Poll: Fantasy or Scifi?

[Dizchu]

(The Lord of the Rings was influenced by the two World Wars)

I think Tolken denied basing his stories off of WW II. I know for a fact he based Frodo and same on officers and their servants in WW I and how the two kept each other going though.

Oh I don't believe that his stories were based on those wars, but he had first-hand experience in combat and saw the rise of the Nazis for himself. I don't doubt that such exposure to these things had a profound influence on his writings, from the camaraderie of the Fellowship to the industrialisation of Isengard. I really don't think that the story of The Lord of the Rings was based on World War II because his book had a simplistic view of good and evil (while he himself was critical of the Allies and anti-German propaganda in WWII). But his fellow soldiers in the trenches? He has openly stated that they influenced characters such as Samwise Gamgee.

 

[Pyrian]

I'm okay with black&white morality. Evil with a capital E is just more fun. But even more, the various grey-vs-gray shades are kind of annoying. Light grey-vs-gray makes you wish they'd just sit down and talk it over, and dark grey-vs-gray makes you wish winter would bloody well arrive already and wipe them all out. Neither one tends to leave me interested in continuing to read the story.

 

[ArcaneGamer]

If I may ask a sort of obvious question:

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/aoz8kgx8pzknypz7z38n.jpg

 

[Ogoid]

While I probably lean a tiny bit more towards the side of fantasy (Lord Dunsany's The Gods of Pegana is my personal Best Thing Ever Written), I like both genres, and read about as much of one as the other.

 

[Cycloptomese]

I like sci-fi in my films and fantasy in my video games. I always preferred fantasy in literature, but I don't really read as much these days.

 

[Fox12]

I absolutely cannot read sci-fi books. I don't know why, but with the exception of Harlan Ellison, I hate them. I love sci-fi movies, comics, and games, but for whatever reason I just can't read them. Maybe I just see the genre as visual in nature.

Anyway, Sci-Fi has Eva, but Fantasy has Berserk and Lord of the Rings. So fantasy for the win. As much as I like sci-fi films, I feel like fantasy touches us somewhere deeper, on a sub-conscious level. It taps into something uniquely human within all of us. Sci-Fi, I've noticed, tends to focus more on concepts then it does on character or humanity, and as a result it comes across as rather "cold."

 

[Breakdown]

I find anything that isn't Princess Bride levels of burbling optimism and glassy good cheer to be immediately categorized as "grimdark" by some of the denizens of this site.

Weirdly enough I thought the Princess Bride book was a bit too grimdark. Wesley seems to resent Buttercup for being a selfish idiot and the fake book editor keeps breaking into the story to take the piss out of his fat kid.

 

[FalloutJack]

There's very little actual "science fiction". Most of it is just future fantasy.

Bah, semantics.

OT: I love both of these equally, and in fact mix them up frequently.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

There's very little actual "science fiction". Most of it is just future fantasy.

Depends on what you're talking about there. Science Fantasy is generally referred to as Soft Science Fiction, which is things like your Flash Gordons, Star Wars, Star Trek(Yeah trek is soft sci-fi at best, it's a bit too meaningless theory to be anything else.),and Commonwealth series.

Then you have Hard Science Fiction which works with a dedication to the limits we know in since, with a little sprinkle of what's theoretically possible. With that you get Honor Harrington, Lost Fleet, along with basically everything done by the likes of Heinlein, Asimov, and to a lesser extent Larry Niven. Basically Hard Sci-Fi uses very little if any theoretical science, grounding it self mostly in what we know and accept to be the limits of what we can do. Sure there might be FTL travel, maybe fusion power, but it's still a lot less "magical technology" when compared to the likes of Star Wars and Star Trek.

Personally I tend towards science fiction rather than fantasy. Too much of fantasy is grimdark and/or Midevil setting but with magic and possibly dragons... Wooo. Then there is the other bulk which is basically Tolkien, or anyone whose basically copied his basic fantasy setting with the elves, dwarves, magic and dragons... Bleh it gets to be a bit of a same thing all the time trudge. I like fantasy in video games because I have agency there, but other wise Sci-Fi is far more stimulating.

Edit: I also love Retro Sci-Fi, sure it's Soft Sci-Fi at the best of times, but it's still awesome. I'm looking at you Fallout series and the likes of Forbidden Planet and the original The Day the Earth Stood Still.

 

[Zontar]

Not a big fan of fantasy. I grew up with Star Trek and Stargate playing on my television, as a result the only time I really like fantasy is when there's a group of contemporary soldiers in the mix.

 

[the December King]

Personally I like fantasy a shade more- loooong time D&D turned-Pathfinder player and DM- but really, anything that has cooler creatures than humans/basically-humans will likely win me over. Star Trek took a while to win me over, for example, as a lot of the featured races on television when I was growing up were either crinkly nosed people, or crinkly headed people, or people with pointy ears. But still, the fantasy and sci-fi don't have to fight- I'll give either a good shot at my attention.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

For movies and games I like Sci-Fi better. I like all the shiny robots and lasers and spaceships and stars and planets and wormholes and stuff and junk.

But for books I have yet to find the Sci-Fi equivalent of Harry Potter or even Game of Thrones, something that really grips me beyond the genre trappings.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

But for books I have yet to find the Sci-Fi equivalent of Harry Potter or even Game of Thrones, something that really grips me beyond the genre trappings.

