I should clarify, it's concept of advanced technology looks dated.
It's kinda meant to "look" dated. It's pretty much a part of what Lucas dubbed the "used future". Keep in mind, what he actually wanted to do was do another Flash Gordon movie. When that wasn't in the cards, he made up his own setting. So even in the 70's he was looking backward to the 30's and 40's version of the future.
When I saw your thread title, I thought you were gonna be referring to the convenience tech and interfacing. It can certainly be argued that a touch screen interface is a good ways ahead of the "wall of glowy buttons" interface. And an astromech? That would be the least convenient setup imaginable.
Any sci-fi universe which contains aliens with furry or otherwise funny looking heads mounted on humanoid bodies is dated -- including Mass Effect, Star Trek, Star Wars, ...
Really?
While I don't believe anything without indisputable proof, my own imaginings seem to agree that if any species were to develop, especially in an ecosystem very similar to ours somewhere in the millions and millions of miles worth of the unknown galaxies, that evolution dictates they'd progress roughly along the same path and something that I don't think is such a giant leap for science fiction.
Do you realize that even the slightest change in the gravitation force in such planet would mean a huge difference in the skeleton and muscles of a body (anatomy) leading to totally different shapes and builds, and even under the ridiculous assumption that all conditions were the same as on Earth, the probability that the evolution would go the same way again is practically zero. You shouldn't read that much sci-fi and occassionally check what the science has actually got to say on the matter.
This really goes way beyond the scope of this thread but if you think in terms of the universe and its planets then that near zero becomes millions of planets that have exactly those features. So I wouldnt really scratch it off the list just yet, specially cause our notion of known universe is so tiny. We will never know not in our lifetime at least.
The probability is still practically zero, if you take that out of 20 aliens, 19 of them would have the same humanoid body with slightly modified head (furry or with white tubes running out of it or greeny with pointy ears, or whatever), which is the basic setup of those three sci-fi universes I mentioned.
Or the SW humans are really us from a long time ago!!! Ooooo weee oooooo.
Originally posted by Relentless02 Now I am about to say some things which people might consider trolling but I assure you I am not, just pointing out something that turns me off to the entire Star Wars universe. Star Wars was made way back in the 70s and it's visual concept of what is futurisitc is kind of dated by today's standards. Now I know Star Wars is not the future but a galaxy far far away but you get what I mean. These days I would consider Mass Effect futuristic in it's visual style. The fact Star Wars looks so dated makes it dificult to enjoy anything from that universe including this game. Anybody else feel this way or am I just wierd?
I think this would fall under the category of "not getting it". Star Wars is Science Fiction, but it's not Hard Science Fiction, it's Fantasy Science Fiction. The science is there to resolve plot points (like getting your hand cut off), but it's not based on any sort of current scientific knowledge as is the case with Hard Science Fiction. Things are meant to be fantastic, not realistic.
There are some more realistic things that Star Wars does that other science fiction doesn't though. One of them is planets having monolithic cultures. Planets in Star Wars have more than one race and more than one culture. Sometimes the planets have wars that have nothing to do with the rest of the universe (though for the purpose of stories, it's usually got something to do with the Empire and the Sith).
Well, maybe the monolithic culture thing is the only thing that Star Wars does realistically. Meh, it's fantasy, what do you expect?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Now I am about to say some things which people might consider trolling but I assure you I am not, just pointing out something that turns me off to the entire Star Wars universe. Star Wars was made way back in the 70s and it's visual concept of what is futurisitc is kind of dated by today's standards. Now I know Star Wars is not the future but a galaxy far far away but you get what I mean. These days I would consider Mass Effect futuristic in it's visual style. The fact Star Wars looks so dated makes it dificult to enjoy anything from that universe including this game. Anybody else feel this way or am I just wierd?
Now I am about to say some things which people might consider trolling but I assure you I am not, just pointing out something that turns me off to the entire Star Wars universe. Star Wars was made way back in the 70s and it's visual concept of what is futurisitc is kind of dated by today's standards. Now I know Star Wars is not the future but a galaxy far far away but you get what I mean. These days I would consider Mass Effect futuristic in it's visual style. The fact Star Wars looks so dated makes it dificult to enjoy anything from that universe including this game. Anybody else feel this way or am I just wierd?
You completely don't get star wars at all kid. It's not meant to be futuristic at all. It a space opera saga, not science fiction. So yea, I think you are wierd.
