just arbitrary, your story will evoke an arbitrary response in people which is not what you should be striving for as a writer.
>A lot of this book is devoted to having laws of magic upon which to base your world, because the world should resonate with the story you are trying to tell
You would think that this would be basic knowledge for writers. If there are no rules, or the rules get broken all the time, then anything can happen and there are no stakes anymore. But looking at a lot of modern movies it's obvious that the writers in charge of those don't give a singular shit about that.
Is this autism? The inability to enjoy things until every question such as 'what do they eat?' is answered? Everything has to be laid out for them in plain text?
If so, that answers OP, because most games are about 'shut up and play', not reading tomes of compendia about why two plus two equals four.
Is this autism? The ability to completely miss the point?
Because it's not about the minute details of the daily lives of people, unless that is somehow relevant to the story, it is about how the world works.
If, at some point, it gets established that resurrection magic is impossible, then there shouldn't be a magical resurrection down the line. If teleportation gets introduced then there needs to be some sort of explanation and restriction to it, otherwise the audience will be stuck with questions as "why didn't they teleport to X" and the like. It is about staying internally consistent.
Because sci fi is goyslop. Fantasy resonates with our Indo European character and folklore. Meanwhile sci fi is based on the israeli invention of scientism where we all evolved from goo and that we live in a giant meaningless void. It's fundamentally nihilist and anti white, which explains why it often devolves into space communism.
This but unironically, the babylonian pursuit of the tramshumanist rootless LGBTQ ideologies and to break the glass dome of the firmament is the mindset of the serpent
The fantasy genre is full of derivative hacks with Tolkien as a foundation. Tolkien had a full life therefore the ability to write environments, characters, and was intellectual enough to pursue a life study of languages and mythology to be able to create a world with verisimilitude. His experiences with war gave him the ability to write an uplifting spiritual subtext on top of that, and I say that with admiration as an atheist.
It's rare that anything fantasy even approaches Tolkien's acumen, good sci fi requires all of the above AND scientific knowledge AND the ability to extrapolate the development of science onto the development of men and women. On top of all that, space and the future are pretty bleak places, you can not only not be a nihilist to create a narrative worth seeing there but you have to actively fight against the idea of entropy otherwise it will be pretty depressing.
The popularity of the genre is also reflected in the population's ability to understand such themes which is directly proportional to caring about them. With the love of nihilism in modern society and the performative embrace of technology long enough to win a reddit argument but no actual deep thinkers upon the subjects it's just not as popular as some knee jerk reality show so we can see how suzy could possibly get chad to frick her this week. So, it's back to dragons and dildos. Escapism which is still fine by me in the meantime because nihilists and leftists are still running us into the ground.
Because moronic game writters make every scifi setting fantastical in nature, there is no logic or principles in all the advance technology and science of their works
If they are smart enough to make scifi believable and not just straight up fantasy, they will be a book/flim writter instead
Actually let me correct it, if they are that smart, they wont be a writer in the first place
>If they are smart enough to make scifi believable and not just straight up fantasy, they will be a book/flim writter instead
This, vidya writers are bottom of the barrel tier 'writers'
Its hard as frick to find sci-fi roleplay in basically every community as well. Worse yet because everybody has their own ideas about tech level and what is and isn't possible, moreso than fantasy RP because people just wave that off as magic.
I'd rather just rip off Tolkien than use my brain cells to come up with something that's both futuristic and original. That shits difficult. And if I do manage to come up with something that takes place in the future, I might have to borrow heavily from Lovecraft because I don't really have any sort of real talent to fall back on.
Sci fi is usually just another flavor of fantasy but worse. Guns are boring, laser guns are still boring. Fantasy has hundreds of different weapons and can take inspiration of literally everything, even sci fi. It's just the superior genre for storytelling and setting.
Anyone else remember that interview or something where it turned out the original idea for A Link to the Past was a space opera? God I wish that had actually happened.
In my experience, Ganker usually has better discussions on off-topic subjects (especially literature and porn) than vidya-related stuff. I don't know why it is so, but somehow Gankerirgins act more civil when they're not talking about video games.
all you have to do is rip off tolkien. You don't need to make sense or write a consistent world that makes much sense at all or follows the basics of life. You can pretty much write trash and it is just seen as "normal" fantasy.
Basically people expect much more out of scifi. They expect fantasy to be mediocre retreads.
Same. I'm a fantasy guy but I have fond memories playing Mass Effect. Even debating on whether or not I should make a personal project of mine fantasy or sci fi.
Sci-Fi is about SCIENCE therefore not appealing to low IQ since it's about imagining a pretend world in a material, tangible way. Fantasy is about ghouls and ghosts aka superstitious fairytale shit which non-whites understand. This is why science fantasy like Star Wars is also popular, it's just a space fairytale.
Sci Fi also (For whatever reason) tends to slip moree towards the cynical side of things. Sure in fantasy you can get raped by a Orc but like take the Halo trilogy where Earth is getting it's shit kicked in by Aliens, Zombies and Zombie aliens (And robots) all at the same time.
>This is why science fantasy like Star Wars is also popular, it's just a space fairytale.
Only the Froce falls under that though. EVerything else is just pretty straight sci fi with robots and hyperspace and bounty hunters and you get the picture. Force isn;t even like magic because it has pretty rigid rules like pushing shit or confusing people.
>Sci-Fi is about SCIENCE therefore not appealing to low IQ since it's about imagining a pretend world in a material, tangible way. >Sci-Fi writers: ahahahah, lasers and psychics go brrrrrrr
muh speculative fiction >yeah but what if some dumb shit was actually real, what implications would that have on society and people?
meanwhile fantasy where there's some country where people just ride around on T-rexes because that's awesome >"acktually have you considered the logistics of keeping a 5-7 ton predator fed with meat? there's no way that could work economically..."
shut the frick up nerd.
I unironically think American comic books did sci-fi better than most of the retrofuture magazines posted ITT
Guys in white domecap suits exploring empty rocks with robots walking around gets boring very very quickly
sci-fi requires more effort
fantasy has a default that people imagine so it's easier to build on and sell to people. People expect elves, dragons, magic, sword fighting. That's pretty easy to do and expand on. It's safer.
Sci-fi might have space travel, probably ranged combat, and more world building because there isn't a template to build on
For TV/movies maybe but vidya is all sci-fi all the time. Even fantasy games have consistently had a 50/50 chance of a sci-fi twist for the last 42 years
I want a game that's a mix between Kenshi and GTA. Basically GorkaMorka.
In a post-apocalyptic(original idea btw) setting where you need cybernetics to survive, so everything is focused on uncovering old caches of technology and resources, and repairing or producing new cybernetics.
I want to be a cool cyborg, that rides a cool car, in a radioactive wasteland. Maybe add a cyborg dog too.
Yeah, i was thinking that guns and cars could basically be a sort of cult focus, like the machine cult. And mormons could be the pseudo-elves of the setting.
Yeah. Originally i wanted a body horror game where you stole different organs and limbs from other living things to eat/replace your own stuff with in a similar style to cybernetics. But some guy was already making that game(don't remember the name, and hasn't seen anything about it in years though).
Imagine if AAA was still run by geeks, and they spent all those resources on making kickass games instead of preaching politics and jerking off investors.. Imagine.
It goes without saying, but Cyberpunk 2077 had a disappointing amount of customization for cybernetics. Random npcs on the street looked better than you.
Yeah, my expectations for AAA is so low i never bothered with the game. I just played Kenshi again.
