The Glade 4.0

True. But I don't consider Star Wars sci-fi. It's more fantasy in space. And like other fantasy, technological leaps aren't what fans want to see. It's why Elrond fought Sauron and his army with swords and arrows, and a few thousand years later fought him with swords and arrows again.

_________________
Les Zombis et les Loups-Garous!

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Not sure what I just watched there.... but I think I liked it.

_________________
Les Zombis et les Loups-Garous!

The part where he belted the guy with the Tuna just slays me.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

I consider it sci-fi. IMO there is no such thing as science fantasy or fantasy in space. That's just a term certain snobs use to put down sci fi they don't personally like.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Or it's simply differentiating by providing more details. I don't see how that requires snobbery.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Indeed. Someone who doesn't know any better may call a tuba an elephant, but that doesn't make it accurate.

Also, does this really seem like a crowd that thinks of fantasy as a lesser genre?

I think the people like to called Star Wars fantasy is because their tech works like magic. It just does and you aren't supposed to think too much about it. Also the focus isn't on the tech it's on more fantasy themes like mysticism and good versus evil. Also if you strip out the technology the plot reads more like forgotten realms than Star Trek, B5,etc. Does. Think about it.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

This.

Sci-fi attempts to follow the rules of physics as we know them, to at least some degree. Where it breaks them, it acknowledges it and provides explanations. Sure, fantasy is typically magic, metaphysical, supernatural, but it also applies to any situation where the scenario is just too fantastical to bother with such explanations.

If nothing else, The Force shifts Star Wars directly into fantasy territory. Even in the view of the people of that setting, it is a supernatural element. (Midichorians notwithstanding). The fact that the laws of physics don't seem to exist and the "science" goes entirely unexplained is secondary to that.

By contrast, the low-tech, near medieval world of the late Anne McCaffrey's Pern is firmly Sci-fi. There's no unexplained events, no magic. The setting is a human colony on another world that lost its technology in a disaster several thousand years earlier. The "dragons" are genetically engineered. The mechanic of between is poorly explained, from a sci-fi standpoint, but is still not supernatural in nature, and rooted in natural physics.

These aren't value judgements. I typically prefer fantasy over sci-fi. But the difference between the two is not dependant on the technology level of the setting.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I like sci-fi. I like fantasy. I don't believe I am a snob because I am of the personal belief that Star Wars falls into the latter category.

And Taly is right. Pern has dragons and swords, but it's definitely in the sci-fi camp.

My definition of sci-fi (since it's clearly not defined) is that it's fiction which could be plausible reality someday (or for another race of beings). Like Taly said, this usually means there aren't any supernatural elements and the technology is attempted to be shown that "makes sense" without necessarily needing to go into great detail.

Star Wars is more in the fantasy camp, in my opinion, because it does have supernatural elements. It's heroes and villains are clearly defined in an almost black and white fashion (and in some cases, literally). You have knights, you have swords, you have wizards, you have magic. The technology and settings are enormous without plausibility (unapologetically so). Actual science is generally thrown right out the window (every planet is exactly one geographical biome, throughout the whole planet).

_________________
Les Zombis et les Loups-Garous!

the degree to which you can make enchanted weapons/armor/boosted damage in a particular specialization is ... disturbing.

I'm rapidly becoming convinced that with a little effort I'll be able to 1-shot a dragon with my bow.

There seems almost no cap on how much you can boost tradeskills. It requires a lot of perks to be able to do it, but I'm hearing about 750 dmg greatswords etc.

My base bow damage with a glass bow and +90% archery damage (33% ring+33% gloves+24% helm -- Going to remake all once I max out enchanting)

Max out your potion making+Max out Enchanting+Max out smithing. Use Potions+Enchanted gear to make the next batch of armor/gear, etc. There are 4-5 slots you can use to boots Alchemy & Smithing. (5 because you can use Circlets+Falamer Helmets simultaneously)

Enchanting 4 pieces of armor with 25% reduction in destruction spell costs is pretty funny...

That can be found in the attitude of the people insisting that the differentiation is really that important.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Right. Exactly. So the next time someone here refers to an M1911 pistol in a video game, and one of you gun savvy guys corrects them by saying, "Technically, it would be a M1911A1, as the automatic version was adopted in 1924," we will accuse them of being a snob. Because, insisting that the differentiation is really that important is the epitome of snobbery.

Just because someone has a very keen interest in something, and holds it in a higher regard than others, does not make them a snob. Referring to others as snobs because of the way they classify a particular movie is a bit much. Yes, there are SOME movie snobs, that are very annoying. But I would hardly call any of the posters here movie snobs, as I have not gotten that impression at all.

_________________
"I Live, I Love, I Slay, and I Am Content."
- Conan the Barbarian

Whew!

You were close. Right on the border, I'd say.

_________________
"I Live, I Love, I Slay, and I Am Content."
- Conan the Barbarian

I'm fairly certain y'all mostly just like fairy tales.

_________________

I love them.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

The fact that something is set in the future does not mean it's science fiction. Not all science fiction is set in the future. The key element to science fiction is science. A lot of contemporary science fiction is based on psychology and biomed, because that's what's hot lately.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

I think we're missing the easy distinction.

For the vast majority of the population (who don't even think about this), spaceships = sci-fi. Dragons = fantasy.

Also, why do the Skyrim threads keep getting derailed? It's just like the game, we can't stay on task. Oh look, butterflies.

You could be playing my Nord ...

Who happens to be the most unlucky assassin ever ...

_________________

This is a great game. I really like it a lot.

_________________
Los Angeles Kings 2014 Stanley Cup Champions

"I love this **** team right here."
-Jonathan Quick

I hate the fact that I always get the quest to help someone 5 minutes after I'm told to murder them.

_________________

This problem can be solved by murdering them in three minutes.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

One-shotting giants now. Though nothing compares to the feeling of taking on 2 dragons simultaneously.