On 26/01/2025 15:01, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> Or "Matter", where the heroes are all (mostly) killed off and the
> story ends. "Excession" is similar too.
>
> I don't actually think it's the author running out of ideas; it's part
> of his style and messaging. But given the pacing and tone of the rest
> of his books, the sudden end leaving so many things unresolved (the
> latter of which, I think is the whole point) is incredibly jarring.
>
> It's as if Star Wars ended right when the X-wings start attacking the
> Death Star. Because of how the rest of the story goes, you know the
> heroes --armed with mystical powers and knowledge of the planet's
> secret weakness-- are likely to win... but you sort of want that
> resolution. And I think that's an apt comparison, because in many ways
> the Culture books are very space-opera sci-fi, and that genre
> typically gets its heroic end. Banks is obviously writing in a way
> that purposefully subverts those expectations, which is an interesting
> experiment but overall not to my liking.

I did recently read Look To Windward and although I enjoyed it I'm
probably not going to revisit the series anytime soon. It's a shame
really as I like my sci-fi and I've read several of his contemporary
fiction novels which he writes under Iain Banks instead of Iain M.
Banks. Not really hiding anything there.

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:

> It's a new year, with the promise of many new games to come. Are we
> excited about any of them? Here's a partial list of titles expected to
> release this year; do any of these wet your whistle?
>
> -- Borderlands 4
> -- Grand Theft Auto 6

These two from the list. But it's more like hope for the best, fear the
worst. Or vainly hope for something decent, wait for the sale otherwise :)

Also possibly space opera game Exodus.

Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> writes:

> #2 Outer Worlds 2 - I suppose I need to get around to playing the
> original with DLCs first though.

Oh, they made a sequel? I kind of bounced off the original. Fallout
without the charm or whatever je ne sais quoi the Fallout games have
that keeps me playing those games.

> I don't even know if I can rouse myself to play PC games much
> anymore. I got hooked on reading sci-fi/fantasy again and have been
> blowing through books like crazy.

I had a bit of stint like that last year. Robert Galbraith detective
stories, finished the Expanse saga (books 5-9), then the first two books
of the Ninth House trilogy by Leigh Bardugo.

Kinda trying to get some non-fiction reading done now for a change. Some
work related, some psychology, some defense related.

On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 21:03:51 +0000, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

>I did recently read Look To Windward and although I enjoyed it I'm
>probably not going to revisit the series anytime soon. It's a shame
>really as I like my sci-fi and I've read several of his contemporary
>fiction novels which he writes under Iain Banks instead of Iain M.
>Banks. Not really hiding anything there.

Well, no worry; he's not writing anything under any name anymore.
Banks died in 2013.

The addition of the "M." in his name for his contemporary fiction
novels was largely at the insistence of his publisher, to avoid
confusion with another author. When he started writing sci-fi, they
suggested adding it in to make those novels distinct from his other
works. Or so the story goes.

On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 15:58:51 +0200, Anssi Saari
<anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:

>Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> #2 Outer Worlds 2 - I suppose I need to get around to playing the
>> original with DLCs first though.
>
>Oh, they made a sequel? I kind of bounced off the original. Fallout
>without the charm or whatever je ne sais quoi the Fallout games have
>that keeps me playing those games.

Not yet. This thread is about games to be released in 2025 that have
caught our eye, after all, and 2025 has only just begun. Whether
"Outer Worlds 2" actually releases this year is, of course, uncertain
(release dates tend to change) but it's _scheduled_ to come out this
year, anyway.

On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 14:38:38 +0200, Anssi Saari
<anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:

>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> It's a new year, with the promise of many new games to come. Are we
>> excited about any of them? Here's a partial list of titles expected to
>> release this year; do any of these wet your whistle?
>>
>> -- Borderlands 4
>> -- Grand Theft Auto 6
>
>These two from the list. But it's more like hope for the best, fear the
>worst. Or vainly hope for something decent, wait for the sale otherwise :)
>
>Also possibly space opera game Exodus.

I hadn't heard of that one. (more info here for the curious:
https://www.exodusgame.com/)

[At least, I'm assuming its this one.]

Not knowing more than the very basics, I'll admit that it LOOKS
interesting, in terms of visuals and setting, but I can't help but
worry that it'll be another too-large open-world grind fest. There
isn't much info about the actual gameplay but it looks like it has
more similarities to something like "Destiny" than "Mass Effect".
Which is fine, if you like that, but definitely not something that
appeals to me.