I just want link related with cyborgs, livin la vida nomad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndLhrTw-wgA >Random NPCs on the street looked better than you.
Imagine accidentally bumping into a hobo, knocking off the blanket he was covering himself with, and pic related is a cyber psycho who thinks you're the one sending "birds" to spy on him.
I wish i had someone to play shadorun with.
>shadowrun
Wonder if Microsoft will ever have HBS do another Shadowrun game.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Doubtful, i think Larian ruined crpg's for the foreseeable future.
Maybe if it was less RPG, and switching into another genre. I'd play a Netrunner puzzle game, as lame as that might sound. Or a cyberpunk Interstate 76 clone.
Thanks for reminding me of HBS existing, i still have their Battletech game in my backlog, maybe it's time.
pic somewhat related, me turning 37 this year
8 months ago
Anonymous
Just curious, would you play a stand-alone Adam Smasher game? Like, start of from when he was just starting to get his cybernetics, and slowly progress through his life story before becoming the full blown borg that we know him nowadays to be.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don't really know much about him, i never actually bothered playing Cyberpunk.
But your idea sounds pretty cool, going from shonen to cyberpsycho. A shadowrun coming of age story.
I wouldn't last 10 seconds in a cyberpunk setting before i completely borg'd myself. MLRS and hydraulic wiener before the day is over.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>I don't really know much about him, i never actually bothered playing Cyberpunk.
Dude's all about becoming a borg and killing everything and everyone in his way. He ties himself to a corporation, Arasaka in Cyberpunk 2077, because they're the only ones who can outfit him with the kind of gear he wants.
>I wouldn't last 10 seconds in a cyberpunk setting before i completely borg'd myself. MLRS and hydraulic wiener before the day is over.
Eh, I'd be more interested in styling myself in the way of Adeptus Mechanicus. All weird shit, insect-like limbs, mechanical tendrils for interfacing with tech, lenses split 8 ways for vision, and so on.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Sounds good bro, i'd just wanna be a big ass mech.
Gotta run, hope we get our cybernetics fix soon.
>But some guy was already making that game(don't remember the name, and hasn't seen anything about it in years though).
You could be thinking of Wrought Flesh
Yeah that's it, thanks dude. Damn it looks a lot different from what i thought it would be. I think the devs posted webbums of the alpha here a long time ago, or maybe i remember it wrong.
>Anno mutationem >Scarlet Nexus >Cyberpunk 2077 >Assasin's Creed >Warhammer 40K >Titanfall >Spider-man and most of the sci fi side of Marvel >Deus Ex >Gundam games >Overwatch
I think its more a problem with you not lurking enough.
Because sci-fi is lame.
1. Sci-fi is not built on common sense, it's built on the writings of scientists which only fanatical nerds care about, and since it ties itself to such a harder ruleset, it's considerably more likely to run into plot holes. And for what payoff? Fantasy listens to the imaginations of the people, while sci-fi listens to reality - boring-ass, fun-hating reality.
2. Sci-fi is more likely to be political or philosophical, which is highly divisive. Rather than the simple fun or personal character studies of fantasy, sci-fi is all about telling the audience the consequences of new technology and by extension beliefs. But what happens if the audience doesn't agree with those outcomes? Then the whole thing falls apart. Along with point #1, this can cause sci-fi to feel more like a kind of religious scripture.
3. Technology is soulless. The more technology, the less soul. Sci-fi is, understandably, going to spend a lot of time looking at technology.
4. Space is empty. It's in the name. Planets can be interesting to visit, but once space travel is invented, everything is either going to become homogenized or quarantined off to remain undisturbed by modern civilization - you know, just like Earth is right fricking now.
5. It's unrelatable. Because sci-fi delivers a culture that hasn't happened yet, it just ends up feeling foreign and icky. Fantasy cultures are all based on real ones, so they feel familiar and nostalgic. Cold, damp dungeons and warm, colorful robes, the power you feel when you grip a weapon in your hands, human nightmares given physical forms. Sci-fi is full of clean, slick surfaces and monotonous, "practical" outfits. It's all sterile and lacking personality. Compare the popular image of a bunch of nerds on a bridge wearing their condom-suits, making serious faces while sitting at a control panel, to the popular image of knights and wizards fighting a dragon in a dungeon.
because sci fi is a shit setting
i even think that there are too many sci fi games, many shitty AAA sci fi shooters that could have been great epic fantasy rpgs... such a waste of ressource
>top space sci-fi autism
Unlike a boat, any half decent spaceship is a WMD, either through flinging asteroids into planets or with FTL is potentially a planet killer. You wouldn't let angry oppressed poorgays or greedy corpos or edgy PMCs or somali pirates just walk around with nukes and shit would you? Space would be authoritarian as hell and for good reason.
>Muh SciFi is hard to write about >It will be sociopolitical and blablabla
One of the most recent SF game is about a cyborg mecha pilot bonding with a mind waifus born from sentient space oil, and the true end is all about giving the entirety of humanity space oil waifus.
You are all just homosexuals with limited imaginations.
>Create ground >Add tree and grass >Add 2-3 towns/cities
There's your fantasy world, that's all it takes. Some fantasy games do more but they are the exception to the rule.
Most games feature combat and medieval settings have the advantage of a good balance of melee and ranged combat. Once you introduce guns melee stops making sense. Magic also feels better in such settings. In sci-fi magic is indistinguishable from fantasy technology, so why have magic at all. Also there are guns so mages suck by default, you can just gun them down.
I'm not saying sci-fi settings are bad by default, by I feel it's easier to design a balanced system that feels good by using medieval fantasy.
with sci-fi there is an expectation that you have to come up with stuff that's somewhat original and that differentiates the setting from other settings, whereas with fantasy you can just churn out elf after dwarf after orc after dragon and everyone laps it up over and over and over.
No, there isn't. This is blatantly untrue. Sci-fi copies itself constantly.
Can't you just enjoy the genre for what it is? Why do you need to lie to give yourself a feeling of intellectual superiority? It's fricking pathetic.
>Can't you just enjoy the genre for what it is? Why do you need to lie to give yourself a feeling of intellectual superiority? It's fricking pathetic.
It's what the genre has become. The anon spamming pulp can only dream of the day it returns to its roots.
Scifi has become a massive dickhead magnet in the same way fantasy attracts sadsacks.
>No, there isn't. This is blatantly untrue. Sci-fi copies itself constantly.
It isn't copy pasting races to the same extent that fantasy does. Even if they include the classic brute or smart race, scifi authors try to give them interesting quirks. This almost never happens with fantasy
You should be able to rip off Star Trek as easily as fantasygays rip off Tolkien. Muh generic human UN world government Earh Federation type shit is everywhere.
Just make it highly illegal to land a FTL spaceship on inhabited planets because dangerous nuke/antimatter/black hole powered spaceship, strict quarantine or security requirements. You have to dock with the orbital station, go through decontamination and body scanning so you can't easily smuggle weapons or contraband in before you can access the hub area.
Or on less developed worlds you take a shuttle down and land at the approved spaceport or get shot the frick down by air defenses.
mud huts and longswords are easier to design than guns and vehicles. granted, FPS gameplay is as brainless as it gets but third person souls-like shit is hardly any more difficult to design
Partially right, you can ripoff sci-fi shit, but fantasy gays just have lower standards, might be cuz most of them are comfyBlack folk, and they all are gullible morons.
kuuderes are the best
vulcan wife pon farr nakadashi
nakadashi for the sole purpose of procreation. Most logical
Vulcans frick whenever they want, and they do in marriage very frequently as it's a major part of being married. The pon farr is when they got to frick or die.
wrong they only do that if they have a human spouse because they think humans need sex every day (they do)
I imagine that constitutes a daily, loveless handjob.