The people don't seem to understand that the whole Star Wars universe is not sci-fi, and it never was, it's Space Fantasy, that's why we love it so much, you can call it Space Opera too, but never, ever call it sci-fi, there is nothing scientific to sustent the technology, the races and the worlds of Star Wars, that's why it has it's unique aesthetics and feeling, if you want sci-fi, you must look at Star Trek, Stargate, Firefly, Babylon 5, etc...
Those aren't really sci-fi either. Andromeda Strain was sci-fi. I robot was Sci-Fi, the book not the movie. Colossus the forbin project was sci-fi. Silent running, not the submarine movie the other one, was sci-fi.
They are all sci-fi, its a very broad genre.
What he counted down just all fall into different sub-genres:
The people don't seem to understand that the whole Star Wars universe is not sci-fi, and it never was, it's Space Fantasy, that's why we love it so much, you can call it Space Opera too, but never, ever call it sci-fi, there is nothing scientific to sustent the technology, the races and the worlds of Star Wars, that's why it has it's unique aesthetics and feeling, if you want sci-fi, you must look at Star Trek, Stargate, Firefly, Babylon 5, etc...
It's under sci-fi .... if you take out the jedi and the sith... you pretty much have a sci fi genre.
Add them in and you have a sci fi with fantasy elements... but since they tried explaining the force (LOL) I'd call it more sci fi than fantasy now...
That's like saying if you take all the races out of WoW, you'll have a medieval setting.
Your statement is wrong on two levels.
1. You can't take one of the main characteristics of a setting away to indicate that it's something else. I could just as easily say, "Take all the technology out of Star Wars and you have pure fantasy." This may be true, but it's pointless because the setting is no longer being represented.
2. I'm stealing this one from another poster from a similar thread. It fits fantasy MORE than Sci-fi because of the way the story is built and the motivations of the characters. You could replace Jedi with actual knights and/or wizards, Princess Leia with... a princess, Luke with a young squier, the emperor with an evil wizard, and grab pretty much any fantasy plot out there and it would work. Or do the opposite. Make the first Star Wars movie into a fantasy novel. You have a kinapped princess trapped in the Death Tower of an evil wizard. And old knight and his squier quest to rescue her.
Try doing that with Star Trek. The only way it can be done is to actually switch genre's entirely. That's why you saw gangster episodes, and Picard was made into Robin Hood by Q and sent to a tech free setting. Because to do it in their standard setting doesn't work.
Sci Fi is more about exploration, mystery; the unknown. Encountering obstacles never before seen. Heck, Asimov's books were basically massive story problems.
Star Wars is fantasy with sci-fi elements. If it were sci-fi, there would have been more emphasis on the technology; what it's capable of and how it works, even if they use word salad to explain it.
You have to remember the fictional starwars universe is another galaxy. it's not in the milkyway. the physics are not the same. the force is in every living thing. even tree's and even the rocks and dirt. possibly it holds the fabric of that galaxy together so the whole thing doesn't fly apart. we have gravity physics in our galaxy.
Also and mainly the technologie never ever changes. the day the first lightsaber was made it pretty much stayed the same for 10's of thousand of years. also 1970's hair do never changes as well. it will never change from when lucas created it. the guy was a man of the 70's. most developers who fell in love with the first starwars movie in 77 agreewith him when they sign the agreement to keep it that way
You have to remember the fictional starwars universe is another galaxy. it's not in the milkyway. the physics are not the same. the force is in every living thing. even tree's and even the rocks and dirt. possibly it holds the fabric of that galaxy together so the whole thing doesn't fly apart. we have gravity physics in our galaxy.
Also and mainly the technologie never ever changes. the day the first lightsaber was made it pretty much stayed the same for 10's of thousand of years. also 1970's hair do never changes as well. it will never change from when lucas created it. the guy was a man of the 70's. most developers who fell in love with the first starwars movie in 77 agreewith him when they sign the agreement to keep it that way
The thing about physics is that they are the same in the whole uinverse not just a galaxy.
It's space opera, imo. It has a raft of cliches that keep it far from hard SF or even moderately soft SF. Example: Fighter spacecraft that manuever like biplanes, despite being in space. Devaronians occur as a race because some of the producer types saw a devil mask at the special effects shop and wanted it added in despite the resistance the effects guys.
