|
Regarding hard vs soft science fiction, there's no hard and fast rules for it, and it's mostly used for labelling more than anything else, but generally hard science fiction asks, "Our protagonist has a problem that he or she has to work out scientifically.based on what we know of physical laws. So, take "The Martian". The guy is trapped on Mars, and he has to stay alive (by making sure he has enough air, food and water) until he's rescued, and the people recusing him have to use orbital mechanics to get the rescue ship to Mars. Soft science fiction focuses more on the effect that the world (and the technology) has on people, and that is a lot of what TNG focuses on. An artificial intelligence has sentience so what legal rights should it have? You've got a machine where people can have ready access to everything they need. How's that affect the economy and society? There's a room that can make scenarios as realistic as the real world. What happens if somebody's addicted to that? We run into militaristic aliens that value war above everything else. How do we make peace with them? This is all the stuff of soft science fiction. (And that's not a bad thing. There's some great soft science fiction out there,)
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 03:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 09:22 |
|
|
i got your hard sci fi right here, pal
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 03:50
|
|
|
gimme the GOD drat candy posted:references in the background are good, mariner listing references in lieu of jokes is bad. it's the difference between a scene in a comedy show and a memory alpha page. Eh they haven't done 'mariner listing references' since like episode two, it's just that turned a lot of people off to references right at the start. These days it feels to me they're pretty good at stuffing it full of references in a way that just makes it feel like it inhabits the same universe as TNG instead of being deliberate references. Ocasionally they have a reference-a-palooza for fun like the collector ship or the holodrills but those are deliberately excused in story. And it helps that they've established that everyone in Starfleet actively looks up to the TNG and DS9 and Voyager crews as legends in-universe and followed their exploits. Also the oblique hints that Freeman and Mariner lives on the Enterprise-D when Mariner was a kid.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 03:53
|
|
|
The General posted:Spock is only hard sci-fi once every 7 years. Quoting this because it didn't get the love it deserves. Epicurius posted:Regarding hard vs soft science fiction, there's no hard and fast rules for it, and it's mostly used for labelling more than anything else, but generally hard science fiction asks, "Our protagonist has a problem that he or she has to work out scientifically.based on what we know of physical laws. So, take "The Martian". The guy is trapped on Mars, and he has to stay alive (by making sure he has enough air, food and water) until he's rescued, and the people recusing him have to use orbital mechanics to get the rescue ship to Mars. Agreed. The 'hard' label is about the relation that the narrative has with scientific. It served to distinguish it from fantastical stories where the fictional science parts were subjugated to the whims of the narrative (SW, ST). I don't think anyone argues that ST never just invents bullshit science to fit the narrative. Scifi that everyone agrees is 'hard' does the reverse of that: the narrative is driven by the science (reality and fiction). And because the narrative derives from constraints and capabilities in the science, that narrative needs to be applied consistently. The 'soft' label came later to mean that the science being applied is more the soft sciences, rather than the hard sciences. That kind of changed the meaning of the 'hard' label: that the narrative is driven by the hard sciences only. But, it still means that 'soft' scifi has science being a driver for the narrative. TNG Trek focused a lot on the social aspects yes, but it seems to happily throw out those social science parts when the plot in the writer's head demands it. Beef fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Oct 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 09:17
|
|
|
the basic pedantic nerd impulse is to insist that hard sci fi is better for whatever reason, and therefore their poison of preference must be hard sci fi.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 09:25
|
|
|
Mulaney Power Move posted:i got your hard sci fi right here, pal
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 10:43
|
|
|
It's entertaining to me that a show featuring a sound powered screwdriver, that to my knowledge has never turned a screw and gets yielded more like a gun, is "basically the same" when it comes to the "hardness" of the scifi of trek. Like, I don't think any star trek really crosses the line into a genre I would call "hard sci-fi", but it's a lot closer to that line than doctor who. Well, actually the technical manual I would call hard sci-fi. But it's not a show.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 11:02