(dreamy sigh)
Putting up with their partner's illogical demands is an act of love.
Because regular fantasy literature outnumbers sci-fi 10000 to 1.
You can make an entire game about exploring a forest on foot or horseback.
You can drive or fly over that entire forest in about two minutes with a spaceship.
that's moronic
you can go to space with a spaceship
Proving my point.
Fantasy makes something as simple and relatively tiny as a forest into an entire experience.
Sci-fi trivializes all of it to the point of it not mattering. It's just another landmark to scan and fly over.
It's why every space game is just empty and empty and empty and empty. Even the most densely-populated sci-fi games get mogged by the emptiest fantasy games.
>It's why every space game is just empty and empty and empty and empty.
Good point, I guess the problem comes down to starfield and NMS popularizing procedural generation, which is why later games such as Mass Effect, Kotor, and Halo all have empty open worlds surrounded by a void of nothingness
>I guess the problem comes down to starfield and NMS popularizing procedural generation
you say this but the proceduralism isn't the issue, it's that they don't use it with enough unique assets to define various elements that the procedural worlds encompass.
having proceduralism is brilliant because it gives you access to a large amount of control over how you wanna define a planets landscape arrangement. that isn't the issue. if you tried to handcraft a planet you'd probably have even MORE of a barren wasteland because how the frick are you going to fill a planet with interesting places when the biggest open world games are one continent at most?
the ultimate solution to space/scifi games would be to have the procedural system starfield has, but parameterize the engine enough to allow for more creatures, aliens, cities, and biospheres as a whole to exist, along with more tailored questlines on each planet. that would be a better foundation. going back to just only doing handmade components for EVERYTHING would be a downgrade.
Irrelevant. You can make the world as dense as you like and confine the action to one planet, or one city, or one facility.
Fantasy is just better most of the time. Especially if your talking about space sci-fi. The best sci-fi is apocalypse scenarios. Space is cringe.
This but unironically. Fantasy became a hit with the normies while sci-fi is still seen as this nerdy, cheesy thing with rubber foreheads and plastic rayguns.
I mean elves and dragons are public domain and highly popular. Put them on your cover and people will know what's up. Show them your OCs such as a purple space babe with five eyes next to some cyborganic monstrosity and they'll be like 'wtf is this?'.
People who like fantasy want comfort food. They're reliable and predictable customers. The genre being frozen in amber and using the same tropes over and over again is part of its appeal to its audience. Sci-fi fans are less predictable; sometimes they buy a game that you would expect them to like, and sometimes they just don't show up and it's not clear why.
it depends. to me sci-fi is usually very stale and relies a lot on technobabble to explain why you are able to do something whereas fantasy has magic that ironically is just easier to accept.
>Fantasy is just better most of the time.
It isn't better most of the time, it's just easier to execute.
>Space is cringe.
I don't even have to guess your skin color
It's much easier to look back than to look forward.
>fantasy games
>Sci fi games
When are we gonna get more planetary romance games? Get the best of both worlds.
It's not a proven genre/aesthetic in today's market(John Carter flopping like it did basically confirmed Planetary Romance is worthless in the eyes of Big Media) which means only low budget indies would ever take a risk on it.
A big budget Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers game could be fricking stellar if they ever took a chance with it and leaned as hard as possible into the pulpiness of it. I'd kill for one.
Does High on Life count as one, kek? If you can stomach the PICKLE RIIIICK humor, it's a pretty decent metroidvania.
I read John Carter of Mars and that book sucked.
>planetary romance games
Yeah, weird how there's none of those.
Most game devs don’t know how to design nice looking vehicles and spaceships, whereas with fantasy you can just have characters walk everywhere or ride horses
Because brainlets have a narrow view of sci-fi.
Cuz fantasy had lotr which made fantasy more popular than sci fi
Source on image?
Sci fi has Star Wars & Star Trek though.
star wars is more like sci-fi FANTASY while star trak is space opera, but yeah, you right tho
dinobonoid on aryion
it's vore
frick!
dinobonoid on aryion
it's vore
sci-fi was never popular.
Sci-fi was always a secondary genre used by media giants to gather conversation about ideas. It was always second best to films like LotR and Indiana Jones. Even financially.
Indiana Jones was popular but it was never as popular as Star Wars. People are also extremely autistic about Star Wars. People think Indiana Jones is cool but they don't RP as characters from the franchise and argue about the lore
Indiana Jones and Star Wars are closer to each other than either of them is to something like Mass Effect or Lord of the Rings.
Bro, I love Mass Effect but it's absolutely not as popular as Star Wars or LotR. And I say that as someone who prefers Mass Effect to both of those franchises
I'm not comparing popularity, I'm saying SW and IJ both have a ton of old school pulp in their DNA, which most modern stuff like Mass Effect has less of. They are from a particular genre tradition where the line between fantasy and sci-fi is much less distinct, and this is possibly a major reason why Star Wars beat out all other sci-fi franchises to become top dog.
I think so too. Star Wars is really the only sci-fi (I say that loosely) franchise that has any sort of international popularity. Everything else is MCU and LOTR.
Fantasy films were basically nonexistent prior to the 1980s. Before then, all you really had was a short fad of sword & sandal B movies in the early 60s, stuff that nobody really watched or cared about. Star Trek was a cultural phenomenon, and Star Wars was so big that it defined a generation in the same way Pokemon did 20 years later.
It was a culture shock, I agree. But a culture shock doesn't imply popularity either. Yu-Gi-Oh was a cultureshock, as was Toonami and most of Saturday morning cartoons in the 90's—early 2000's.
Not nearly as big. Star Wars was the second-biggest media franchise in the world for most of the 80s, it was the first media franchise to really lean hard into merchandising. Star Wars toys were the best selling toys every Christmas from 1977 until at least 1984.
>tripgay
Ah I get it, you're flamebaiting with contrarian shitposts. Nevermind
There are also other problems to consider: Star Wars isn't sci-fi even on a technical level. It's science fantasy which is quoted by George Lucas himself. Star Wars had some resemblance of science fiction in its novelization, but it's also not based on anything. No laws of gravity, spiritualism, religions, pyrotechnics, nothing. It's just a universe saturated in technological advancements. There's no real mythology to the science: it just is.
Secondly, a cultural phenomena partly contributes to the success of Star Wars, but it also is a culture shock that maintained the interest over the years. Arguing that the same people who watched Star Wars in the 70's are the same people who watch it now is shit. It's just shit. You know that and I know that. So in some level of fairness (or imperative), we could say that there are some fans of the original three movies today, but even then those bandwagoners did not suffer the honeymoon phase as the rest of America did during its very real and highly confrontational culture shock which almost killed the genre dead in the 90s.
u wot? sci fi DEFINED the 60s in popular media.
It did?
yes. The 60s in popular media is about the perils or advantages of the future. B-class cinema started out as sci fi slop. All popular media was sci fi (or western). Superhero genre got reinvented as sci fi adjacent with marvel (specially Kirby), science fiction as social critique, specially over nuclear proliferation, was at an all time high.
Fantasy was something of the 20s. The entire 50s-70s period was dominated by sci fi and we don't really see a shift until the tail end of the 80s.
So that means over 50% of boomers knowingly encourage Star Wars as a social commentary, knowing that some of the most influential works existed decades prior?