On 1/26/2025 11:31 AM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 10:02:45 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com>

>> It'd be nice if more games had demos again so you didn't have to pay for
>> a month of Gamepass. Especially as there's a number of games that are
>> on Elite Gamepass (let us gouge you for more!) that I'm mildly
>> interested in, but not enough to pay more.
>
> For those of us into multiplayer games, I think the demo would really
> need to be in the form of a 30 day trial which is a bit different than
> the classic business model around releasing demos. And to some extent
> I'm not sure I would want them giving away 30 days for free, because
> it would probably just attract more hacker/cheater attempts.
>

Good point. I don't think you'd need a 30 day trial, a free weekend has
been enough for those when they do those.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 18:47:22 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>
>>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>say:
>>
>>>On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 09:30:21 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 1/23/2025 9:00 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I don't even know if I can rouse myself to play PC games much anymore.
>>>>I got hooked on reading sci-fi/fantasy again and have been blowing
>>>>through books like crazy.
>>>
>>>Heh. Oddly enough, me too. I mean, I tend to go through books fairly
>>>regularly anyway, but recently I've been hitting the pages a lot more
>>>often. It's definitely cutting into my video-game time!
>>>
>>>I'm working my way through Ian Bank's "Culture" series again.Well,
>>>most of them. A couple of his books are written in first-person, and
>>>that's just not a format I enjoy. But all the rest. They aren't
>>>/great/, but they're imaginative and passably well written (even if
>>>every book does seem like he just ran out of ideas and just decided to
>>>end it at some random point).
>>
>>Consider Phlebas and that execution method?
>
>Or "Matter", where the heroes are all (mostly) killed off and the
>story ends. "Excession" is similar too.
>
>I don't actually think it's the author running out of ideas; it's part
>of his style and messaging. But given the pacing and tone of the rest
>of his books, the sudden end leaving so many things unresolved (the
>latter of which, I think is the whole point) is incredibly jarring.
>
>It's as if Star Wars ended right when the X-wings start attacking the
>Death Star. Because of how the rest of the story goes, you know the
>heroes --armed with mystical powers and knowledge of the planet's
>secret weakness-- are likely to win... but you sort of want that
>resolution. And I think that's an apt comparison, because in many ways
>the Culture books are very space-opera sci-fi, and that genre
>typically gets its heroic end. Banks is obviously writing in a way
>that purposefully subverts those expectations, which is an interesting
>experiment but overall not to my liking.

I did not get a space opera vibe from the culture novels, but then I am
a fan of the original space opera author, E.E. "Doc" Smith.

The culture novels fall _well_ short of the firepower requirements for
true space opera. I do not remember Iain M. Banks destroying a _GALAXY_
in any of his, as E.E. did in the last Skylark novel.

The Lensman books, were E.E. toning it down. Throwing planets and black
holes (negaspheres), harnessing the entire output of the sun into a
planet melting super laser, was toning it down.

He's the inventor of the genre, and the powdered donut.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 21:03:51 +0000, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>
>>I did recently read Look To Windward and although I enjoyed it I'm
>>probably not going to revisit the series anytime soon. It's a shame
>>really as I like my sci-fi and I've read several of his contemporary
>>fiction novels which he writes under Iain Banks instead of Iain M.
>>Banks. Not really hiding anything there.
>
>Well, no worry; he's not writing anything under any name anymore.
>Banks died in 2013.
>
>The addition of the "M." in his name for his contemporary fiction
>novels was largely at the insistence of his publisher, to avoid
>confusion with another author. When he started writing sci-fi, they
>suggested adding it in to make those novels distinct from his other
>works. Or so the story goes.

Actually not so.
He wrote both science fiction, where he's used the M. middle initial and
non fiction ( like the Wasp Factory) where he wrote non science fiction
and non fiction with no M.

(You do not want to read that book, trust me.)

