Poll: Fantasy or Scifi?

[Sack of Cheese]

Which one do you like better?

I think the fantasy world feels more organic. It also has magick and dragons, which make it automatically cool.

 

[Vault101]

Sci Fi

I dont know why but its just so much more apealing, the "fantastical" elements can make alot more sense than magic and I think theres generally alot more room for cool Ideas

Fantasy I probably wouldnt mind as much if alot of it wasnt trying to be tolkein, I think by its nature its always very Romanticed, I dont know it just doesnt have the same apeal...it kind of bores me my problem is it just has too many "rules"

one of my favorite things in the past year is the comic saga because it simply doesnt follow any convention its fantasy and sci fi thrown into one big insane blender and it works!

[img/]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dzVOMnfynsU/T77LWHRrQXI/AAAAAAAABPM/MPtsnhqVEY8/s1600/sagapanel1.jpg[/img]

I think somtimes rules and convetions arent always a good thing...I mean why do you think so many people like starwars?

EDIT: and yes...that is a man with a TV for a head

 

[Thaluikhain]

The distinction is a bit vague and arbitrary.

I mean, Star Wars is described as either science fiction or science fantasy. It's got spaceships in it, which makes it scienc-ey (and vice versa, it's not "real" science fiction unless spaceships, it would seem). The force is sorta kinda magic, so that's fantasy.

40k is either science fantasy (magic stuff) or science fiction (magic has a scientific basis, it's all stuff from another reality leaking into ours).

D&D is fantasy (it's got elves and other monsters that magically see in the dark), but used to be more sciencey (they used to be able to see infra-red light, the ones that see best that way have active infra-red, and can easily be seen by elves with have passive infra-red).

...

What do you mean by "organic" though?

My main problem with fantasy is that so many authors try so very hard to be Tolkien. Tolkien was not popular or influential because he desperately wanted to be the same as someone else everyone else was copying.

You've also got people trying desperately hard not to be Tolkien, but they are not-Tolkien in the exact same way.

Another thing that annoys me is when many, many people make up a world full or were-iguanas and talking goldfish or whatever, but then make it horribly patriarchal, because it wouldn't be realistic otherwise.

 

[Zhukov]

Uh... both?

They can both be done incredibly well, and they can both be insipid regurgitations of hideously overused tropes.

I have one major gripe with each genre. Too much fantasy just tries to be Tolkien. Too much sci-fi neglects the fiction in favour of having a wank over the science.

 

[Nickolai77]

I feel with fantasy you have more creative freedom, because you can explain practically anything using magic. On the other hand, with sci-fi there's an obligation to scientifically explain why and how things are the way they are- like how warp drives or artificial gravity works. That's more difficult.

I think space fantasy's like Star Wars brings together the best of both worlds in that you don't have to explain the science so you have more creative freedom. In addition, you can bring in elves and dwarfs and make them aliens, and turn swords into lightsabers and whatnot. I think that's what makes the Star Wars universe so well envisoned really, because it brings together the two genres. It's a shame that space-fantasy's arn't a more distinctive though, because they deserve to be.

 

[Baneat]

Uh... both?

They can both be done incredibly well, and they can both be insipid regurgitations of hideously overused tropes.

Examples of fantasy done incredibly well? Has to be much better than the LoTR

 

[DoPo]

I grew up reading tons of sci-fi, so I'll go with that. I'm just more familiar with it and while I see recycled tropes, themes and plots, in most new things I do like them more than the recycled dragons and elves. Then again, I mostly like urban fantasy and cyberpunk, so...I don't know where those fall.

 

[General Grind]

I grew up reading tons of sci-fi, so I'll go with that. I'm just more familiar with it and while I see recycled tropes, themes and plots, in most new things I do like them more than the recycled dragons and elves. Then again, I mostly like urban fantasy and cyberpunk, so...I don't know where those fall.

Malazan Book of The Fallen by Steven Erikson
The Kingkiller Chronicles by Patrick Rothfuss
The First Law Series + Heroes by Joe Abercrombie
The Mistborn Trilogy + The Way of Kings by Brandon Sanderson

All of these are newer fantasy (after 2000) which tries to move away from Tolkienesque fantasy.

Also, A Song of Ice and Fire by George R.R Martin, but you probably know about that one already.

Edit: As for the OP, I like both genres, but I like it best when the two genres combine into something completely unique like the Hyperion Cantos by Dan Simmons.

 

[The_Lost_King]

I grew up reading tons of sci-fi, so I'll go with that. I'm just more familiar with it and while I see recycled tropes, themes and plots, in most new things I do like them more than the recycled dragons and elves. Then again, I mostly like urban fantasy and cyberpunk, so...I don't know where those fall.