I'd suggest the Honor Harrington series by David Weber, which starts with On Basilisk Station. The Commonwealth series by Peter F. Hamilton, starting with Pandora's Star. The Known Space series by Larry Niven, starting with Ringworld. Also Jack Campbell's(actually John G. Hemry's) Lost Fleet series starting with The Lost Fleet: Dauntless. Though all of those, the Honoverse especially the main series of Honor Harrington books absolutely destroys both Harry Potter and Game of Thrones, just in terms of characters, character development, political happenings, and events that shake civilization. The Honor Harrington main series will suck you in really deep, because it's more than just wandering around space, things actually happen, you get in close, but get to see the big picture. Really David Weber knocks it out of the park with these books. Though they do tend to follow a formula, it's not entirely predictable.

 

[FPLOON]

Whatever fuck Kingdom Hearts falls under... or Adventure Time... or fucking The Muppets...

Other than that, I like my Scifi like I like my Fantasy... with the phrase "Fuck your logic" without it coming off as fully condescending...

 

[Vigormortis]

Science fiction. Hands down.

Don't get me wrong. I like the occasional sword-and-sorcery fantasy tale. I like Potter, LoTR, etc, but...well...

I'll put it this way:
My book shelf is filled with novels from Asimov, K. Dick, Crichton, Clarke, Shelley, Heinlein, Wells, Vinge, Herbert, etc, etc. The largest grouping of fantasy novels is the Potter collection.

Science fiction just captures my imagination far more than most fantasy tales, notably hard-sci-fi stories. I find more lasting entertainment from pondering the possibilities, moral quandaries, and speculative advances in technology presented in those sorts of stories.

 

[Terminal Blue]

I think fantasy has the persistent problem that it's been overly determined by the influence of Tolkien, and Tolkien actually wasn't a very good fiction writer, in my opinion.

Middle earth isn't really a collection of stories, it's a philological exercise. It's basically a linguist and myth scholar sitting down and making up a fictional mythology just because he could. The point isn't to teach us anything about ourselves, or develop our understanding of the human condition, or even really to make us feel, it's just a very highly educated person using his knowledge of real world mythological structures and languages to entertain himself.

Sadly, it seems to have ended up entertaining a lot of other people as well. Most of those people are inevitably not the calibre of philologists which Tolkien was, but have simply adopted his overarching concern with "world building" over storytelling without really being able to replicate his achievement.

Science fiction can fall prey to an obsession with world building and escapism, but for some reason (in my experience) very seldom actually does, at least not to the degree of fantasy. Science fiction is usually (although not always) trying to be about something which is relevant to us in our world, and I tend to think that's a much stronger basis for storytelling.

 

[skywolfblue]

I've read a lot more good Sci-fi then I have Fantasy.

I love LoTR, but it's somewhat problematic that almost every other fantasy story out there wants to copy it page for page.
The Mistborn trilogy is absolutely awesome, but it stands pretty lonely.

I think there's a lot bigger playing field in Sci-Fi. Everything you can imagine, it's all open. Vs. with fantasy, you have to make it somewhat medieval, so that limits things.

I dislike "hard" Sci-Fi. I've read a lot, there's some good bits, but too often it boils down to "hey! statistics!" or "hey! psychology!". (see Foundation or Honor Harrington for particularly annoying examples of that)

So I adore Space Operas. The Commonwealth and Void Sagas by Peter Hamilton are awesome.

David Brin writes a lot of stuff I love. Uplift Trilogy, Earth, etc etc.

Everyone always focuses on the original Dune so much, but I think the last 4 books in the Dune series are what make the series a masterstroke. In the first book the "hero" saves the world by becoming a prescient. In books 3-6, the "hero"'s son has to become the "villian" for thousands of years to teach the world how to save itself from people like his father.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I think there's a lot bigger playing field in Sci-Fi. Everything you can imagine, it's all open. Vs. with fantasy, you have to make it somewhat medieval, so that limits things.

But you don't. You really don't. Nothing to stop you having a Roman style republic, a Greek style city-state, an Aztec style empire or a Tongan style kingdom. Or anything else.

Just everyone writes the same damn medieval England according to people who've never opened a history book in their lives.

Alternatively, you have urban fantasy, which is about angry women in leather being abused by a werewolf that can't help it.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I think there's a lot bigger playing field in Sci-Fi. Everything you can imagine, it's all open. Vs. with fantasy, you have to make it somewhat medieval, so that limits things.

But you don't. You really don't. Nothing to stop you having a Roman style republic, a Greek style city-state, an Aztec style empire or a Tongan style kingdom. Or anything else.

Just everyone writes the same damn medieval England according to people who've never opened a history book in their lives.

Alternatively, you have urban fantasy, which is about angry women in leather being abused by a werewolf that can't help it.

Well there's always my personal favorite spot for Fantasy, Japanese folklore. Yōkai/Ayakashi are just an amazing subject all to themselves, you can put them in any time period, and basically each one can be unique, or represent a type/species of their kind. The best part is that each Yōkai/Ayakashi is up to interpretation, because each one has various different legends tied to it. They can be evil, they can be paragons of good, they can be tricksters, they can eat people, or simply not care that humans even exist. The sky's the limit. You can have humanity discover them, then the integrate into society, or destroy society, or whatever. Seriously the possibilities are massive, and very under valued.

 

[pookie101]

i like them both but definitely more in favour of sci-fi mainly due to the huge differences in the worlds. from cyberpunk, to time travel, to hard sci-fi, through to space opera and documentaries like star trek ..