|
BexGu posted:This is not a story or character spoiler, just a description of the ship: Yeah it does but I always took that as a temp thing. Throw the marines in a room, strap them in, tell them to suck it up, and move. The ship is built like a tall beer can with the engines at the bottom so the various rooms will probably show up on the show as needed as "oh, its just a deck above/below". Is one of the writers Morman?
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 05:58 |
|
|
Bert Roberge posted:I expect a 5 minute romantic subplot with the coffee maker this January. No, the books (correctly) depict space battles as grueling, insanely tense affairs in which ships exchange torpedoes at incredible distances while crushing the drugged-up crews halfway to death with sustained acceleration. Like modern naval warfare, the fact that the combatants are distant and mostly automated doesn't stop the fight from being exciting or visually spectacular — it's just different than the close-range slugging matches we expect. I think the show and the books have both done a pretty great job with this so far. When I was at Bungie I tried to convince them to do one of their space battles in The Taken King with Red Storm Rising-style missile tactics but they wouldn't bite 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
I'm digging the space battles so far, looking forward to some more that I'm sure can't be too far behind. I also love how much syfy opened up their pocketbooks for this, I mean this seems way above even BSG-level production values, especially for a first season. It seems like Holden's story so far is "Jump from crazy set to crazy set" so I'm kind of hoping he stays on that rad new ship for awhile if only to see the show burn slightly less money. I also like the gravity effects so far. There's room for improvement, but it's doing quite well for a TV budget. A very solid cast with just the right amount of star power too. Oh, and the settings fun with two major factions on the brink of war, your terrorist/activists on the side, and now some new guys with crazy tech coming in to wreck everything. It's like Starcraft with only humans and done with almost Game of Thrones-level story hopping and politicking. Above all else I'm glad that between this and some of the other crazy shows Syfy is airing, or has in the pipeline, it's finally doing actual science fiction again. Whenever a standard network tries to go that route it's average at best and lasts a few seasons if it's lucky, or it might last awhile but be some kind of genre mix. Just keep feeding me spaceships and I'll keep watching. General Battuta posted:When I was at Bungie I tried to convince them to do one of their space battles in The Taken King with Red Storm Rising-style missile tactics but they wouldn't bite You absolutely had the right idea. That big Dreadnaught firing scene would have been much more epic if a TON of missiles were heading toward it and it blew all of them up, followed by the fleet, and then you pan out to see it's made a big ol' hole in Saturn's rings. As it was I think it was only a few missiles and rapid-fire ship to ship combat. NowonSA fucked around with this message at 07:20 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
This was far and away BSG's best space battle on a purely compositional level, since they lost a lot of their lighting/gorgeous volumetric fire when they switched studios in season 3, so I hope we get something equally interesting to look at (but probably very different to look at) from The Expanse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 07:24
|
|
|
I can only hope that Holden keeps trying to save his crew even as they keep dying and are in increasingly perilous situations. "I'm not leaving without saving my crew from being blasted into the vacuum of space." -1 crew "I'm not leaving without saving my crew from that Space Volcano." -1 crew "I'm not leaving without my crew's bodies." And of course he must agree to anything if his captors will guarantee his crew's safety, including the complete destruction of planet Earth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 07:56
|
|
|
NowonSA posted:And of course he must agree to anything if his captors will guarantee his crew's safety, including the complete destruction of planet Earth. lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
NowonSA posted:And of course he must agree to anything if his captors will guarantee his crew's safety, including the complete destruction of planet Earth. haha book 5
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 11:28
|
|
|
Dude..... wtf. *book spoilers* this really isn't cool anymore.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 11:31
|
|
|
I really like this show and it made me start reading the books, but I really can't read this thread because of all the book spoiler chat. I am surprised that the show isn't being marketed more, given all the effort they've put into the effects and the attention to detail. None of my friends have even heard of it. Did BSG take off after a while as well, or was it hot from the start?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:This was far and away BSG's best space battle on a purely compositional level, since they lost a lot of their lighting/gorgeous volumetric fire when they switched studios in season 3, so I hope we get something equally interesting to look at (but probably very different to look at) from The Expanse. The fewer links to BSG space battles this thread has the better I'll think this show is, thank you For real though, BSG's battles blew my mind and are still visually amazing, despite the CGI showing its age at this point. I'm in complete awe whenever I watch them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
didnt hear of this until just now
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
Rocksicles posted:Dude..... wtf. As a book reader I'm down to split this thread or advocate probations for spoilers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 13:47
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:The fewer links to BSG space battles this thread has the better I'll think this show is, thank you BSG was not hard Sci-fi. Don't expect poo poo like that in this tv series.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
gohmak posted:BSG was not hard Sci-fi. Don't expect poo poo like that in this tv series. This isn't hard Sci-fi either haha Edit: Honestly, BSG is just as *hard* as The Expanse, if you want Hard Sci Fi you should read better authors Professor Shark fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:This isn't hard Sci-fi either haha No kidding, the ice tankers are hilariously over engineered for their job and probably weigh more than the ice they haul.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
It's Space Opera. Which is exactly what BSG was. There are many flavours of Space Opera. The Expanse is tech limited (no magic star drive). The limits on tech are entirely plot driven. This is splitting hairs tbh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:Edit: Honestly, BSG is just as *hard* as The Expanse, if you want Hard Sci Fi you should read better authors This is a big claim since BSG has physics-defying FTL travel, magical artificial gravity and robot angels or whatever the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 14:24
|
|
|
Collateral posted:The Expanse is tech limited (no magic star drive). The limits on tech are entirely plot driven. BSG: FTL and Magic Gravity Device Expanse: No FTL (countdown until distance/time goes GoT and stops being consistent?), Gravity works "whenever"/ "however" Boing posted:This is a big claim since BSG has physics-defying FTL travel, magical artificial gravity and robot angels or whatever the gently caress. Yeah and The Expanse (Book 1 Spoilers) has Vomiting Space Zombies and Magic Alien Technology
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Can we stop talking about BSG in this thread?