Malazan Book of The Fallen by Steven Erikson
The Kingkiller Chronicles by Patrick Rothfuss
The First Law Series + Heroes by Joe Abercrombie
The Mistborn Trilogy + The Way of Kings by Brandon Sanderson

All of these are newer fantasy (after 2000) which tries to move away from Tolkienesque fantasy.

Also, A Song of Ice and Fire by George R.R Martin, but you probably know about that one already.

Edit: As for the OP, I like both genres, but I like it best when the two genres combine into something completely unique like the Hyperion Cantos by Dan Simmons.

You quoted the wrong person, might want to fix that.

I prefer fantasy. Can't tell you why, I just do.

 

[Shock and Awe]

I tend to prefer Sci-Fi because it usually at least tries to make it believable sounding and I like that kind of thing, it keeps things somewhat grounded. Fantasy has a real bad habit of just going off the deep end from what I've seen. Though I've recently gotten into A Song of Fire and Ice and I absolutely love it because it doesn't do that.

 

[DoPo]

Uh... both?

They can both be done incredibly well, and they can both be insipid regurgitations of hideously overused tropes.

Examples of fantasy done incredibly well? Has to be much better than the LoTR

Malazan Book of The Fallen by Steven Erikson
The Kingkiller Chronicles by Patrick Rothfuss
The First Law Series + Heroes by Joe Abercrombie
The Mistborn Trilogy + The Way of Kings by Brandon Sanderson

All of these are newer fantasy (after 2000) which tries to move away from Tolkienesque fantasy.

Also, A Song of Ice and Fire by George R.R Martin, but you probably know about that one already.

Edit: As for the OP, I like both genres, but I like it best when the two genres combine into something completely unique like the Hyperion Cantos by Dan Simmons.

I think you meant him.

 

[omicron1]

I prefer prehistory/early history fantasy. Think Titan Quest or God of War (or anything set in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, Crete, you name it...)
Vastly underused setting. Much more potential for a sense of awe/exploration in a less-developed world, where anything might be hiding just around the corner, and human civilization is the exception, not the rule.

That aside, I prefer sci fi to medieval fantasy, and all of the above to anything set in or past the Renaissance. Modern-era games can go die in a fire, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Scarim Coral]

I kind of prefer fantasy over sci fi althought I am getting tried of it but in saying so I'm still playing GW2 despite finishing the story while I should spend more time on Mass Effect.

I know for a fact that my brother is the oppersite and he really doesn't fantasy games for some strange reason.

 

[Blow_Pop]

Uh... both?

They can both be done incredibly well, and they can both be insipid regurgitations of hideously overused tropes.

I second this. I tend to read more fantasy(mostly because that's what people buy me so it is what I have more of when I don't go to the library)but I enjoy both fairly equally. Long as it is well written I'll read just about anything really.

 

[wolf thing]

I proffer speculative fiction, which is a way of saying science fiction which is either more scientifically correct or has an idea which is discussed as the main feature of the piece. this different from pulp fiction or science fantasy, if thats what you say, in which the technology is there to make the action interesting, like in star wars or flash gorden. i think its a good idea to separate these different types of science fiction because they both focus on different thing and people often clash them which means we'll get 2001 a space odassy and transformer put into same bucket. it also help when thing like this come up were science fiction and fantasy are compared, which bothers me because they are totally different, there are similarity between pulp fiction and fantasy but good speculative fiction is totally different.

 

[Yopaz]

Fantasy for me. Favoruite series of all time is The Wheel of Time series. Now that the series is over it feels like a part of my life has disappeared. It's like I've lost an old friend.

That said I also love The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, though that could probably be defined as a fantasy series since there's not even a sliver of science in it...

 

[Vigormortis]

I read a fair bit of both, but I feel that science fiction is the "better" genre.

Not that the science fiction stories are inherently better, in a narrative sense. What I mean is, science fiction allows for a much larger variety of stories, settings, themes, and characters. A greater level of unique creativity, if you will. Not to mention many of the sci-fi classics have, in one way or another, influenced the course of history and technology.

I could be biased, however. Though I read classic fantasy stories like that of Tolkien and others growing up, I was always more enamored with the works of authors like Issac Asimov, Michael Crichton, Jules Verne, Mary Shelley, H.G. Wells, Carl Sagan, Vernor Vinge, Philip K. Dick, Arthur C. Clarke, Robert C. O'Brien, and many, many others.

 

[Realitycrash]

Uh... both?

They can both be done incredibly well, and they can both be insipid regurgitations of hideously overused tropes.

Examples of fantasy done incredibly well? Has to be much better than the LoTR

Neil Gaimain's Sandman.
Neil Gaiman's American God's
The entire fucking Dresden Files.
Harry Potter.

(What? You didn't specify that URBAN Fantasy didn't count. So yes, there's loads).

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Honestly, it is a tie. I love both equally!