TF Views

Sparky Prime wrote:And like you, I find it enjoyable that we can get into these types of intelligent debates on this board. On so many other boards such debates just seem to devolve into unintelligible flaming.

Indeed and I also really like the fact that even after all of these epic debates we never take things to a personal level or start attacking each other, there's still mutual respect even if we differ on opinion. It's one of the main things that makes these forums stand out as an enjoyable place to post. As Gomess said this really is a place where we can all appreciate each other's diverse viewpoints.

Yes. In fact, I only hate two of the people here! And one isn't here anymore.

Onslaught Six wrote:Yes. In fact, I only hate two of the people here! And one isn't here anymore.

*aside glance to empty spot with a blinking Synjo outline before quickly looking forward blankly at the camera for a silent moment* ...Aw shit!

Shockwave wrote:Indeed and I also really like the fact that even after all of these epic debates we never take things to a personal level or start attacking each other, there's still mutual respect even if we differ on opinion. It's one of the main things that makes these forums stand out as an enjoyable place to post. As Gomess said this really is a place where we can all appreciate each other's diverse viewpoints.

Hey, we welcome "all views from the Transformers community"! It's right there in the title! I mean look at this latest thing: 10+ pages of debate over how genres work that for the last two pages derailed into an *argument about arguing* and now here we are with a bunch of back-pats and "This place is some awesome"s.

I know I don't contribute to these gigantic things because I generally feel I have nothing new to add to a particular side of the argument, and because sometimes I frankly can't keep up with you crazy kids, but I truly do enjoy following these adventures.

And, for the record, I still see little enough difference between sci-fi and sword and sorcery. Sword and sorcery easily allows for more handwaves through the use of magic, while sci-fi requires fewer obvious handwaves. That is about the size of the difference.


Dom
-lets for for another 10 pages.

BWprowl wrote:

Onslaught Six wrote:Yes. In fact, I only hate two of the people here! And one isn't here anymore.

*aside glance to empty spot with a blinking Synjo outline before quickly looking forward blankly at the camera for a silent moment* ...Aw shit!

Would I have bought your big gay pink DSi if I hated you? (I mean, technically, that means I deprived you of your DSi. So, maybe.)

Shockwave wrote:Indeed and I also really like the fact that even after all of these epic debates we never take things to a personal level or start attacking each other, there's still mutual respect even if we differ on opinion. It's one of the main things that makes these forums stand out as an enjoyable place to post. As Gomess said this really is a place where we can all appreciate each other's diverse viewpoints.

Hey, we welcome "all views from the Transformers community"! It's right there in the title! I mean look at this latest thing: 10+ pages of debate over how genres work that for the last two pages derailed into an *argument about arguing* and now here we are with a bunch of back-pats and "This place is some awesome"s.

I know I don't contribute to these gigantic things because I generally feel I have nothing new to add to a particular side of the argument, and because sometimes I frankly can't keep up with you crazy kids, but I truly do enjoy following these adventures.

I keep getting bored halfway through.

Dominic wrote:And, for the record, I still see little enough difference between sci-fi and sword and sorcery. Sword and sorcery easily allows for more handwaves through the use of magic, while sci-fi requires fewer obvious handwaves. That is about the size of the difference.

And you'd still be wrong, for the record. Part of what makes sci-fi what it is, is its speculation on science, not unexplainable "handwaves". You can't just ignore part of what defines something.

Hard sci-fi, maybe, but I know when I wrote Transformers*, I didn't care if what they were doing was at all theoretically possible, and I doubt most other TF writers did either. I just wrote some technobabbly explanation that sounded cool.

*Fanfic, of course, but still.

Onslaught Six wrote:Hard sci-fi, maybe,

It's not just with hard sci-fi. Shows like Stargate and Star Trek would be considered soft sci-fi, but that doesn't mean those writers didn't strive to make their science seem theoretically possible. In fact, from interviews and behind the scenes stuff I've seen, the writers said they often read science articles and magazines to use as inspiration for their stories.

and I doubt most other TF writers did either.

I wouldn't say that it wasn't that they didn't care about it, but that it could have used more effort. Transformers doesn't exactly have the best track record for writing in general. G1 wasn't even always consistent with it's own storylines. So sure, their science wasn't always very plausible, but that puts it on the very soft end of soft sci-fi.

*Fanfic, of course, but still.

But still, that doesn't count for anything.

Sparky Prime wrote:

Onslaught Six wrote:Hard sci-fi, maybe,

It's not just with hard sci-fi. Shows like Stargate and Star Trek would be considered soft sci-fi, but that doesn't mean those writers didn't strive to make their science seem theoretically possible. In fact, from interviews and behind the scenes stuff I've seen, the writers said they often read science articles and magazines to use as inspiration for their stories.

That's why Trek is considered hard sci-fi. Because it takes the science of today and applies it to the science of the stories it's telling. I think a better example of why we keep saying that it doesn't matter with soft sci-fi is the TIE Fighter. TIE stands for Twin Ion Engine. There are actually Ion Engines. Nasa has invented them and they work. Problem is they don't work anything near like they do in Star Wars. The ion engine would allow a spacecraft to move through space but it would be little more than a manuevering thruster. If it was the primary means of propulsion you'd be sitting there in space not going anywhere quickly and would be a terrible thing to use in a fighter craft. But Lucas used it anyway thus forever rendering an actual TIE Fighter a... fantasy.

Shockwave wrote:That's why Trek is considered hard sci-fi. Because it takes the science of today and applies it to the science of the stories it's telling.

That's just one factor though. Star Trek also has a lot of alien races that look and act exactly or close to humans and most often have no difficulties communicating with races they've never encountered before. So yeah, Star Trek has a combination of hard and soft sci-fi in it.

I think a better example of why we keep saying that it doesn't matter with soft sci-fi is the TIE Fighter. TIE stands for Twin Ion Engine. There are actually Ion Engines. Nasa has invented them and they work. Problem is they don't work anything near like they do in Star Wars. The ion engine would allow a spacecraft to move through space but it would be little more than a manuevering thruster. If it was the primary means of propulsion you'd be sitting there in space not going anywhere quickly and would be a terrible thing to use in a fighter craft. But Lucas used it anyway thus forever rendering an actual TIE Fighter a... fantasy.

Are you sure about that? As you say our current Ion Engines aren't anything like in Star Wars, but just last year scientists announced a new Ion engine. It doesn't have the thrust to escape Earth's gravity, but as that article points out, once in space it can continuously push a craft which will gradually increase its momentum. This actually makes it quite useful in terms of interplanetary propulsion. And whose to say what future innovations we might come up with as we continue to develop that technology?