Bert Roberge fucked around with this message at 14:35 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Not yet:Boing posted:robot angels or whatever the gently caress. BSG also really pushes that God ("The Jealous God") is just the last of the Lords of Kobol, who created Humans in the same way Humans created Cylons, and that they were just super advanced alien beings who appeared Godlike
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
Bert can you please stop pm-ing about talking about BSG? I don't think it's unacceptable to talk about another, similar show in this thread. I know TV/IV can be sensitive, but you're being unusually weird about it. Edit: Message from Bert Roberge Title: Please don't post anymore in this thread Text: Just love BSG in a different thread or whatever. Stop being a loving weirdo, Bert Professor Shark fucked around with this message at 14:53 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:Bert can you please stop pm-ing about talking about BSG? Lol another thread mate. That's all I ask. Here I want to ask about the crew of the Rocinante and such. Please don't make this into a weird internet feud I just like The Expanse. Bert Roberge fucked around with this message at 14:59 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
I took God in BSG to be the whole process of uprisings and genocide, become so strong that it actively perpetuates itself  Humanity has to survive, so it can go through the whole mess again and God lives another day.I prefer the Expanse novels because BSG was very short on likeable characters (Tyrol, Baltar when in comedy mode, and I guess Tigh?) Also there's less of the "should are brave boys be free to
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Bert Roberge posted:Lol another thread mate. That's all I ask. Here I want to ask about the crew of the Rocinante and such. Please don't make this into a weird internet feud I just like The Expanse. I think this thread can sustain more than one discussion about different shows/ mediums at a time Edit: Professor Snark removal Professor Shark fucked around with this message at 15:31 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:Expanse: No FTL (countdown until distance/time goes GoT and stops being consistent?), Gravity works "whenever"/ "however" The accepted mode of flight in the series universe is to continuously accelerate with 1G towards your destination, and spin the ship around 180° and decelerate with 1G. Whenever a ship is accelerating or decelerating, there's gravity. At any other point, there's not. It's pretty drat realistic, with the exception of the Epstein drive. The Revelation Space series handled it the same, and it is considered hard scifi.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
Have they shown the ships spinning to create gravity? From what I remember from last episode the Donnager and the Roci traveled "Star Trek" style, despite the compartment layout not being stacked for propulsion generated gravity...