This may have had something to do with attitudes of the time.
Apollo 11 was the American spaceflight that first landed humans on the Moon. Commander Neil Armstrong and Lunar Module Pilot Buzz Aldrin landed the Apollo Lunar Module Eagle on July 20, 1969, at 20:17 UTC, and Armstrong became the first person to step onto the Moon's surface six hours and 39 minutes later, on July 21 at 02:56 UTC. Aldrin joined him 19 minutes later, and they spent about two and a quarter hours together exploring the site they had named Tranquility Base upon landing.
Also, right before Star Wars came out was a period of depressing nihilistic leftist woody allen oscar bait type shit. It wasn't just sci fi, it created the summer blockbuster forget your troubles kind of movie.
I can only hope we are reaching a similar breaking point now.
I don't think it does, you're probably defining scifi by some absurd standard but there's tons of scifi bullshit out there. Seeing as you used Star Trek I take it you mean scifi has to be some big dumb spacefaring ordeal. But Fallout is Scifi, Resident Evil is SciFi, Armor Core, Pikmin, etc.
Not real sci-fi
Can you give us clear examples of "real" sci-fi and "not real" sci-fi? Because I think even if you filter out sci-fantasy stuff like Star Wars, there's still a ton of sci-fi shooters out there.
>Resident Evil is SciFi
Don't be ridiculous.
Yes the game about abominations of science running amok isn't scifi
Harder to scale unless it takes place on a single shitty planet like xenogears.
Vulcans are stupidly strong by human standards, right? Does that mean Vulcan grippy is super-strong?
If they wish it to be, but given the Vulcan's hyper logical understanding of anatoy they probably know a pressure point on your dick that could make you cum harder than a photon torpedo
She fricks human men
Do they? Is that even true? Off the top of my head it seems to be a fairly 50/50 distribution. In fact, never having thought about it before, I am amazed they're so neck-and-neck.
I will also throw out that there's a bit of a false dichotomy here, as there are some games that are both fantasy and sci-fi. For example Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy both predominantly use fantasy settings, but have areas with robots and future tech.
Chrono trigger and Final fantasy are sci-fantasy, not sci-fi.
Sci-fi. An aesthetic that vaguely conforms to what was considered to be futuristic at the time of it's creation. Constantly shifting as a result. Star wars, halo, blade runner, total recall.
Speculative Sci-fi. A genre concerned with exploring the consequences of future technology/society according to a set of logically consistent rules about how the technology/society works. Can also be done with a fantasy aesthetic although this is rare. I, Robot, Foundation, The Time Machine, Ancillary Justice.
Science Fantasy. An aesthetic which which mixes elements of high, often futuristic technology into a conventional fantasy setting. Many Final Fantasy games, Trails in the Sky, Chrono trigger, some Zelda games. Arguably star wars.
This. OP is fricking moronic. I'm a fantasygay and all I see every time I look through steam is sci-fi bullshit. Even then, I know it's partly due to my own bias because I'm going to be more picky about what is a "fantasy" game while everything that looks like neon vomit will probably get the sci-fi brand. But realistically, it's probably about an even distribution.
Don't know, don't care.
More kuutsun cuties.
>The O'neill and Action Jackson pretty spot-on
>But then
>The WIIDE on that Teal'c
>Carter looks like she belongs in Yotsuba&
Compare Warhammer Fantasy to 40K (ringe). In Fantasy there exists the entire world all in one place. All the many different civilizations, the Empire of Sigmar in the heartlands, the Dwarves in their Karak peaks, the Elves in their forests and islands, the Orcs in their badlands, the Norscans in the far north and so on and so forth. Nice and consolidated, easy to see, actual places that hold weight in this world and are connected. A space setting removes this because everything is so fricking far away, and it's an entire planet compared to the much smaller kingdom or city state. So when you see this garbage of le exterminatus destroying an entire planet it doesn't hold the same value compared to Atdorf or Reikland being decimated because it's a whole fricking planet that just gets blown up by lasers not a desperate defence of knights, footmen and militia against monsters and barbarians besieging their homes. Nobody gives a shit about an entire planet being destroyed because there's no value as there's like ten thousand fricking planets just like it. Not the same when it's an entire city with smaller towns and villages full of people.
So to continue this with a neat little bow on top Fantasy keeps things way smaller to a more connected world with much more filled in factions that all have more stakes and lived in societies instead of soulless grimdark slop. Look at Vermintide and Darktide to see the difference of the two settings and why one is vastly superior to the other. It's not the space game btw.
Actually low IQ if the scale of a setting filters you this hard
Look at the two examples of Vermintide and Darktide showing why one setting is vastly superior to the other you dimb ficking child.
if anything, Vermintide suffers from the smaller scale, at the end of the day you KNOW that everything the Ubersreik 5 does is all for naught, sure, protectinga single planet in a galaxy of millions may not mean much, but .01 percent is better than literally nothing
Yep, it's all about scale and implication of medieval combat being more personal.
The closest to being a famous gunmen are those who get to operate alone like that Finnish sniper during WWII or whoever was the most infanous bandit in Wild West.
Middle Ages had plenty of famous warriors who didn't need to rack up a small village worth of kills because every fight was a struggle, not a coinflip.
Maybe if you're not counting the bajorillion sci-fi shooters out there.
>bajorillion
Is that how many people died during the occupation?
when that new Star Trek Stellaris game comes out in the next few days I'm going to immediately genocide the Bajorrans just like how it didn't happen but should have
Are Bajorans even in the game?
yes. looks like they start off as a vassal under Cardassia, too
lel
this
this real?
i was thinking it was some stellaris mod or something
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1622900/Star_Trek_Infinite/
>thirty bucks
That's one hell of an expensive mod.
bruh, ok? is this legal? I mean, IT IS published by paradox, but, what the frick?
>you have to pay $10 extra for Klingon voices
P'takh!
Paradox has no honor
I fricking love the Cardassians like you wouldn't believe, bros. They deserved better.
Very subtle, Obsidian Order member.
Obsidian Order? You have me all wrong, I'm just a human of the Federation, and definitely not a Cardassian intelligence operative altered to look like a human! I'm just a really empathetic fellow.
Oh, then that's alright. I'll just send another email to the Department of Internal Affairs, telling them that I made a mistake.
Do they really? To me it seems like modern-ish > sci-fi > fantasy
If amything fantasy shit is still seen as too nerdy for the average normalgay, even if DnD is more popular among them
Star Trek slept on delivering a rogueli*e with more combat, diplomacy, archeology, anomalies, fist fights, exploration, away missions, and dead redshirts than you could shake a stick at.
Some games already laid the groudwork. Strange Adventures in Infinite Space sends you on a ten year mission to map out a sector. Crying Suns' execution sucked but the bridge management aesthetics were nice. Renowned Explorers had an extensive stat/perk-based encounter system. There's no excuse.
>Why do regular fantasy games outnumber sci-fi games 1000 to 1?
Women don't care for sci-fi, that's why. No major sci-fi property has targeted women, so it's rare for a woman to like things like space exploration, robots, and trans humanism. In contrast there have been plenty of fantasy media aimed at women and young girls specifically, so it's pretty common for girls to pretend they're princesses or witches, or fantasizing about riding horses or attending grand balls. I'm not saying it's impossible to get a girl to like something that's sci-fi, but usually they like it in spite of it being sci-fi, like liking Edgerunners because of the romance.
TLDR: Fantasy setting appeals to both genders, Sci-fi only appeals to men.
They don't.