That said, futurism is rarely going to peg loads of things accurately. Just go back and look at the (now) retro futurists visions. Big trends may be spotted, but that's pretty much the best you can hope for. For the OP, the look is 40 years old now. OF course it's looking a bit dated. IT will probably cycle around, as these things have a way of doing.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Originally posted by AdamTM Originally posted by jeremyjodes You have to remember the fictional starwars universe is another galaxy. it's not in the milkyway. the physics are not the same. the force is in every living thing. even tree's and even the rocks and dirt. possibly it holds the fabric of that galaxy together so the whole thing doesn't fly apart. we have gravity physics in our galaxy. Also and mainly the technologie never ever changes. the day the first lightsaber was made it pretty much stayed the same for 10's of thousand of years. also 1970's hair do never changes as well. it will never change from when lucas created it. the guy was a man of the 70's. most developers who fell in love with the first starwars movie in 77 agreewith him when they sign the agreement to keep it that way
The thing about physics is that they are the same in the whole uinverse not just a galaxy. Change the crawl text to:
"A long time ago In a universe far far away"
and i will agree with you
That's one of the things that makes it a Science Fantasy, not a Hard SciFi story. The science has nothing to do with...well...science. This is fine because it exists to tell a story. It doesn't need hard science to tell a story.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
That's one of the things that makes it a Science Fantasy, not a Hard SciFi story. The science has nothing to do with...well...science. This is fine because it exists to tell a story. It doesn't need hard science to tell a story.
The TIE/ln's engine was one of the most precisely manufactured propulsion systems in the galaxy and, with no moving parts, was low-maintenance. Unlike the TIE before it, the TIE/ln sported independent generators for the engine and the weapons. The lack of combat shields, hyperdrive, and life-support systems, in concert with the advanced engine design, reduced the mass of the fighter and conferred exceptional maneuverability.
That said though, the force as presented in the original trilogy was DEFINITELY science fantasy, no doubt.
However, in the prequels they tried to make it more "sciency" by explaining the force by some BS symbiotic relationship between lifeforms and "midichlorians" (cough...parasite eve...cough). <Shudders>
Lucas's story was really punched up by his screenwriting co-horts. Once he got too big to have anyone tell him he was being a doofus, things went downhill fast.
Luke Starkiller, anyone?
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
So if we toss a bunch of pretty blue screens and shiney lighting on the floor that's futuristic.
As it has been said it's space opera.
Alot of the problem is you view analog as not futuristic and instead see Digital as futuristic.
Well... I'd like you to check out a aircraft carrier's* internals and you'll find analog is not a "out dated" thing. It's only percieved as such because we just like shiney screens.
The Clone Wars are a good example of the merger of the two.
Digital does not equate futuristic to me in the least bit.. It sometimes is a regression.
I'm going to bottom line it here.
You really want to be in the deep dark cold depths of space and have your vid control screen go BSOD your entire...
See>Xeno Gears.
I'd rather have back up nobs and gizmo's thank you very much.
I also think way too much on this crap.
*Though not in the future please review the next gen carriers, they still rock analog, as do all space craft we currently have been able to use, as our concept of sci-fi is based on these very things it stands to reason. Analog is still in.
You can't forget that Roddenberry sold Star Trek as a "wagon train to the stars", and the heavy Western influence on the original series.
Han Solo appears, and we've got Western elements all over Star Wars too. Lucas described the orignal movie as "space western" many times. Gunfights, horse races, outlaws hiding in the badlands, it's all there.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
You have to remember the fictional starwars universe is another galaxy. it's not in the milkyway. the physics are not the same. the force is in every living thing. even tree's and even the rocks and dirt. possibly it holds the fabric of that galaxy together so the whole thing doesn't fly apart. we have gravity physics in our galaxy.
Also and mainly the technologie never ever changes. the day the first lightsaber was made it pretty much stayed the same for 10's of thousand of years. also 1970's hair do never changes as well. it will never change from when lucas created it. the guy was a man of the 70's. most developers who fell in love with the first starwars movie in 77 agreewith him when they sign the agreement to keep it that way
See>Underlined:
Actually as a super hardcore starwars nerd.
The light saber has changed dramatically.
The first series are like that of "No more heroes" As that saber is actually a shout out to the old concept of the saber.
Pre-Republic (True republic) those bastards had such a huge energy pack on them you'd have to have the force just to carry them.