|
|
|
CainFortea posted:It's entertaining to me that a show featuring a sound powered screwdriver, that to my knowledge has never turned a screw and gets yielded more like a gun, is "basically the same" when it comes to the "hardness" of the scifi of trek. Like, I don't think any star trek really crosses the line into a genre I would call "hard sci-fi", but it's a lot closer to that line than doctor who. I think Hard Sci-fi is more in terms of it holds fast to its own internal rules. The classic-Who sonic screwdrive is, mostly, "hard" sci-fi because it opens locks but doesn't work on anything made of wood. Star Wars' Hyperdrives are another example as, at least up until JJ Abrahms going "Hyperdrive does whatever I want, look at me jiggle the keys for the viewers SKIPSKIPSKIP", it has a very firm rule; You can't use it inside a gravity well, like that of a planet or black hole (that's how Interdictor Cruisers work; they lay out an artificial gravity well and pull ships back into realspace when they hit it like an interstellar rumble strip), and you really need a clear shot between A and B so you don't smack into the mass shadow of anything in realspace. Or the old Zat-gun three-shot rule from early Stargate SG:1. Granted, got rightfully coughed and ignored after like season 2-3 into "it just Stuns" for a bunch of very good reasons. Star Trek on the other hand... really isn't. Aside from radiation-of-the-week, they'll contrive their tech to do whatever to move the plot along (not a slam against it of course, it's just how it's written).
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 11:19
|
|
|
agh that enterprise season 2 clip absolutely ruled. how are people sleeping so hard on this show
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 11:30
|
|
|
Neddy Seagoon posted:Star Trek on the other hand... really isn't. Aside from radiation-of-the-week, they'll contrive their tech to do whatever to move the plot along (not a slam against it of course, it's just how it's written). I am trying to watch SG1 and they still had the whole 3 shots thing into season 6. I think it was 6 was the last one I saw. Anyway, I'd argue that what you are describing is just one of the things I look for in well written shows. Be it science, vampires, or magic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 11:34
|
|
|
Jokerpilled Drudge posted:agh that enterprise season 2 clip absolutely ruled. how are people sleeping so hard on this show I actually went and watched the episode last night because I didn't remember it at all. It's not terrible. Maybe a bad opinion, but the temporal cold war stuff isn't as awful as I remember. What's ultimately frustrating is that it took them forever to do anything, really, and then it just kind of fizzled out. It reminds me of like a classic LOST style puzzle box that's all intrigue and not actually thought out at all. Now you've got a modern show like Travelers which leans into a similar premise and does a good job. Oh well. Shran forever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 12:17
|
|
|
CainFortea posted:I am trying to watch SG1 and they still had the whole 3 shots thing into season 6. I think it was 6 was the last one I saw. I'de argue its more often abused than used. Yeah lets crash commando troopers through the glass windows of a space station. Not realistic? We're making a space epic here man. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeZ6hwMUrHM&t=4036s
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 12:23
|
|
|
External Organs posted:Oh well. Shran forever. archer i demand you show me some pink skin
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 12:40
|
|
|
Star Wars is fantasy that happens to be set in space. Nerds have fleshed out the details of the technology in expanded universe stuff but if you look at the good films, none of that matters. The main character is a wizard with a magic sword, blasters might as well be bows and arrows, the Falcon is a very fast but scruffy looking and occasionally recalcitrant horse and cart, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 13:18
|
|
|
As always categories are a lie and reality is a continuum with no clear borders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 13:30
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:As always categories are a lie and reality is a continuum with no clear borders. This post is a JRPG in a gritty cowboy universe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 13:35
|
|
|
Beef posted:I'de argue its more often abused than used. I said that internal consistency is a thing that well written shows have. Not that all shows with internal consistency are well written.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 14:10
|
|
|
Your story isn't hard sci-fi unless the appendix looks like this, sorry
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 14:25
|
|
|
these terms are genre labels that are used as nothing more than a mild heuristic to broadly categorize works. Goons want to describe specific scenes in a series of works that is ultimately over 600 hours long in order to litigate whether "hard scifi" is the right label or not. poo poo is re-tardis real talk though, you're generally gonna have to crack a book to get something wholly hard scifi outside of film
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 14:35
|
|
|
Picard is hard sci-fi because the ninja elf's name means 'Star Trek' in Tolkien's elvish.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 14:43
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:... You’re missing Leverage, an excellent Star Trek featuring a post-economic crew solving humanitarian issues using their mastery of knowledge and skills and superior technology in a wide variety of situations, with many episodes directed by Frakes and with major recurring characters played by Wil Wheaton and Jeri Ryan. It is not clear if they are actually reprising their characters from the other Star Trek series but it wouldn’t be completely incongruous. On your list I would slot it in right after TNG.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 14:52
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:As always categories are a lie and reality is a continuum with no clear borders. I mean, well yeah, but were posting in a thread that has over 80,000 posts in it, about a sci-fi show. We're going to have a bit of fun being pedantic about it. I'd say soft sci-fi is star wars. Not intrested in exploring ideas and concepts. Just space wizards having fantasy adventures. Basically just "sci-fi" as it's set in space. Hard sci-fi is more kim stanley robinson, mars trilogy. Hey a bunch of scientist land on mars, lets follow them and how they try and live there, start a society, the methods that they use terraform it. What interesting ideas come from that? If we had the technology to terraform mars how would we use it? should we use them? Do we have the right to use it? How would people react to us using it? It's interested in looking at human reactions to future technology and situations, to explore ethics, philosophy and human nature. I tend to like the latter more, but you know what, good fantasy romp is also cool and good sometimes. Trying to place star trek on that spectrum I don't think works that well just cos there has been far to much of it, that varies so much between the two. Generally I would say it's more towards fantasy, but TNG, DS9, and a few TOS episodes did try for a more exploring ideas, and how would humans react approach to story telling. Sure A measure of man didn't try and BS "hard science" about data, but it did try and look into the idea of artificial consciousness and what rights would it have, which to me is hard sci-fi. Also plenty of TNG episodes which hey lets have a space fantasy adventure wooo! But yeah of course, end of the day genre categories are pretty much just useful shorthand for finding and discussing poo poo and it's never good to take any of this at all seriously.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:06
|
|
|
dr_rat posted:I'd say soft sci-fi is star wars. Not intrested in exploring ideas and concepts. Just space wizards having fantasy adventures. Basically just "sci-fi" as it's set in space. Hard sci-fi is more kim stanley robinson, mars trilogy. Hey a bunch of scientist land on mars, lets follow them and how they try and live there, start a society, the methods that they use terraform it. What interesting ideas come from that? If we had the technology to terraform mars how would we use it? should we use them? Do we have the right to use it? How would people react to us using it? See, I'd say that the Mars Trilogy is soft sci-fi for the reasons you listed above. Very little of that is hard science, It's social science and philosophy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
External Organs posted:I actually went and watched the episode last night because I didn't remember it at all. It's not terrible. The main issue I have with Enterprise is that it's kind of bland for the most part. I have watched the whole series a few times and then struggle to remember any of it 6 months later. I have yet to attempt a rewatch of Voyager and will not be rewatching Disco or Picard anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:19
|
|
|
gimme the GOD drat candy posted:the basic pedantic nerd impulse is to insist that hard sci fi is better for whatever reason, and therefore their poison of preference must be hard sci fi. yep, its the same thing that makes nerds fetishize vulcan "logic" despite there being no consistent meaning for that save "paying lip service to suppressing emotions, couching all feelings in 'logic'" it's actually kind of cool how transparently full of poo poo the vulcans are. swap out "logical" with "holy" and nothing changes. this is a really interesting part of the setting and is one of the great features of star trek but a lot of people miss it and just buy in to vulcan BS. i have no idea if the writers buy in or not. it seems like ds9/tng/tos definitely bought in but later writers occasionally (but not universally) Get It
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:26
|
|
|
For all its issues Enterprise still has a very cherubic GWB-like engineer carrying the entire show on his back vvv dr_rat posted:I mean leaving aside social sciences not being sciences Hah yeah, i just decided to leave that one alone lmao. KSR is a hard scifi writer who writes about sociology. You want to know what people are going to live like in 2080 during an apocolyptic "wet bulb" heatwave, then KSR is your guy. Jokerpilled Drudge fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Oct 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:33
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:See, I'd say that the Mars Trilogy is soft sci-fi for the reasons you listed above. Very little of that is hard science, It's social science and philosophy. I mean leaving aside social sciences not being sciences, interested to know what you would consider hard sci-fi if your not including the mars trilogy. Off the top of my head I can only really think of The Martian and The Expanses that go harder into actual science. I mean in the first book of the mars trilogy there is large section of just science discussion on the different sort of transforming methods that would be effective. Like all the books are grounded in science as hell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:33
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:See, I'd say that the Mars Trilogy is soft sci-fi for the reasons you listed above. Very little of that is hard science, It's social science and philosophy. yeah, he pretty much admits he fudged a lot of the science to make terraforming the planet fit within a human lifespan
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:36
|
|
|
dr_rat posted:I mean leaving aside social sciences not being sciences, interested to know what you would consider hard sci-fi if your not including the mars trilogy. The two main things I remember from the Mars Trilogy are the dirt-eating orgy and a section about the physics behind the color of the Martian sky.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:36
|
|
|
Achmed Jones posted:i have no idea if the writers buy in or not. it seems like ds9/tng/tos definitely bought in but later writers occasionally (but not universally) Get It Loved lower decks take of making them ''logic'' based, but too a fault that made them judgmental dicks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:38
|
|
|
Cthulu Carl posted:The two main things I remember from the Mars Trilogy are the dirt-eating orgy and a section about the physics behind the color of the Martian sky. Look, if your going to include some botanists on your terraforming crew, botanists are going to botanist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
Vulcans have more holy sites than the Catholic Church. On top of that, I'm pretty sure they have more ways of falling into apostasy. And rituals. I
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
CainFortea posted:Vulcans have more holy sites than the Catholic Church. On top of that, I'm pretty sure they have more ways of falling into apostasy. And rituals. I They're listening posts. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:48
|
|
|
so i think i just realized that klingons never utter a single bad phrase about vulcans and dont even mention them on-screen, ever cowards
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:51
|
|
|
GolfHole posted:so i think i just realized that klingons never utter a single bad phrase about vulcans and dont even mention them on-screen, ever I guess the Vulcan Hello worked extremely well then
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:53
|
|
|
GolfHole posted:so i think i just realized that klingons never utter a single bad phrase about vulcans and dont even mention them on-screen, ever Klingons can just be super passive aggressive sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 15:56
|
|
|
Avoid Death and Cower!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 16:00
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:I guess the Vulcan Hello worked extremely well then "Two hundred and forty years ago, near H'Atoria, a Vulcan ship crossed into Klingon space. The Klingons attacked immediately. They destroyed the vessel. Vulcans don't make the same mistake twice. From then on, until formal relations were established, whenever the Vulcans crossed paths with Klingons, the Vulcans fired first. They said ‘hello’ in a language the Klingons understood. Violence brought respect. Respect brought peace. Captain, we have to give the Klingons a Vulcan ‘hello’." lmao
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 16:03
|
|
|
GolfHole posted:so i think i just realized that klingons never utter a single bad phrase about vulcans and dont even mention them on-screen, ever Not quite. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-PF98w_HF4&t=99s
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 16:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 09:22 |
|
|
good matchup
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2021 16:09
|
|