The reason why fantasy is so common though is because early game developers were all D&D nerds because before video games that was the only 'nerdy' game they could play together. When they started making video games, they naturally drew on their experiences with D&D which led to a lot of games having a fantasy setting.
Sci-fi, especially the modern kind, is very gay in that people will accuse you of """speculating wrong""" if they don't like your ideas. Hardscifi is about justification for concepts within the story and or basing it on real sci. People are acting like scifi itself is not valid unless you can expect 'x' thing to be real by citing at least 5 papers which makes it homogeneous and uncreative trash.
The fact that the term Science Fantasy now applies to what was once the foundation of Scifi says everything.
>speculating wrong
That sounds beyond moronic. Surely people have enough imagination to suspend their disbelief?
To many Scifi is the anime of western lit, "It's not cartoons mom, it's anime". A hint of intellectualism for those who desperately lack it. If you read the OG scifi and pulps it was all very creative and in some cases markedly impossible. People like to soi out over how many of the ideas have in some form or another appeared in modern society but that's potentially the stories planting the seeds AND writing about things that are convenient.
The author's weren't sitting there trying to justify microchips existing so they could write about handheld devices that could do whatever you needed or capacitance when talking about fricking handheld lasers.
>tfw no Babylon 5 game
they made one it's called mass effect
Stellaris
Scifi requires looking toward the future. Fantasy has you looking toward the past. The future is bleak and the past looks rosy compared to the modern day so fantasy is more popular.
>The future is bleak
But the future does not have to be bleak in your fictional story? That's why it's fiction, you can write whatever the frick you want as long as you create some sort of reasonable in-universe explanation.
Doesn't matter. The modern audience fricking hates looking at the future because their future is bleak and there is fathomable no escape short of death. This is also why isekai is such a popular genre, the only way for most people's lives to improve is to fricking die and be reincarnated.
well I choose to still have hope
Fiction aside the only hope man has is
a) leaving the planet which will necessarily create divides in power and give us new frontiers and distinctions
b) a massive world war which sets us back thousands of years socially
If we coalesce into a single order shit will get tyrannical (if not immediately then eventually) and tyranny almost always needs at least some outsider involvement to be overthrown. We'll finally reach a point of existential homo-stasis. Ironically after fashioning our philosophy after Prometheus we will become him.
>thought about grabbing the high frontier book
>all the ones for sale are more recent republications without the gorgeous 70s art
pain
Abupbup, anon. Now we've got RETURNER fiction. Isekai is about bailing out on the shit life and inherently accepting a fantasy (literal) in place of it. Where you're insulated from failure and can find succour in whatever you lacked in the real world be it romance, friendship, autonomy, success or even restfulness.
Returner is the new up and comer which is about the future absolutely going completely fricking batshit but with the MC having been granted revelation either by experiencing it and traveling back, receiving an oracle ect.
There's a combined genre where one iskeais a world with a bad end for the setting or their character personally which combines the two - but it's safe to say people are finally starting to approach the idea of the future being bad but perhaps being surmountable as opposed to fleeing the sinking ship - at least in terms of fiction.
It sounds like just more Isekai to me but I'll bite, what's a good example of this?
Utopian fiction doesn’t exist, closest you will get are treatises on ideal societies which do not contain a narrative.
Doesn't the Federation in Star Trek count as utopian?
They have a shady intelligence agency that supersedes all other lawful institutions, plus they have plenty of examples of bad faith officers abusing authority. Since they are post-scarcity so it’s exponentially more hopeful than most fiction, but it is detailed how we went through a good share of nuclear biomutant cyber holocausts to get there.
Fair enough. I did sorta forget about their shady intelligence agency On the other hand, I expect that the formation of any utopia or post-scarcity civilization would involve one or more horrific wars beforehand, if only for the combination of war fueling innovation and the destruction of the current civilization so that a new, better one, can be constructed from the ashes.
Cause you need decent writers for sci-fi
My absolute Black person
Fantasy has almost nothing to do with looking towards the past you complete spastic. That's why Howard's work was so innovative.
>inb4 brainlet take based on comics or films
Read a fricking book
>inb4 but muh Tolkien
Yeah he was into history but the series wasn't historically motivated rather it was mythologically motivated. What's the difference? Well you can make a myth of anything you can be as fantastic as you want and you can make the setting more alien than scifi if you please. Historical fiction or pseudo-historical fantasy ala Howard takes a much more grounded approach and anyone reading either work can feel the difference.
The primary issue with fantasy is that the majority wish to ape the feeling of 'rightness' that Tolkien exhibits. That appeal to the central tenants and those ever present beats and symbols that exist throughout all myths. They do this without understanding how those myths were formed and in the large majority of the time, without any appreciation or perhaps even exposure to real theological/mythological literature (which is where the confusion around the significance of history can occur).
Preferably not israeli.
We just need this man to write for a game
>evil space lioness holds you hostage at gun point
>she’s naked and licking her lips while motioning you to strip
OH NO
Fantasy has been around longer (Even though Space itself is infinitely older)
sci-fi takes significantly more effort to write and has significantly less broad appeal outside of star wars (which is just fantasy in space)
What's your favorite sci-fi story anon?
That's it for Galaxy, next? Amazing!
I miss covers like this
Do you prefer pulp/retro/soft sci-fi/whatever designs or hard sci-fi(as close as it gets)?
Bungie are hack frauds.
That's it for Amazing for now and that one Imagination mag If you want you can find audiobooks/radio shows on gaytube for most of stories here
Honestly? That's a toughie. Of the Galaxy cover stories? I liked the one about the man whose kids were hyper evolved and eventually just bailed on this entire plane of existence. I'm not sure it's galaxy but despite the hilarity of the premise I found the story about the prison planet where evil was ontologically good and visa versa to be fun.
There's a tonne of little (galaxy) stories I recall, like the head hunting society where everyone got to let their urges out in a lottery where you got to kill or be killed.
It's not pulp but I like 2001 Nights. That's an excellent pulp-like manga which eventually has most of its stories pull together in an extremely satisfying way.
Star Control 2, it also has the benefit of being attached to a game.
I did enjoy the Bobiverse audible series despite the 'nerd humor'.
Brigador's book was a nice recent read, although it's more military fiction with sci-fi elements
>What's your favorite sci-fi story anon?
Star Wars
I am an unapologetic basedboy. Come at me.
Homeworld is the best sci fi game
>Star Wars
You're only a total homosexual if you like what Disney did to the IP.
no
>and the sequels
Kenshi. The history and world building are especially compelling. The thought that there might be life on the two other planetary bodies in the sky but you have no feasible way of getting to them is an abstract kind of feel. The people of Kenshi itself might never be able to reach them but if enough knowledge and technology survived on those worlds then maybe they can begin the long process of reconnecting. And rebuilding what was once lost.
Recently read the Imperial Radch trilogy and went through the 3 books within a few weeks of picking up the first. Great set of reads
blindsight
Dune
ender's game
in vidya, outer wilds
Frank Herbert's Dune, A Canticle for Leibowitz, and Roadside Picnic are some of my favorites. Especially the latter one got me:
HAPPINESS, FREE, FOR EVERYONE, AND LET NO ONE BE FORGOTTEN!!
My brother from another mother. I'll add in Sphere by Crichton, I read it before Roadside Picnic and it scratches a similar itch. Besides its similar mechanism, I mean. Also, despite all the omissions from the book, the movie is great simply for Dustin Hoffman's and Samuel Jackson's performances.
>Sphere
Thanks for the book suggestion, bro, I'll add that to my (hopelessly long) reading list! I haven't played any of the Stalker games, but I've watched Tarkovsky's movie like four times or so. Amazing what kind of adaptations RP has inspired.
I still haven't watched the Tarkovsky movie but I have the criterion collection disc, was hoping to watch it with bros but never got around to it. RP and Sphere both have a form of mystic quality to their mechanism, though I'd say with Sphere it entirely makes sense by the end. Though maybe RP's does as well and I just haven't clicked it yet. I've only read it once. As far as Canticle for Leibowitz, read any of the other books in the series? And how are they/how do they compare to Canticle? Haven't gotten around to tracking copies down.
>the Tarkovsky movie
It can feel a bit slow - think of 2001 - but it's one of my favorite films of all time. Everything from the music to the actors and the dreamlike atmosphere just oozes with soulfulness. I did not like Solaris that much, it feels more dated and somewhat "awkward." In any case, if you're going to watch a Tarkovsky film, make sure you can watch it in peace and quiet.
>RP and Sphere
What struck me in RP was Redrick's daughter. It is really saddening how she slowly mutates and becomes nonhuman.
>As far as Canticle for Leibowitz, read any of the other books in the series?
Can't say I have. I've understood that the sequel is decent but overshadowed by the Canticle. I think I should reread the Canticle because it has been over 10 years since I first read it. Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun probably captures a similar feeling to the Canticle, but I must admit that I haven't been able to finish his books (aside from being busy, his complex prose is a bit of a barrier to me).
Oh I know more or less how the Tarkovsky film feels, though now that you say that and I think again I'll probably watch it on my own this month, yeah. Took my bro to see 2001 in theater last year, he'd never seen it, loved it; we watch slow shit all the time. Solaris on the other hand made me want to kill myself lol. Speaking of slow and dreamlike atmosphere, though it's certainly off the topic of the thread, I'll recommend Angel's Egg. It's my favorite movie of all time.
>Monkey's descent
Yeah, that killed me too.
I'll look into Book of the New Sun, thanks. Haven't read anything new this year and been itching for it.
I've watched Angel's Egg (5 years ago or so?) and I like the art style. Should rewatch it.
>Haven't read anything new this year and been itching for it
I would also recommend Jack Vance's "The Dying Earth" short story collection (also known as "Mazirian the Magician"). Every story in that collection is worth of reading. Also, if you like fantastical horror, check out Clark Ashton Smith. "The Dark Eidolon and Other Fantasies" is another collection with excellent stories in it.
Very nice, I'll add all those to my list, thank you anon. Time for me to dip but been nice talking to you.
Thank you and have a nice day! Hope to see you in another thread similar to this.
Kin-dza-dza
Just read moon moth and I wonder if it inspired the boyle mission from dishonored
BECAUSE SCI-FI IS INHERENTLY NIHILISTIC
AND SHIT
It's also just riddled with plot holes. Why hasn't a nanites swarm killed everything? Why hasn't a bio-engineered plague killed us all? Why haven't robots and or AI killed us all? Why keep the plebs around when you could just replace them with technology? It's fricking stupid. It's why settings like 40k and Star Wars are so popular, they're Science Fantasy, and they play the best when you use handwavium to justify the OP things so they can't be exploite.
>Why haven't we nuked ourselves?
>Why are we not all dead from Covid?
>Why haven't robots taken all of our israelitebs
It doesn't really work that way
Over half the things I mentioned you do on accident, that's the point. Sci-Fi is fricking stupid. The whole point of it is to reach technological singularity, and then everything is pointless.
Sci-Fi represents a dull end for Humanity. Godless, devoid of divine purpose, roaming the empty dying stars, waiting for the heat death of the Universe.
Fantasy represents the hopeful beginnings of Man, brimming with mystery and adventure. Tales of rising up against all odds with the power of love and belief.
Not always,sci fi can have hope and mystery
Oh yeah is that so. Does you're colon always have caca in it?
there's no grander mystery and adventure than finding ancient but also hi-tech ruins on another planet and exploring them
Why not post sci-fi stuff that has actual games?
I should replay Emperor: Battle for Dune one day
god i fricking wish there was a space rpg with the aesthetics of tng
Is Dune science fantasy or sci-fi?
a) there's no such thing
b) it's sci-fi even if you want to push the spastic dichotomy
sci fi, but really sloppy sci fi. It's the kind of book that's written with the mentality that prose matters above everything, and the writer didn't even bother to hide he was making some Lawrence of Arabia in Space bullshit.
But when it comes to prose, Dune is arguably the best book of the classics.
>there's no such thing
there is. Space Operas are science fantasy.
Writing-wise, pretty much everything since the 90s is science fantasy because it's merely uses the genres as a coolness-factor dressing for generic YA plots that have nothing to do with either.
Complete poser response bro, get the frick out of here. Read some fricking pulp
How so, c**t? Space Operas are pulp and sci fi essentially derives from fantasy and action writing to the point it's earliest scenes barely distinguished the concepts.
Modern pop culture creators are so afraid of not being unironic they have to pretend all fantasy and sci fi is actually video games or thinly disguised non-fiction about being an urbanite.
Give me quintessential scifi then? Give me its antecedents?
>Vulcan women
>the physiology but without the mentality of a woman
>get to be hundreds of years old so a young one stays young until you die old
>fertile dicky
>can even cosplay as elves naturally
God I wish that Vulcan was real.
Because everything in fantasy can be explained with "lol magic"
Sci-fi needs to at least try to be believable
Since when? Fantasy has armors made of magic ore, magic potions that can cure anything, and magic wands that can conjure anything. Sci-fi has armors made of made up alloys and elements, technobabble medicine that can cure anything, and make-believe power sources that make magic look like parlor tricks. Neither ever needed to explain how any of this is possible.
You're talking science fantasy, sci-fi at least attempts to explain things.
I'll tell you a secret too: bad fantasy doesn't explain how magic works either, which is most of it. Good fantasy resembles sci-fi more than most people will understand.
See this book? Orson Scott Card is one of the most critically acclaimed fantasy and sci-fi authors living. A lot of this book is devoted to having laws of magic upon which to base your world, because the world should resonate with the story you are trying to tell, and if it is just arbitrary, your story will evoke an arbitrary response in people which is not what you should be striving for as a writer.
>A lot of this book is devoted to having laws of magic upon which to base your world, because the world should resonate with the story you are trying to tell
You would think that this would be basic knowledge for writers. If there are no rules, or the rules get broken all the time, then anything can happen and there are no stakes anymore. But looking at a lot of modern movies it's obvious that the writers in charge of those don't give a singular shit about that.
Is this autism? The inability to enjoy things until every question such as 'what do they eat?' is answered? Everything has to be laid out for them in plain text?
If so, that answers OP, because most games are about 'shut up and play', not reading tomes of compendia about why two plus two equals four.
Is this autism? The ability to completely miss the point?
Because it's not about the minute details of the daily lives of people, unless that is somehow relevant to the story, it is about how the world works.
If, at some point, it gets established that resurrection magic is impossible, then there shouldn't be a magical resurrection down the line. If teleportation gets introduced then there needs to be some sort of explanation and restriction to it, otherwise the audience will be stuck with questions as "why didn't they teleport to X" and the like. It is about staying internally consistent.
Because sci fi is goyslop. Fantasy resonates with our Indo European character and folklore. Meanwhile sci fi is based on the israeli invention of scientism where we all evolved from goo and that we live in a giant meaningless void. It's fundamentally nihilist and anti white, which explains why it often devolves into space communism.
Yes I'm sure life would be better with literally zero scientific progress /misc/-kun
This but unironically, the babylonian pursuit of the tramshumanist rootless LGBTQ ideologies and to break the glass dome of the firmament is the mindset of the serpent
Stellaris was ruined by patches
Can you still play previous versions, or does that require a million hoops to jump through?
>Steam
I think you can still rollback to old versions
>Pirate
Just dl old shit
Good to know, thanks.
because sci-fi is just regular fantasy but everyone wear a moronic uniform
sci-fi: poc crowd eats bug slop
fantasy: return to monke
simple as
>fantasy: return to monke
>simple as
Based
Is like when you are in the woods and pick a piece of wood and pretend is a sword.
The fantasy genre is full of derivative hacks with Tolkien as a foundation. Tolkien had a full life therefore the ability to write environments, characters, and was intellectual enough to pursue a life study of languages and mythology to be able to create a world with verisimilitude. His experiences with war gave him the ability to write an uplifting spiritual subtext on top of that, and I say that with admiration as an atheist.
It's rare that anything fantasy even approaches Tolkien's acumen, good sci fi requires all of the above AND scientific knowledge AND the ability to extrapolate the development of science onto the development of men and women. On top of all that, space and the future are pretty bleak places, you can not only not be a nihilist to create a narrative worth seeing there but you have to actively fight against the idea of entropy otherwise it will be pretty depressing.
The popularity of the genre is also reflected in the population's ability to understand such themes which is directly proportional to caring about them. With the love of nihilism in modern society and the performative embrace of technology long enough to win a reddit argument but no actual deep thinkers upon the subjects it's just not as popular as some knee jerk reality show so we can see how suzy could possibly get chad to frick her this week. So, it's back to dragons and dildos. Escapism which is still fine by me in the meantime because nihilists and leftists are still running us into the ground.
What's with sci-fi and evil mr robotos? Why dindu nuffin bots are so rare?
Because moronic game writters make every scifi setting fantastical in nature, there is no logic or principles in all the advance technology and science of their works
If they are smart enough to make scifi believable and not just straight up fantasy, they will be a book/flim writter instead
Actually let me correct it, if they are that smart, they wont be a writer in the first place
>If they are smart enough to make scifi believable and not just straight up fantasy, they will be a book/flim writter instead
This, vidya writers are bottom of the barrel tier 'writers'
Its hard as frick to find sci-fi roleplay in basically every community as well. Worse yet because everybody has their own ideas about tech level and what is and isn't possible, moreso than fantasy RP because people just wave that off as magic.
Because it's really hard to do right and in a fun way. The scope of it just becomes too much for most devs.
(not reading any of the thread at all) romulan sexo
Because Sci-fi is less appealing of a setting, duh
I'd rather just rip off Tolkien than use my brain cells to come up with something that's both futuristic and original. That shits difficult. And if I do manage to come up with something that takes place in the future, I might have to borrow heavily from Lovecraft because I don't really have any sort of real talent to fall back on.
>I'd rather not be original than not be original
you're in your own head anon, setting is only background shit, characters sell the deal
Sci fi is usually just another flavor of fantasy but worse. Guns are boring, laser guns are still boring. Fantasy has hundreds of different weapons and can take inspiration of literally everything, even sci fi. It's just the superior genre for storytelling and setting.
Anyone else remember that interview or something where it turned out the original idea for A Link to the Past was a space opera? God I wish that had actually happened.
In my experience, Ganker usually has better discussions on off-topic subjects (especially literature and porn) than vidya-related stuff. I don't know why it is so, but somehow Gankerirgins act more civil when they're not talking about video games.
It's generally the truth that each board tends to be better at discussing things that the given board actually isn't about.
yea say that to any and all social issues, v manages to screech louder than even pol if anything like that gets mentioned
That's because on /misc/ they discuss the topics but on Ganker /misc/ performs 'missionary work'.
all you have to do is rip off tolkien. You don't need to make sense or write a consistent world that makes much sense at all or follows the basics of life. You can pretty much write trash and it is just seen as "normal" fantasy.
Basically people expect much more out of scifi. They expect fantasy to be mediocre retreads.
Cute woman
I reply
Sex
I don't know but it saddens me as well... I miss Mass Effect times...
Same. I'm a fantasy guy but I have fond memories playing Mass Effect. Even debating on whether or not I should make a personal project of mine fantasy or sci fi.
Sci-Fi is about SCIENCE therefore not appealing to low IQ since it's about imagining a pretend world in a material, tangible way. Fantasy is about ghouls and ghosts aka superstitious fairytale shit which non-whites understand. This is why science fantasy like Star Wars is also popular, it's just a space fairytale.
Sci Fi also (For whatever reason) tends to slip moree towards the cynical side of things. Sure in fantasy you can get raped by a Orc but like take the Halo trilogy where Earth is getting it's shit kicked in by Aliens, Zombies and Zombie aliens (And robots) all at the same time.
>This is why science fantasy like Star Wars is also popular, it's just a space fairytale.
Only the Froce falls under that though. EVerything else is just pretty straight sci fi with robots and hyperspace and bounty hunters and you get the picture. Force isn;t even like magic because it has pretty rigid rules like pushing shit or confusing people.
>Sci-Fi is about SCIENCE therefore not appealing to low IQ since it's about imagining a pretend world in a material, tangible way.
>Sci-Fi writers: ahahahah, lasers and psychics go brrrrrrr
muh speculative fiction
>yeah but what if some dumb shit was actually real, what implications would that have on society and people?
meanwhile fantasy where there's some country where people just ride around on T-rexes because that's awesome
>"acktually have you considered the logistics of keeping a 5-7 ton predator fed with meat? there's no way that could work economically..."
shut the frick up nerd.
>scifii requires the author to actually know what they are talking about otherwise the setting falls apart.
>fantasy can be anything, lmao its magic i dont have to explain shit
simple as
>lmao its magic i dont have to explain shit
This makes for fricking awful storytelling
queue 20 harry potter books
I unironically think American comic books did sci-fi better than most of the retrofuture magazines posted ITT
Guys in white domecap suits exploring empty rocks with robots walking around gets boring very very quickly
fantasy is comfy and sci-fi is depressing.
modern dark fantasy grimdark edgefests are pretty depressing as well
sci-fi requires more effort
fantasy has a default that people imagine so it's easier to build on and sell to people. People expect elves, dragons, magic, sword fighting. That's pretty easy to do and expand on. It's safer.
Sci-fi might have space travel, probably ranged combat, and more world building because there isn't a template to build on
For TV/movies maybe but vidya is all sci-fi all the time. Even fantasy games have consistently had a 50/50 chance of a sci-fi twist for the last 42 years
Fricking Wizardry man
I want a game that's a mix between Kenshi and GTA. Basically GorkaMorka.
In a post-apocalyptic(original idea btw) setting where you need cybernetics to survive, so everything is focused on uncovering old caches of technology and resources, and repairing or producing new cybernetics.
I want to be a cool cyborg, that rides a cool car, in a radioactive wasteland. Maybe add a cyborg dog too.
this idea radiates american
Yeah, i was thinking that guns and cars could basically be a sort of cult focus, like the machine cult. And mormons could be the pseudo-elves of the setting.
Then all of a sudden NINJA ATTACK!
>expecting a game to actually explore cybernetics as more than just "+2% buff to [xyz] attack/ability"
It will never happen, anon.