They looked like Giga counters. It's pretty neat actually.
The light saber definitely became elegant later on but before ? It was impractical and was mainly used as a traditional side arm and really had no true identity to Jedi until the first Sith came.
Originally posted by Creslin321 Originally posted by lizardbones
Originally posted by AdamTM
Originally posted by jeremyjodes ...
That's one of the things that makes it a Science Fantasy, not a Hard SciFi story. The science has nothing to do with...well...science. This is fine because it exists to tell a story. It doesn't need hard science to tell a story.
Well there are parts of Star Wars that are very "sciency" for example, just read this description of a TIE fighter: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TIE/ln_starfighter . Here's an excerpt: The TIE/ln's engine was one of the most precisely manufactured propulsion systems in the galaxy and, with no moving parts, was low-maintenance. Unlike the TIE before it, the TIE/ln sported independent generators for the engine and the weapons. The lack of combat shields, hyperdrive, and life-support systems, in concert with the advanced engine design, reduced the mass of the fighter and conferred exceptional maneuverability. That said though, the force as presented in the original trilogy was DEFINITELY science fantasy, no doubt. However, in the prequels they tried to make it more "sciency" by explaining the force by some BS symbiotic relationship between lifeforms and "midichlorians" (cough...parasite eve...cough). <Shudders>
The description of the TIE fighter is very technical, but it's not really based on science. It's one thing to say there are no moving parts, but it's another to describe how they managed to create propulsion without any moving parts. It's one thing to say it has independent generators for 'energy', but another thing entirely to describe how those generators actually work, and how the systems convert that energy into offensive weapons and propulsion. One is more fantasy, dressed in science fiction clothes, and the other is more science fiction.
I totally agree about the midichlorians...that was one of the single stupidest things that Lucas has added to the story. He probably figured that having real magic in science fiction was unbelievable. Hopefully they'll just ignore that in every other Star Wars related thing in the future.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by Arglebargle Lucas's story was really punched up by his screenwriting co-horts. Once he got too big to have anyone tell him he was being a doofus, things went downhill fast.
Luke Starkiller, anyone?
Sadly, the more I see of his 'tweaks' to the story, the more true this becomes for me.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
That's one of the things that makes it a Science Fantasy, not a Hard SciFi story. The science has nothing to do with...well...science. This is fine because it exists to tell a story. It doesn't need hard science to tell a story.
The description of the TIE fighter is very technical, but it's not really based on science. It's one thing to say there are no moving parts, but it's another to describe how they managed to create propulsion without any moving parts. It's one thing to say it has independent generators for 'energy', but another thing entirely to describe how those generators actually work, and how the systems convert that energy into offensive weapons and propulsion. One is more fantasy, dressed in science fiction clothes, and the other is more science fiction.
I totally agree about the midichlorians...that was one of the single stupidest things that Lucas has added to the story. He probably figured that having real magic in science fiction was unbelievable. Hopefully they'll just ignore that in every other Star Wars related thing in the future.
He should have let the mystery be....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I totally agree about the midichlorians...that was one of the single stupidest things that Lucas has added to the story. He probably figured that having real magic in science fiction was unbelievable.
How I wish I could unhear that bit of Ep. 1... that was just the stupidest thing ever. How did we get from "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter..." to "little microspobic buggy things let you use the force!"???
That's one of the things that makes it a Science Fantasy, not a Hard SciFi story. The science has nothing to do with...well...science. This is fine because it exists to tell a story. It doesn't need hard science to tell a story.
The TIE/ln's engine was one of the most precisely manufactured propulsion systems in the galaxy and, with no moving parts, was low-maintenance. Unlike the TIE before it, the TIE/ln sported independent generators for the engine and the weapons. The lack of combat shields, hyperdrive, and life-support systems, in concert with the advanced engine design, reduced the mass of the fighter and conferred exceptional maneuverability.
That said though, the force as presented in the original trilogy was DEFINITELY science fantasy, no doubt.
However, in the prequels they tried to make it more "sciency" by explaining the force by some BS symbiotic relationship between lifeforms and "midichlorians" (cough...parasite eve...cough).
The description of the TIE fighter is very technical, but it's not really based on science. It's one thing to say there are no moving parts, but it's another to describe how they managed to create propulsion without any moving parts. It's one thing to say it has independent generators for 'energy', but another thing entirely to describe how those generators actually work, and how the systems convert that energy into offensive weapons and propulsion. One is more fantasy, dressed in science fiction clothes, and the other is more science fiction.
