The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum

The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release => Starbase Café => Topic started by: Zeep-Eeep on July 28, 2006, 05:58:35 pm



Title: Games
Post by: Zeep-Eeep on July 28, 2006, 05:58:35 pm
There is an article on Slashdot today which debated which is more
popular; fantacy or sci-fi on-line role playing games. It
seems fantacy wins in popularity.

Having played a number of both, I tend to agree. I
think there are two reasons for this:
1. Sci-fi tends to lend itself to more solo game play.
Especially when piloting ships. Fantacy is focued more on
group efforts, generally.
2. Sci-fi seems to focus more on upgrading equipment, where fantacy
is geared more toward self-improvement.

Any thoughts on this? I realize this is a dangerous view-point
in a sci-fi forum. So, please, be gentle.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Deus Siddis on July 28, 2006, 06:25:55 pm
It could just be that SciFi RPG games have not yet reached their full potential. I mean, it is much harder to make an interesting space game, because you have space exploration, planetary exploration, internal ship/station exploration, which are somewhat needed to give the feeling that your are really in this other universe. Fantasy is more like people with bows, swords, and magic walking around on foot in a small land, with a little special transportation here and there (horses, wyveryns, ships, portals, etc.) I think there are less requirements for a Fantasy RPG to feel "complete."

Also, I think SciFi people maybe like a little more action in their games, where as the fantasy crowd is more content with stats and such. