Comment on In Star Wars, what would it mean "to bring balance to The Force?"

• Danquebec@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I found this universe that might be medieval scif-fi:

  Dragonriders of Pern

  source

  • Nighed@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    You beat me here. Great series and one I always use as an example in sci-fi Vs fantasy comparisons.

    source
• Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Mistborn is mediaeval sci-fi

  source

  • BenevolentOne@infosec.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    There are detailed in-world explanations for precisely where the magic comes from, who gets it, why, and how it relates to other physical systems.

    It’s as much sci-fi as warp drives, planet cities, telecommunications aliens, ancient AIs, and space pirates…

    Anyways, enjoy this quote:

    There really is nothing to fear in fantasy unless you are afraid of the freedom of uncertainty. This is why it’s hard for me to imagine that anyone who likes science can dislike fantasy. Both are based so profoundly on the admission of uncertainty, the welcoming acceptance of unanswered questions. Of course the scientist seeks to ask how things are the way they are, not to imagine how they might be otherwise. But are the two operations opposed, or related?

    Ursula K. Le Guin, “It Doesn’t Have To Be the Way It Is,” June 2011; collected in No Time to Spare (2017)

    ursulakleguin.com/…/28-it-doesnt-have-to-be-the-w…

    source
  • Danquebec@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The books follow a series of Allomancers, who are individuals who can consume metal to wield magical powers.

    Doesn’t seem scientific.

    source

    • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It’s more sci-fi than Star Wars

      source
• ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Yes, of course you’re right but even ignoring all the fantasy bits and just focusing on the science and vision of the future it’s mediocre. Let’s take AI as an example. Star Trek has state of AI solidly defined: there’s one truly intelligent android, it’s state of the art and no one really knows how it works so it’s not copied yet but it’s recognized as a person and granted all rights. Computers are intelligent but not real AI. Dune doesn’t have AI and there’s an explanation for it. But Star Wars? C3P0 was build from junk, is completely useless but is kept around for decades as some sort of a pet or companion. At the same time robot soldiers are just weapons. AI is granted personhood or treated as appliance without any sense or logic behind it. Nothing besides robots has any intelligence for some reason. Star Wars used basic concepts from sci-fi but it’s clear the writers didn’t understand any of them.

  source

  • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Yeah, it’s a little hilarious to me that Star Wars occasionally tries to get serious about politics or economics and the droids are just kind of sitting there, completely unexamined in any way.

    You can just spin up a consciousness that has to obey your orders and can be housed inside any kind of machinery and it has no impact on society?

    source
• Danquebec@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I just thought about this now, but any alternate history that explores tech in the Middle-Ages would count as medieval sci-fi. For example, the Eastern Romans building on the Greek techs and experiments and using Greek fire, concentrated mirror beams, calculators and steam engines.

  source
• saimen@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Hmm…

  Image

  source

  • Nibodhika@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Your point being?

    source

    • saimen@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It’s playing in the past and not in the future

      source

      • Nibodhika@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Futuristic relates to technology level, not time period. Otherwise 2001 or Battlestar Galactica would not be futuristic either.

        source