Hard Science vs Soft Science

Elidia · March 08, 2006, 04:37:52 PM

Quote from: ColonelHardissonAs I got done typing the above, I suddenly realized how stupid I was for EVEN NOTICING SUCH SHIT.

I try to deconstruct Stargate sometimes, and get couch pillows thrown at me. Those fuckers HURT when they have a little velocity behind them! :mad: It's not my fault that the writers don't realize things like "middle class women gossip about childbearing, as a sporting event, and a dropped birth rate would get noticed."

Basara_549 · March 08, 2006, 06:33:33 PM

Heh... I pointed that out myself when a friend showed me that episode....

What I can't stand are the types that think that things like Gundam, Evangelion or Macross are hard SF, in the anime fandom, when they are at best Soft SF (and Eva borders on fantasy).

cranberry · March 08, 2006, 11:01:36 PM

Quote from: CyberzombieNow *that* would have been an interesting episode. And it would have gotten her out of those stupid outfits. Not a bad looking woman; she was just put in costumes that made her *look* horrible...

You didn't like the cheerleader outfit?

Dr_Avalanche · March 10, 2006, 08:39:28 AM

Quote from: CyberzombieWell, when I found out that cyberpunk was created by a Luddite (William Gibson) and actually read his books, that reduced my interest in the genre quite a bit. Not to mention when the Japanese economy tanked and a huge pillar of the genre become just plain silly.

I must say, I had almost exactly the opposite reaction when I understood how little Gibson understood about technology. It affirmed my belief that his novels really weren't about what the future will look like technologically, but societally. Ironically, his ignorant predictions about future technology turned into self-fulfilling prophecy, while his vision about what the future will look like in terms of social and economical structures is still way off...

Still good novels. One of my favorite authors.

flyingmice · March 22, 2006, 08:47:29 AM

One of the most frequent criticisms of Transhuman Space is that most GMs and players "don't know what to do," which confirms conventional wisdom that Hard SF is essentially 'difficult' to 'uplayable.' What is necessary for a Hard SF game to be playable, in your opinion?

-mice

Xavier Lang · March 22, 2006, 09:53:22 AM

Quote from: flyingmiceOne of the most frequent criticisms of Transhuman Space is that most GMs and players "don't know what to do," which confirms conventional wisdom that Hard SF is essentially 'difficult' to 'uplayable.' What is necessary for a Hard SF game to be playable, in your opinion?

-mice

That surprises me. I see the setting as full of potentical for political, social, economic, and spiritual intrigue. Is it the lack of clearly defined "good" guys and "bad" guys? Or something else?

flyingmice · March 22, 2006, 10:03:37 AM

Quote from: Xavier LangThat surprises me. I see the setting as full of potentical for political, social, economic, and spiritual intrigue. Is it the lack of clearly defined "good" guys and "bad" guys? Or something else?

That was not my assessment, but that of many people posting on various other fora. It seems the general consensus. Personally, I have no problem with THS - or rather my problems with THS have nothing to do with the playability of the setting, merely strong disagreements about the speed of the proposed technological changes and such minor matters - so I can't answer your question.

-mice

Nicephorus · March 22, 2006, 10:13:17 AM

Quote from: flyingmiceThat was not my assessment, but that of many people posting on various other fora. It seems the general consensus.

I've never read THS and didn't have plans to pick it up because almost the only thing I'd heard about it was that it was unplayable or that it would be hard to make a game out of it.

I have no idea whether that's true but it really does have that reputation.

flyingmice · March 22, 2006, 11:29:21 AM

Quote from: NicephorusI've never read THS and didn't have plans to pick it up because almost the only thing I'd heard about it was that it was unplayable or that it would be hard to make a game out of it.

I have no idea whether that's true but it really does have that reputation.

That's exactly what I was talking about. Thanks, Nicephorus!

-mice

Zachary The First · March 22, 2006, 12:17:35 PM

Quote from: NicephorusI've never read THS and didn't have plans to pick it up because almost the only thing I'd heard about it was that it was unplayable or that it would be hard to make a game out of it.

I have no idea whether that's true but it really does have that reputation.

Same here. It's definitely got that rep, deserved or not. I started out with several editions of Traveller, bumped to Alternity, and am right now really enjoying Cold Space (btw, look for a review next week, clash!), all which have varying degrees of scientific "hardness". But THS has never broken into the rotation of any of my gaming groups. I'd say the split has been about 50% were just going with the flow, 30% had heard the "bad rep" bit, and 20% didn't like the setting or science.

Funny, with all these folks I've known objecting to it, I don't think a single one ever actually claimed to have played it. :confused: A stigma like that must stick pretty hard.

flyingmice · March 22, 2006, 12:49:01 PM

Quote from: Zachary The FirstSame here. It's definitely got that rep, deserved or not. I started out with several editions of Traveller, bumped to Alternity, and am right now really enjoying Cold Space (btw, look for a review next week, clash!), all which have varying degrees of scientific "hardness". But THS has never broken into the rotation of any of my gaming groups. I'd say the split has been about 50% were just going with the flow, 30% had heard the "bad rep" bit, and 20% didn't like the setting or science.

Funny, with all these folks I've known objecting to it, I don't think a single one ever actually claimed to have played it. :confused: A stigma like that must stick pretty hard.

Hi Zachary!

That's one of the things I'm trying to find out. Where did this stigma come from? What is it about THS that earned such a rep? Is it inherent in the Hardness of the setting? Is it that the prospective players are not used to Hard SF and thus find few of the standard SF tropes to work with? What can other hard SF games do to avoid this sort of rep?

Personally, I find THS fascinating, in spite of my quibbles. It certainly is very hard SF. David Pulver did a magnificent job writing it.

I'm also very glad you're enjoying CS, and really looking forward to your review, Zachary!

-mice

Zachary The First · March 22, 2006, 01:03:05 PM

Quote from: flyingmiceHi Zachary!

That's one of the things I'm trying to find out. Where did this stigma come from? What is it about THS that earned such a rep? Is it inherent in the Hardness of the setting? Is it that the prospective players are not used to Hard SF and thus find few of the standard SF tropes to work with? What can other hard SF games do to avoid this sort of rep?

Personally, I find THS fascinating, in spite of my quibbles. It certainly is very hard SF. David Pulver did a magnificent job writing it.

I'm also very glad you're enjoying CS, and really looking forward to your review, Zachary!

-mice

It might be. I mean, many gamers are of a Star Trek: TNG, Star Wars, or Babylon 5 sort of generation. Perhaps they're looking for familiar handholds and aren't finding them. I think "soft-science" shows and movies have had a bit easier time finding wider audiences, and perhaps folks are just tending to gravitate towards what they know.

But, in brief, I don't know. I'd love to hear any other theories, contentions, angles that are out there.

flyingmice · March 22, 2006, 01:30:10 PM

Quote from: Zachary The FirstIt might be. I mean, many gamers are of a Star Trek: TNG, Star Wars, or Babylon 5 sort of generation. Perhaps they're looking for familiar handholds and aren't finding them. I think "soft-science" shows and movies have had a bit easier time finding wider audiences, and perhaps folks are just tending to gravitate towards what they know.

But, in brief, I don't know. I'd love to hear any other theories, contentions, angles that are out there.

That sounds very plausible. I'm from a (much) earlier generation. My dad was a huge SF fan, and an engineer to boot. I was weaned on Analog and Galaxy, and Heinlein was near unto a god. SF for me has always been primarily a literary phenomenon. Old Trek was an abberation, which we would religiously watch in prime time from the family table - not because it was great SF, but because it was SF and on TV! A most amazing freak of nature, like the dog who could sing. Thus I'm working from a very different frame of reference than most gamers, the vast majority of whom are far younger than I. This means I am working blind in some respects, and I need to find out what went wrong with such a brilliant piece of work.

-mice

Varaj · March 22, 2006, 05:22:05 PM

I think much of the problem with coming up with good campaigns is the game itself doesn't do a great job of limiting the options or at least provide very specific directions.
I think it is needed for a couple of reasons. It isn't your typical RPG were you are going to go out and kill people and take their stuff. This alone is going to give people stumps. Also there are many options for types of campaigns but most of them are ones that generally take more work to make them fun. The main book doesn't have any campaign hints or ideas to speak of and leaving that out in an open ended world that is also outside of the norm of what people general play was a mistake.

flyingmice · March 23, 2006, 09:39:02 AM

Quote from: VarajI think much of the problem with coming up with good campaigns is the game itself doesn't do a great job of limiting the options or at least provide very specific directions.
I think it is needed for a couple of reasons. It isn't your typical RPG were you are going to go out and kill people and take their stuff. This alone is going to give people stumps. Also there are many options for types of campaigns but most of them are ones that generally take more work to make them fun. The main book doesn't have any campaign hints or ideas to speak of and leaving that out in an open ended world that is also outside of the norm of what people general play was a mistake.

Thanks, Varaj. That makes a lot of sense. For someone used to the specific sub-genre, you have a background is stories and novels that will feed you ideas, but like roleplaying, Hard SF is a niche of a niche, and the intersection of those two sets would be rather small. Your ideas are good - provide adventure seeds, spark ideas, show examples of what can be done. Thanks!

-mice