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 18:42:23 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:

>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>say:
>
>>On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 18:47:22 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>>say:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 09:30:21 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 1/23/2025 9:00 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I don't even know if I can rouse myself to play PC games much anymore.
>>>>>I got hooked on reading sci-fi/fantasy again and have been blowing
>>>>>through books like crazy.
>>>>
>>>>Heh. Oddly enough, me too. I mean, I tend to go through books fairly
>>>>regularly anyway, but recently I've been hitting the pages a lot more
>>>>often. It's definitely cutting into my video-game time!
>>>>
>>>>I'm working my way through Ian Bank's "Culture" series again.Well,
>>>>most of them. A couple of his books are written in first-person, and
>>>>that's just not a format I enjoy. But all the rest. They aren't
>>>>/great/, but they're imaginative and passably well written (even if
>>>>every book does seem like he just ran out of ideas and just decided to
>>>>end it at some random point).
>>>
>>>Consider Phlebas and that execution method?
>>
>>Or "Matter", where the heroes are all (mostly) killed off and the
>>story ends. "Excession" is similar too.
>>
>>I don't actually think it's the author running out of ideas; it's part
>>of his style and messaging. But given the pacing and tone of the rest
>>of his books, the sudden end leaving so many things unresolved (the
>>latter of which, I think is the whole point) is incredibly jarring.
>>
>>It's as if Star Wars ended right when the X-wings start attacking the
>>Death Star. Because of how the rest of the story goes, you know the
>>heroes --armed with mystical powers and knowledge of the planet's
>>secret weakness-- are likely to win... but you sort of want that
>>resolution. And I think that's an apt comparison, because in many ways
>>the Culture books are very space-opera sci-fi, and that genre
>>typically gets its heroic end. Banks is obviously writing in a way
>>that purposefully subverts those expectations, which is an interesting
>>experiment but overall not to my liking.
>
>I did not get a space opera vibe from the culture novels, but then I am
>a fan of the original space opera author, E.E. "Doc" Smith.

Galaxy-destroying levels of power are hardly necessary for it to be
space opera. I mean, Star Wars still largely limits itself to
destroying mere planets, and it is definitely space opera. And The
Culture universe is definitely within that range (in fact, far above,
since they not only destroy planets, but build them at times)

By definition, space opera is a genre more focused on melodrama and
adventure, and tends to be fairly loose on the actual science (and, as
such, pretty much all mass-media sci-fi, from modern Star Trek to The
Expanse, to Battlestar Galactica, qualifies as space opera rather than
'proper' true-Scottsman sci-fi). Bank's novels, which often focus on
rather introvert characters, lack some of the more obvious melodrama,
but otherwise qualify quite well.

Which isn't to dismiss the novels; they're fun, imaginative, sometimes
thought provoking and I love his take on an AI-run post-scarcity
universe. For all its wars and shenanigins (which often have death
tolls counted in the TRILLIONS) it's a lot more hopeful take on the
far-future than the hell-hole futures of many sci-fi franchises.

But it's space-opera, through and through.

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 18:42:23 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>
>>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>say:
>>
>>>On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 18:47:22 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>>>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>>>say:
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 09:30:21 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 1/23/2025 9:00 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't even know if I can rouse myself to play PC games much anymore.
>>>>>>I got hooked on reading sci-fi/fantasy again and have been blowing
>>>>>>through books like crazy.
>>>>>
>>>>>Heh. Oddly enough, me too. I mean, I tend to go through books fairly
>>>>>regularly anyway, but recently I've been hitting the pages a lot more
>>>>>often. It's definitely cutting into my video-game time!
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm working my way through Ian Bank's "Culture" series again.Well,
>>>>>most of them. A couple of his books are written in first-person, and
>>>>>that's just not a format I enjoy. But all the rest. They aren't
>>>>>/great/, but they're imaginative and passably well written (even if
>>>>>every book does seem like he just ran out of ideas and just decided to
>>>>>end it at some random point).
>>>>
>>>>Consider Phlebas and that execution method?
>>>
>>>Or "Matter", where the heroes are all (mostly) killed off and the
>>>story ends. "Excession" is similar too.
>>>
>>>I don't actually think it's the author running out of ideas; it's part
>>>of his style and messaging. But given the pacing and tone of the rest
>>>of his books, the sudden end leaving so many things unresolved (the
>>>latter of which, I think is the whole point) is incredibly jarring.
>>>
>>>It's as if Star Wars ended right when the X-wings start attacking the
>>>Death Star. Because of how the rest of the story goes, you know the
>>>heroes --armed with mystical powers and knowledge of the planet's
>>>secret weakness-- are likely to win... but you sort of want that
>>>resolution. And I think that's an apt comparison, because in many ways
>>>the Culture books are very space-opera sci-fi, and that genre
>>>typically gets its heroic end. Banks is obviously writing in a way
>>>that purposefully subverts those expectations, which is an interesting
>>>experiment but overall not to my liking.
>>
>>I did not get a space opera vibe from the culture novels, but then I am
>>a fan of the original space opera author, E.E. "Doc" Smith.
>
>Galaxy-destroying levels of power are hardly necessary for it to be
>space opera. I mean, Star Wars still largely limits itself to
>destroying mere planets, and it is definitely space opera. And The
>Culture universe is definitely within that range (in fact, far above,
>since they not only destroy planets, but build them at times)

Star Wars and Star Trek are NOT science fiction, they never have been.
Science has never been the foundation of those shows, not ever.

E.E. "Doc" Smith was always about the science of the era and taking it
as far as it could go.

Yes that meant using tube technology - i.e. spacehounds of ipc (1948)

I do not recognize Star Wars as space opera, not even close, it's pure
fantasy in space. Literally every element is from fantasy. The Hermit
who is a powerful wizard, the magic sword, the bad guy who is the
hero's father - every damn element is pure fantasy - setting it in space
does NOT make it sci fi, it's still pure fantasy.

George Lucas pulled the wool over a lot of eyes, but not mine!

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 23:18:14 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:

>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>say:
>
>>On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 18:42:23 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>>say:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 18:47:22 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>>>>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>>>>say:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 09:30:21 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 1/23/2025 9:00 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I don't even know if I can rouse myself to play PC games much anymore.
>>>>>>>I got hooked on reading sci-fi/fantasy again and have been blowing
>>>>>>>through books like crazy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Heh. Oddly enough, me too. I mean, I tend to go through books fairly
>>>>>>regularly anyway, but recently I've been hitting the pages a lot more
>>>>>>often. It's definitely cutting into my video-game time!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm working my way through Ian Bank's "Culture" series again.Well,
>>>>>>most of them. A couple of his books are written in first-person, and
>>>>>>that's just not a format I enjoy. But all the rest. They aren't
>>>>>>/great/, but they're imaginative and passably well written (even if
>>>>>>every book does seem like he just ran out of ideas and just decided to
>>>>>>end it at some random point).
>>>>>
>>>>>Consider Phlebas and that execution method?
>>>>
>>>>Or "Matter", where the heroes are all (mostly) killed off and the
>>>>story ends. "Excession" is similar too.
>>>>
>>>>I don't actually think it's the author running out of ideas; it's part
>>>>of his style and messaging. But given the pacing and tone of the rest
>>>>of his books, the sudden end leaving so many things unresolved (the
>>>>latter of which, I think is the whole point) is incredibly jarring.
>>>>
>>>>It's as if Star Wars ended right when the X-wings start attacking the
>>>>Death Star. Because of how the rest of the story goes, you know the
>>>>heroes --armed with mystical powers and knowledge of the planet's
>>>>secret weakness-- are likely to win... but you sort of want that
>>>>resolution. And I think that's an apt comparison, because in many ways
>>>>the Culture books are very space-opera sci-fi, and that genre
>>>>typically gets its heroic end. Banks is obviously writing in a way
>>>>that purposefully subverts those expectations, which is an interesting
>>>>experiment but overall not to my liking.
>>>
>>>I did not get a space opera vibe from the culture novels, but then I am
>>>a fan of the original space opera author, E.E. "Doc" Smith.
>>
>>Galaxy-destroying levels of power are hardly necessary for it to be
>>space opera. I mean, Star Wars still largely limits itself to
>>destroying mere planets, and it is definitely space opera. And The
>>Culture universe is definitely within that range (in fact, far above,
>>since they not only destroy planets, but build them at times)
>
>Star Wars and Star Trek are NOT science fiction, they never have been.
>Science has never been the foundation of those shows, not ever.
>
>E.E. "Doc" Smith was always about the science of the era and taking it
>as far as it could go.
>
>Yes that meant using tube technology - i.e. spacehounds of ipc (1948)
>
>I do not recognize Star Wars as space opera, not even close, it's pure
>fantasy in space. Literally every element is from fantasy. The Hermit
>who is a powerful wizard, the magic sword, the bad guy who is the
>hero's father - every damn element is pure fantasy - setting it in space
>does NOT make it sci fi, it's still pure fantasy.
>
>George Lucas pulled the wool over a lot of eyes, but not mine!
>

The whole 'is space opera sci-fi question' is one of those tiresome
topics that comes up way to often to be fun anymore. Personally, I
agree with you that, no, it's not; it's its own genre (space fantasy)
that falls under the 'speculative fiction'* uber-genre that
encompasses sci-fi, horror and the rest. But it stands apart from
'real' sci-fi by its general disregard for, you know, science. And by
that definition Star Wars - and increasingly, Star Trek- definitely
better fit into space-opera and not proper sci-fi.

But my definition isn't really relevant. Space-opera, and Star Wars,
all are roped into sci-fi whether I want them there or not. If it has
aliens and spaceships, it's sci-fi: "a literary or cinematic genre in
which fantasy, typically based on speculative scientific discoveries
or developments, environmental changes, space travel, or life on other
planets, forms part of the plot or background." Else you just end up
arguing with 8 billion other people over the definition and that's,
like I said, tiring.

(but I do it anyway ;-)

* isn't all fiction speculative? ;-)

On 2/11/2025 8:18 PM, Xocyll wrote:
> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
> say:
>
>> On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 18:42:23 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>> say:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 18:47:22 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>>>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>>>> say:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 09:30:21 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/23/2025 9:00 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't even know if I can rouse myself to play PC games much anymore.
>>>>>>> I got hooked on reading sci-fi/fantasy again and have been blowing
>>>>>>> through books like crazy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heh. Oddly enough, me too. I mean, I tend to go through books fairly
>>>>>> regularly anyway, but recently I've been hitting the pages a lot more
>>>>>> often. It's definitely cutting into my video-game time!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm working my way through Ian Bank's "Culture" series again.Well,
>>>>>> most of them. A couple of his books are written in first-person, and
>>>>>> that's just not a format I enjoy. But all the rest. They aren't
>>>>>> /great/, but they're imaginative and passably well written (even if
>>>>>> every book does seem like he just ran out of ideas and just decided to
>>>>>> end it at some random point).
>>>>>
>>>>> Consider Phlebas and that execution method?
>>>>
>>>> Or "Matter", where the heroes are all (mostly) killed off and the
>>>> story ends. "Excession" is similar too.
>>>>
>>>> I don't actually think it's the author running out of ideas; it's part
>>>> of his style and messaging. But given the pacing and tone of the rest
>>>> of his books, the sudden end leaving so many things unresolved (the
>>>> latter of which, I think is the whole point) is incredibly jarring.
>>>>
>>>> It's as if Star Wars ended right when the X-wings start attacking the
>>>> Death Star. Because of how the rest of the story goes, you know the
>>>> heroes --armed with mystical powers and knowledge of the planet's
>>>> secret weakness-- are likely to win... but you sort of want that
>>>> resolution. And I think that's an apt comparison, because in many ways
>>>> the Culture books are very space-opera sci-fi, and that genre
>>>> typically gets its heroic end. Banks is obviously writing in a way
>>>> that purposefully subverts those expectations, which is an interesting
>>>> experiment but overall not to my liking.
>>>
>>> I did not get a space opera vibe from the culture novels, but then I am
>>> a fan of the original space opera author, E.E. "Doc" Smith.
>>
>> Galaxy-destroying levels of power are hardly necessary for it to be
>> space opera. I mean, Star Wars still largely limits itself to
>> destroying mere planets, and it is definitely space opera. And The
>> Culture universe is definitely within that range (in fact, far above,
>> since they not only destroy planets, but build them at times)
>
> Star Wars and Star Trek are NOT science fiction, they never have been.
> Science has never been the foundation of those shows, not ever.
>
> E.E. "Doc" Smith was always about the science of the era and taking it
> as far as it could go.
>
> Yes that meant using tube technology - i.e. spacehounds of ipc (1948)
>
> I do not recognize Star Wars as space opera, not even close, it's pure
> fantasy in space. Literally every element is from fantasy. The Hermit
> who is a powerful wizard, the magic sword, the bad guy who is the
> hero's father - every damn element is pure fantasy - setting it in space
> does NOT make it sci fi, it's still pure fantasy.
>
> George Lucas pulled the wool over a lot of eyes, but not mine!
>
I have no problem calling Star Wars 'Science Fantasy'. But Star Trek is
science fiction. It isn't _hard_ SF, as it includes social changes but
SF has a long tradition of that as well. (And Doc Smith had no real
world science to base any of the psi based aspects of Lensmen upon even
at the time he wrote those books.)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 07:43:59 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>I have no problem calling Star Wars 'Science Fantasy'. But Star Trek is
>science fiction. It isn't _hard_ SF, as it includes social changes but
>SF has a long tradition of that as well. (And Doc Smith had no real
>world science to base any of the psi based aspects of Lensmen upon even
>at the time he wrote those books.)

I'd agree with you on classic Star Trek, but modern Star Trek is a
different beast. It's not anything about modern science or examining
how it would affect social changes anymore. It's soap opera in space
set against a background that mirrors current events. It's about the
drama and thus increasingly falls beneath the 'space opera' umbrella.

(That said, on -increasingly rare- occassion Star Trek does surprise
by being a bit deeper than usual... but so too does Star Wars
sometimes, albeit never in the main-line movies.)

On 2/12/2025 12:31 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 07:43:59 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>
>> I have no problem calling Star Wars 'Science Fantasy'. But Star Trek is
>> science fiction. It isn't _hard_ SF, as it includes social changes but
>> SF has a long tradition of that as well. (And Doc Smith had no real
>> world science to base any of the psi based aspects of Lensmen upon even
>> at the time he wrote those books.)
>
> I'd agree with you on classic Star Trek, but modern Star Trek is a
> different beast. It's not anything about modern science or examining
> how it would affect social changes anymore. It's soap opera in space
> set against a background that mirrors current events. It's about the
> drama and thus increasingly falls beneath the 'space opera' umbrella.
>
> (That said, on -increasingly rare- occassion Star Trek does surprise
> by being a bit deeper than usual... but so too does Star Wars
> sometimes, albeit never in the main-line movies.)
>
Well, I don't know the current "state" of Star Trek. The last Trek show
I watched was season 2 of 'Orville'. Everything is on streaming now and
I don't do streaming.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 17:37:50 -0800, Dimensional Traveler wrote:

> On 2/12/2025 12:31 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 07:43:59 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I have no problem calling Star Wars 'Science Fantasy'. But Star Trek is
>>> science fiction. It isn't _hard_ SF, as it includes social changes but
>>> SF has a long tradition of that as well. (And Doc Smith had no real
>>> world science to base any of the psi based aspects of Lensmen upon even
>>> at the time he wrote those books.)
>>
>> I'd agree with you on classic Star Trek, but modern Star Trek is a
>> different beast. It's not anything about modern science or examining
>> how it would affect social changes anymore. It's soap opera in space
>> set against a background that mirrors current events. It's about the
>> drama and thus increasingly falls beneath the 'space opera' umbrella.
>>
>> (That said, on -increasingly rare- occassion Star Trek does surprise
>> by being a bit deeper than usual... but so too does Star Wars
>> sometimes, albeit never in the main-line movies.)
>>
> Well, I don't know the current "state" of Star Trek. The last Trek show
> I watched was season 2 of 'Orville'. Everything is on streaming now and
> I don't do streaming.

I rise in defense of one of the newer Trek shows, _Strange New Worlds_.

Mrs. vallor and I have been watching it from the start -- an episode
here and there -- and we haven't been disappointed. Note that I don't
usually watch series', but this is an exception...

I'm a fan of TOS, which I grew up watching in syndication. SNW scratches
that itch, albeit with much better effects, and arguably better stories.
Already, one story included a plot device where communication using
music was central to the plot, and the way they used it was
absolutely enchanting.

And while I agree that Star Wars is "space fantasy", Star Trek
is about as "SF" as you can expect on TV -- if not "Science Fiction"
then "Speculative Fiction".

Oh, and Captain Pike is the captain -- no "Kirk" Shakespearean over-acting
to be found. Number One is the first officer, and we just learned
something about her character that shows that the writers _are_ writing
_big_ character arcs. (We already saw some of that with Spock, Uhura,
and Pike, but this was a Big Deal about her past...)

So there's good drama -- in space! It also doesn't always take itself
so seriously, which is a welcome change from the TOS format.

I saw some of _The Orville_, and could appreciate what Seth was trying
to do with it. This is the "Trek" universe's answer to it.