I totally agree about the midichlorians...that was one of the single stupidest things that Lucas has added to the story. He probably figured that having real magic in science fiction was unbelievable. Hopefully they'll just ignore that in every other Star Wars related thing in the future.
Ion Propulsion.
It explains how the engine operates as much as it can.
It uses Ions. The same way we use them on our swiffer sweepers (lol tis truth) it's just propulsion versus some other sciencey crap I am not qaulified to preach on.
I totally agree about the midichlorians...that was one of the single stupidest things that Lucas has added to the story. He probably figured that having real magic in science fiction was unbelievable.
How I wish I could unhear that bit of Ep. 1... that was just the stupidest thing ever. How did we get from "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter..." to "little microspobic buggy things let you use the force!"???
Mitocondria yall.
That's what he was trying to do. Which sort of makes sense if you ponder it.
They are our power cells in real life, without them we're just hunks of goop with no magnetic structure.
Yoda was spiritual. All things he said were spiritual. A Buddhist monk.
Where as it was a science to others. Like in the real world different entities interpret the data differently.
I sort of liked that, as it kind of made sense when you think about it. What makes one "Chosen" in the force?
It didn't discredit the "Force" it only explained how a fat blue kid could fling a starship at a bounty hunter.
Edit: Removed hypothetical smaller than mitocondrial power houses due to lack of true evidence past a few research papers in 1993
I totally agree about the midichlorians...that was one of the single stupidest things that Lucas has added to the story. He probably figured that having real magic in science fiction was unbelievable.
How I wish I could unhear that bit of Ep. 1... that was just the stupidest thing ever. How did we get from "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter..." to "little microspobic buggy things let you use the force!"???
They are our power cells in real life, without them we're just hunks of goop with no magnetic structure.
But I AM just a hunk of goop with no magnetic structure!
Good points, though. Especially the bit on the different perspectives.
Comments
It's kinda meant to "look" dated. It's pretty much a part of what Lucas dubbed the "used future". Keep in mind, what he actually wanted to do was do another Flash Gordon movie. When that wasn't in the cards, he made up his own setting. So even in the 70's he was looking backward to the 30's and 40's version of the future.
When I saw your thread title, I thought you were gonna be referring to the convenience tech and interfacing. It can certainly be argued that a touch screen interface is a good ways ahead of the "wall of glowy buttons" interface. And an astromech? That would be the least convenient setup imaginable.
Or the SW humans are really us from a long time ago!!! Ooooo weee oooooo.
I think this would fall under the category of "not getting it". Star Wars is Science Fiction, but it's not Hard Science Fiction, it's Fantasy Science Fiction. The science is there to resolve plot points (like getting your hand cut off), but it's not based on any sort of current scientific knowledge as is the case with Hard Science Fiction. Things are meant to be fantastic, not realistic.
There are some more realistic things that Star Wars does that other science fiction doesn't though. One of them is planets having monolithic cultures. Planets in Star Wars have more than one race and more than one culture. Sometimes the planets have wars that have nothing to do with the rest of the universe (though for the purpose of stories, it's usually got something to do with the Empire and the Sith).
Well, maybe the monolithic culture thing is the only thing that Star Wars does realistically. Meh, it's fantasy, what do you expect?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I'm going for option 2.
You completely don't get star wars at all kid. It's not meant to be futuristic at all. It a space opera saga, not science fiction. So yea, I think you are wierd.
They are all sci-fi, its a very broad genre.
What he counted down just all fall into different sub-genres:
Star Trek - Space Opera
Stargate - Millitary SciFi (like Starship Troopers)
Firefly - SpaceWestern
Babylon 5 - classic Space Opera
What you counted down is the so called "hard scifi" or "core SciFi".
Star Wars never entirelly fell into the sci fi genre, its a crossbreed between SF and Fantasy, hence the classification of
Sci Fantasy
like Dragonriders Of Pern for example.
Other sub genres of sci-fi are:
steampunk - Trigun in Anime, Mutant Chronicles in PnP
cyberpunk - Deus Ex, Neuromancer, BladeRunner, GITS
biopunk - Bioshock
post apocalyptic retropunk - Fallout
Soft SF - 1984, Atlas Shrugged, Foundation
Superhuman - 90% of Marvel or DC comics
All SF is a sub-genre of speculative fiction.