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
They are laid out vertically inside, but the exterior shots tend to show them side on like battleships. Only huge ships like the Mormon one under construction spin; Ceres does too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:Have they shown the ships spinning to create gravity? From what I remember from last episode the Donnager and the Roci traveled "Star Trek" style, despite the compartment layout not being stacked for propulsion generated gravity... The nerd fluff is the epstein drive creates artificial gravity when on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
The epstein drive 100% does not generate any magical gravity field when activated, the epstein drive is just a magicky advanced fusion based engine that can generate a lot of acceleration and requires much less fuel than pre-epstein drives required. Gravity is acceleration, the ships are basically built like apartment buildings with the engine at the bottom so that whenever the vessel is accelerating it fees like there's gravity working in the direction of the aft. The ships usually accelerate below 1g (0.3g is usually the edge of the comfort zone for most belters), greater acceleration is applied only during combat maneuvers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
The donnager was described as a sideways office building with missiles and guns strapped on and a fusion torch drive instead of a basement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:The epstein drive 100% does not generate any magical gravity field when activated, the epstein drive is just a magicky advanced fusion based engine that can generate a lot of acceleration and requires much less fuel than pre-epstein drives required. AirborneNinja posted:The donnager was described as a sideways office building with missiles and guns strapped on and a fusion torch drive instead of a basement. Yeah I was thinking about it in the shower and I think the books handled this and it's actually a mistake by the show: Holden talks about how the Roci/Don are basically built like silos and that even in the Don rooms are only an arms-length across, even the Marine Assault Bay isn't much bigger, and he was blown away on the space station at how large Johnson's two-arms-length room was. Small rooms are good for when the ceiling becomes the floor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
Also, if the Epstein Drive (I thought it was a cool touch that Epstein will be visible "forever" in space as far as Humanity is concerned) creates gravity then you have some pretty incredible technology on your hand, much more powerful than a space engine
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:Also, if the Epstein Drive (I thought it was a cool touch that Epstein will be visible "forever" in space as far as Humanity is concerned) creates gravity then you have some pretty incredible technology on your hand, much more powerful than a space engine It doesn't create gravity, it just provides sustainable 1G (or more) acceleration. Gravity and acceleration are physically indistinguishable in relativity (as far as I remember). More broadly, arguing about whether this show is 'hard scifi' is one of those infuriating and pointless genre arguments that should be left up to marketing. The only point I want to make is that even purely mundane SF with no fictional technology at all can be visually striking — witness Gravity! The biggest 'that's really cool' visual touch I've seen so far is the insane acceleration on the torpedoes. It's awesome how they pop out, orient on target, and vanish. General Battuta fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
A big issue with tiny spaces like you would expect a spaceship to be is that they're pretty hard to film in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
The martian is also a recent example of 'hard sci-fi', I actually haven't watched the film and only recently read the book but it's pretty much a quintessential example of hard sci-fi, the book is pretty much obsessed with convincing the reader that everything that happens is somewhat plausible from a scientific point of view, even if the protagonists continued survival is dependant on some pretty unlikely occurrences taking place. And still there's a magical 'Ion drive' engine written into it. As far as the expanse is concerned the physics are just realistic enough to the point where they contribute to the style and tone of the work, the books clearly do not concern themselves with whether the sci-fi is hard or soft, it just that for the major set pieces they prefer having the protagonists work around known physical limitations rather than just set the hyper-space modulator to a new frequency or some poo poo like that. And yeah, really, the distinction is really not that meaningful anyway, during his day Robert Heinlein was considered a 'hard sci-fi' writer because he would have passages using words like "Delta V" but then he came up with Aliens living on Venus and Mars only because scientists at the time didn't yet prove that those planets were lifeless wastelands. Really I think some people think that Hard Sci-Fi is 'more serious' or 'more grown-up' or some poo poo like that but it's really just about 'more spergy about certain details' than anything else, there are tons of serious and well acclaimed sci-fi works that simply put don't deal with any of this garbage yet on an emotional and artistic level they are very much serious works, the expanse for all intents and purposes is not a serious work anyway and it barely takes itself seriously so the discussion really isn't important.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Not having read the book I can't say how magical it is but ion engines are a thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
AirborneNinja posted:Not having read the book I can't say how magical it is but ion engines are a thing. So maybe it's the one sci-fi work that has no magic parts? I wouldn't know. Still, I think it's a rather good example of 'what hard sci-fi is', Gravity is certainly another good example.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
I'm gone Christmas shopping for one morning and look what you kids start doing in this thread  I wasn't sure if this show would be big enough to warrant a GoT-style Book Spoiler Thread/Pure TV Thread separation, but if it's really becoming an issue for people coming into the show fresh, then that's what's going to have to happen. Don't be dicks, guys, we want people to be excited about the show, not avoiding the thread for fear of blatant spoilers and classic goon bickering. I know there's the general space opera thread in the Book Barn, but would it be a better idea to make a thread specifically for The Expanse so that the general thread isn't flooded with gravity debates and episode/book comparisons?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
Well the only magical thing about the Epstein drive is that it lets the ships move at plot speed (which is still pretty slow, the outer planets are months away I think) without lugging a small asteroid the whole way to mine for fuel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 05:58 |
|
|
General Battuta posted:It doesn't create gravity, it just provides sustainable 1G (or more) acceleration. Gravity and acceleration are physically indistinguishable in relativity (as far as I remember). Forbes had a interesting writeup on the show: http://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2015/12/18/how-the-expanse-gets-general-relativity-right/2/ More importantly the magic wonder drive allows the show to get away with filming lots of challenging zero g scenes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:55
|
|