(And I might have to look into that Star Trek MMO on Steam, if it is still
around...)

--
-Scott System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.14.0-rc2 Release: Mint 22.1 Mem: 258G
"This is your brain. Postscript on brain your is This."

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On 2/11/2025 8:18 PM, Xocyll wrote:
>> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>> say:
>>
>>> On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 18:42:23 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>>> say:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 18:47:22 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>>>>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>>>>> say:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 09:30:21 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/23/2025 9:00 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't even know if I can rouse myself to play PC games much anymore.
>>>>>>>> I got hooked on reading sci-fi/fantasy again and have been blowing
>>>>>>>> through books like crazy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Heh. Oddly enough, me too. I mean, I tend to go through books fairly
>>>>>>> regularly anyway, but recently I've been hitting the pages a lot more
>>>>>>> often. It's definitely cutting into my video-game time!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm working my way through Ian Bank's "Culture" series again.Well,
>>>>>>> most of them. A couple of his books are written in first-person, and
>>>>>>> that's just not a format I enjoy. But all the rest. They aren't
>>>>>>> /great/, but they're imaginative and passably well written (even if
>>>>>>> every book does seem like he just ran out of ideas and just decided to
>>>>>>> end it at some random point).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Consider Phlebas and that execution method?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or "Matter", where the heroes are all (mostly) killed off and the
>>>>> story ends. "Excession" is similar too.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't actually think it's the author running out of ideas; it's part
>>>>> of his style and messaging. But given the pacing and tone of the rest
>>>>> of his books, the sudden end leaving so many things unresolved (the
>>>>> latter of which, I think is the whole point) is incredibly jarring.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's as if Star Wars ended right when the X-wings start attacking the
>>>>> Death Star. Because of how the rest of the story goes, you know the
>>>>> heroes --armed with mystical powers and knowledge of the planet's
>>>>> secret weakness-- are likely to win... but you sort of want that
>>>>> resolution. And I think that's an apt comparison, because in many ways
>>>>> the Culture books are very space-opera sci-fi, and that genre
>>>>> typically gets its heroic end. Banks is obviously writing in a way
>>>>> that purposefully subverts those expectations, which is an interesting
>>>>> experiment but overall not to my liking.
>>>>
>>>> I did not get a space opera vibe from the culture novels, but then I am
>>>> a fan of the original space opera author, E.E. "Doc" Smith.
>>>
>>> Galaxy-destroying levels of power are hardly necessary for it to be
>>> space opera. I mean, Star Wars still largely limits itself to
>>> destroying mere planets, and it is definitely space opera. And The
>>> Culture universe is definitely within that range (in fact, far above,
>>> since they not only destroy planets, but build them at times)
>>
>> Star Wars and Star Trek are NOT science fiction, they never have been.
>> Science has never been the foundation of those shows, not ever.
>>
>> E.E. "Doc" Smith was always about the science of the era and taking it
>> as far as it could go.
>>
>> Yes that meant using tube technology - i.e. spacehounds of ipc (1948)
>>
>> I do not recognize Star Wars as space opera, not even close, it's pure
>> fantasy in space. Literally every element is from fantasy. The Hermit
>> who is a powerful wizard, the magic sword, the bad guy who is the
>> hero's father - every damn element is pure fantasy - setting it in space
>> does NOT make it sci fi, it's still pure fantasy.
>>
>> George Lucas pulled the wool over a lot of eyes, but not mine!
>>
>I have no problem calling Star Wars 'Science Fantasy'. But Star Trek is
>science fiction. It isn't _hard_ SF, as it includes social changes but
>SF has a long tradition of that as well. (And Doc Smith had no real
>world science to base any of the psi based aspects of Lensmen upon even
>at the time he wrote those books.)

Science Fiction is taking existing tech and extrapolating it to the
future. Star Trek never did that. It never explained any tech every,
warp drive, explicators, etc, they never every touched on how this tech
changed the world, it was just in the background like scenery.

Not sci-fi, not even close. Doc Smith, extrapolated on the tech of the
time, and pushed it into the future, literally EVERYTHING was about how
it changed the world.

Star Trek, Star Wars, pure fantasy!

And oh yeah, the lenses were not human tech, they were from a race a
billion times older, fighting a proxy war with another ancient race.
Sounds kinda like America and Russia fighting proxy wars all over this
planet.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com