That's like saying if you take all the races out of WoW, you'll have a medieval setting.
Your statement is wrong on two levels.
1. You can't take one of the main characteristics of a setting away to indicate that it's something else. I could just as easily say, "Take all the technology out of Star Wars and you have pure fantasy." This may be true, but it's pointless because the setting is no longer being represented.
2. I'm stealing this one from another poster from a similar thread. It fits fantasy MORE than Sci-fi because of the way the story is built and the motivations of the characters. You could replace Jedi with actual knights and/or wizards, Princess Leia with... a princess, Luke with a young squier, the emperor with an evil wizard, and grab pretty much any fantasy plot out there and it would work. Or do the opposite. Make the first Star Wars movie into a fantasy novel. You have a kinapped princess trapped in the Death Tower of an evil wizard. And old knight and his squier quest to rescue her.
Try doing that with Star Trek. The only way it can be done is to actually switch genre's entirely. That's why you saw gangster episodes, and Picard was made into Robin Hood by Q and sent to a tech free setting. Because to do it in their standard setting doesn't work.
Sci Fi is more about exploration, mystery; the unknown. Encountering obstacles never before seen. Heck, Asimov's books were basically massive story problems.
Star Wars is fantasy with sci-fi elements. If it were sci-fi, there would have been more emphasis on the technology; what it's capable of and how it works, even if they use word salad to explain it.
You have to remember the fictional starwars universe is another galaxy. it's not in the milkyway. the physics are not the same. the force is in every living thing. even tree's and even the rocks and dirt. possibly it holds the fabric of that galaxy together so the whole thing doesn't fly apart. we have gravity physics in our galaxy.
Also and mainly the technologie never ever changes. the day the first lightsaber was made it pretty much stayed the same for 10's of thousand of years. also 1970's hair do never changes as well. it will never change from when lucas created it. the guy was a man of the 70's. most developers who fell in love with the first starwars movie in 77 agreewith him when they sign the agreement to keep it that way
The thing about physics is that they are the same in the whole uinverse not just a galaxy.
Change the crawl text to:
"A long time ago In a universe far far away"
and i will agree with you
It's worst in my opinion. SWTOR several thousands years before the movies but the technology is pretty much the same.
Honestly the viewpoint that Star Wars is really fantasy not a bad one.
It's space opera, imo. It has a raft of cliches that keep it far from hard SF or even moderately soft SF. Example: Fighter spacecraft that manuever like biplanes, despite being in space. Devaronians occur as a race because some of the producer types saw a devil mask at the special effects shop and wanted it added in despite the resistance the effects guys.
That said, futurism is rarely going to peg loads of things accurately. Just go back and look at the (now) retro futurists visions. Big trends may be spotted, but that's pretty much the best you can hope for. For the OP, the look is 40 years old now. OF course it's looking a bit dated. IT will probably cycle around, as these things have a way of doing.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Change the crawl text to:
"A long time ago In a universe far far away"
and i will agree with you
That's one of the things that makes it a Science Fantasy, not a Hard SciFi story. The science has nothing to do with...well...science. This is fine because it exists to tell a story. It doesn't need hard science to tell a story.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Well there are parts of Star Wars that are very "sciency" for example, just read this description of a TIE fighter: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TIE/ln_starfighter .
Here's an excerpt:
The TIE/ln's engine was one of the most precisely manufactured propulsion systems in the galaxy and, with no moving parts, was low-maintenance. Unlike the TIE before it, the TIE/ln sported independent generators for the engine and the weapons. The lack of combat shields, hyperdrive, and life-support systems, in concert with the advanced engine design, reduced the mass of the fighter and conferred exceptional maneuverability.
That said though, the force as presented in the original trilogy was DEFINITELY science fantasy, no doubt.
However, in the prequels they tried to make it more "sciency" by explaining the force by some BS symbiotic relationship between lifeforms and "midichlorians" (cough...parasite eve...cough). <Shudders>
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Lucas's story was really punched up by his screenwriting co-horts. Once he got too big to have anyone tell him he was being a doofus, things went downhill fast.
Luke Starkiller, anyone?
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
So if we toss a bunch of pretty blue screens and shiney lighting on the floor that's futuristic.
As it has been said it's space opera.
Alot of the problem is you view analog as not futuristic and instead see Digital as futuristic.