Yeah. Originally i wanted a body horror game where you stole different organs and limbs from other living things to eat/replace your own stuff with in a similar style to cybernetics. But some guy was already making that game(don't remember the name, and hasn't seen anything about it in years though).
Imagine if AAA was still run by geeks, and they spent all those resources on making kickass games instead of preaching politics and jerking off investors.. Imagine.
It goes without saying, but Cyberpunk 2077 had a disappointing amount of customization for cybernetics. Random npcs on the street looked better than you.
Yeah, my expectations for AAA is so low i never bothered with the game. I just played Kenshi again.
I just want link related with cyborgs, livin la vida nomad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndLhrTw-wgA
>Random NPCs on the street looked better than you.
Imagine accidentally bumping into a hobo, knocking off the blanket he was covering himself with, and pic related is a cyber psycho who thinks you're the one sending "birds" to spy on him.
I wish i had someone to play shadorun with.
>shadowrun
Wonder if Microsoft will ever have HBS do another Shadowrun game.
Doubtful, i think Larian ruined crpg's for the foreseeable future.
Maybe if it was less RPG, and switching into another genre. I'd play a Netrunner puzzle game, as lame as that might sound. Or a cyberpunk Interstate 76 clone.
Thanks for reminding me of HBS existing, i still have their Battletech game in my backlog, maybe it's time.
pic somewhat related, me turning 37 this year
Just curious, would you play a stand-alone Adam Smasher game? Like, start of from when he was just starting to get his cybernetics, and slowly progress through his life story before becoming the full blown borg that we know him nowadays to be.
I don't really know much about him, i never actually bothered playing Cyberpunk.
But your idea sounds pretty cool, going from shonen to cyberpsycho. A shadowrun coming of age story.
I wouldn't last 10 seconds in a cyberpunk setting before i completely borg'd myself. MLRS and hydraulic wiener before the day is over.
>I don't really know much about him, i never actually bothered playing Cyberpunk.
Dude's all about becoming a borg and killing everything and everyone in his way. He ties himself to a corporation, Arasaka in Cyberpunk 2077, because they're the only ones who can outfit him with the kind of gear he wants.
>I wouldn't last 10 seconds in a cyberpunk setting before i completely borg'd myself. MLRS and hydraulic wiener before the day is over.
Eh, I'd be more interested in styling myself in the way of Adeptus Mechanicus. All weird shit, insect-like limbs, mechanical tendrils for interfacing with tech, lenses split 8 ways for vision, and so on.
Sounds good bro, i'd just wanna be a big ass mech.
Gotta run, hope we get our cybernetics fix soon.
>But some guy was already making that game(don't remember the name, and hasn't seen anything about it in years though).
You could be thinking of Wrought Flesh
Yeah that's it, thanks dude. Damn it looks a lot different from what i thought it would be. I think the devs posted webbums of the alpha here a long time ago, or maybe i remember it wrong.
I think it went through a couple of name changes as well.
Who the frick is gonna pick Cardassia?
*walks up and steals your spoonheaded gf* whats lil gavos gonna do
Yeah, Cardiassians are the poor man's Romulan or Klingons. I guess you might play as them if you wanted to roleplay as a Chinese government.
I am, and it's gonna be fun as frick. Gonna throw all of Bajor into the camps.
Cutie
>Anno mutationem
>Scarlet Nexus
>Cyberpunk 2077
>Assasin's Creed
>Warhammer 40K
>Titanfall
>Spider-man and most of the sci fi side of Marvel
>Deus Ex
>Gundam games
>Overwatch
I think its more a problem with you not lurking enough.
Lots of fake sci-fi
Lots of real autism in your post.
>Fake sci-fi
Ooh boy, now what?
your list is disqualified by the sheer audacity to include overshit
is star trek good or is it only popular because there was nothing else on at the time
both
TNG is some of the best TV ever made.
Because sci-fi is lame.
1. Sci-fi is not built on common sense, it's built on the writings of scientists which only fanatical nerds care about, and since it ties itself to such a harder ruleset, it's considerably more likely to run into plot holes. And for what payoff? Fantasy listens to the imaginations of the people, while sci-fi listens to reality - boring-ass, fun-hating reality.
2. Sci-fi is more likely to be political or philosophical, which is highly divisive. Rather than the simple fun or personal character studies of fantasy, sci-fi is all about telling the audience the consequences of new technology and by extension beliefs. But what happens if the audience doesn't agree with those outcomes? Then the whole thing falls apart. Along with point #1, this can cause sci-fi to feel more like a kind of religious scripture.
3. Technology is soulless. The more technology, the less soul. Sci-fi is, understandably, going to spend a lot of time looking at technology.
4. Space is empty. It's in the name. Planets can be interesting to visit, but once space travel is invented, everything is either going to become homogenized or quarantined off to remain undisturbed by modern civilization - you know, just like Earth is right fricking now.
5. It's unrelatable. Because sci-fi delivers a culture that hasn't happened yet, it just ends up feeling foreign and icky. Fantasy cultures are all based on real ones, so they feel familiar and nostalgic. Cold, damp dungeons and warm, colorful robes, the power you feel when you grip a weapon in your hands, human nightmares given physical forms. Sci-fi is full of clean, slick surfaces and monotonous, "practical" outfits. It's all sterile and lacking personality. Compare the popular image of a bunch of nerds on a bridge wearing their condom-suits, making serious faces while sitting at a control panel, to the popular image of knights and wizards fighting a dragon in a dungeon.
I was thinking of going for fantasy vs technology thing, but even this could be divisive.
What a pain. I just an apoc setting
because sci fi is a shit setting
i even think that there are too many sci fi games, many shitty AAA sci fi shooters that could have been great epic fantasy rpgs... such a waste of ressource
>top space sci-fi autism
Unlike a boat, any half decent spaceship is a WMD, either through flinging asteroids into planets or with FTL is potentially a planet killer. You wouldn't let angry oppressed poorgays or greedy corpos or edgy PMCs or somali pirates just walk around with nukes and shit would you? Space would be authoritarian as hell and for good reason.
Artist?
And DS9 was good because they stole Babylon 5's bible.
Fantasy is easy to make, sci-fi isn't.
Is this the thread?
>Muh SciFi is hard to write about
>It will be sociopolitical and blablabla
One of the most recent SF game is about a cyborg mecha pilot bonding with a mind waifus born from sentient space oil, and the true end is all about giving the entirety of humanity space oil waifus.
You are all just homosexuals with limited imaginations.
A male with heart shaped pupils?
i think its in respone to the op vulcanian waifu doe
So a loveless, Vulcan handjob with a dark skinned human with heart shaped pupils?
Lack of imagination
>Create ground
>Add tree and grass
>Add 2-3 towns/cities
There's your fantasy world, that's all it takes. Some fantasy games do more but they are the exception to the rule.
Times are getting worse as we move into the 4th turning, people would rather look back than forward because there's nothing to look forward to.
Because modernity sucks and people want to escape from it.
How do I get into star trek?
Just watch TNG
TNG season 1 is rough.
You can start with ToS if you're okay with some camp. You can start at TNG season 2 if you aren't.
Most games feature combat and medieval settings have the advantage of a good balance of melee and ranged combat. Once you introduce guns melee stops making sense. Magic also feels better in such settings. In sci-fi magic is indistinguishable from fantasy technology, so why have magic at all. Also there are guns so mages suck by default, you can just gun them down.
I'm not saying sci-fi settings are bad by default, by I feel it's easier to design a balanced system that feels good by using medieval fantasy.
it's professor spak from the star gate