Well... I'd like you to check out a aircraft carrier's* internals and you'll find analog is not a "out dated" thing. It's only percieved as such because we just like shiney screens.
The Clone Wars are a good example of the merger of the two.
Digital does not equate futuristic to me in the least bit.. It sometimes is a regression.
I'm going to bottom line it here.
You really want to be in the deep dark cold depths of space and have your vid control screen go BSOD your entire...
See>Xeno Gears.
I'd rather have back up nobs and gizmo's thank you very much.
I also think way too much on this crap.
*Though not in the future please review the next gen carriers, they still rock analog, as do all space craft we currently have been able to use, as our concept of sci-fi is based on these very things it stands to reason. Analog is still in.
You can't forget that Roddenberry sold Star Trek as a "wagon train to the stars", and the heavy Western influence on the original series.
Han Solo appears, and we've got Western elements all over Star Wars too. Lucas described the orignal movie as "space western" many times. Gunfights, horse races, outlaws hiding in the badlands, it's all there.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
See>Underlined:
Actually as a super hardcore starwars nerd.
The light saber has changed dramatically.
The first series are like that of "No more heroes" As that saber is actually a shout out to the old concept of the saber.
Pre-Republic (True republic) those bastards had such a huge energy pack on them you'd have to have the force just to carry them.
They looked like Giga counters. It's pretty neat actually.
The light saber definitely became elegant later on but before ? It was impractical and was mainly used as a traditional side arm and really had no true identity to Jedi until the first Sith came.
That's one of the things that makes it a Science Fantasy, not a Hard SciFi story. The science has nothing to do with...well...science. This is fine because it exists to tell a story. It doesn't need hard science to tell a story.
Well there are parts of Star Wars that are very "sciency" for example, just read this description of a TIE fighter: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TIE/ln_starfighter .
Here's an excerpt:
The TIE/ln's engine was one of the most precisely manufactured propulsion systems in the galaxy and, with no moving parts, was low-maintenance. Unlike the TIE before it, the TIE/ln sported independent generators for the engine and the weapons. The lack of combat shields, hyperdrive, and life-support systems, in concert with the advanced engine design, reduced the mass of the fighter and conferred exceptional maneuverability.
That said though, the force as presented in the original trilogy was DEFINITELY science fantasy, no doubt.
However, in the prequels they tried to make it more "sciency" by explaining the force by some BS symbiotic relationship between lifeforms and "midichlorians" (cough...parasite eve...cough). <Shudders>
The description of the TIE fighter is very technical, but it's not really based on science. It's one thing to say there are no moving parts, but it's another to describe how they managed to create propulsion without any moving parts. It's one thing to say it has independent generators for 'energy', but another thing entirely to describe how those generators actually work, and how the systems convert that energy into offensive weapons and propulsion. One is more fantasy, dressed in science fiction clothes, and the other is more science fiction.
I totally agree about the midichlorians...that was one of the single stupidest things that Lucas has added to the story. He probably figured that having real magic in science fiction was unbelievable. Hopefully they'll just ignore that in every other Star Wars related thing in the future.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Sadly, the more I see of his 'tweaks' to the story, the more true this becomes for me.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
+1 for Analog Synthesizers!
And their analog interfaces....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
He should have let the mystery be....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
How I wish I could unhear that bit of Ep. 1... that was just the stupidest thing ever. How did we get from "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter..." to "little microspobic buggy things let you use the force!"???
Ion Propulsion.
It explains how the engine operates as much as it can.
It uses Ions. The same way we use them on our swiffer sweepers (lol tis truth) it's just propulsion versus some other sciencey crap I am not qaulified to preach on.
Mitocondria yall.
That's what he was trying to do. Which sort of makes sense if you ponder it.
They are our power cells in real life, without them we're just hunks of goop with no magnetic structure.
Yoda was spiritual. All things he said were spiritual. A Buddhist monk.
Where as it was a science to others. Like in the real world different entities interpret the data differently.
I sort of liked that, as it kind of made sense when you think about it. What makes one "Chosen" in the force?
It didn't discredit the "Force" it only explained how a fat blue kid could fling a starship at a bounty hunter.
Edit: Removed hypothetical smaller than mitocondrial power houses due to lack of true evidence past a few research papers in 1993
But I AM just a hunk of goop with no magnetic structure!
Good points, though. Especially the bit on the different perspectives.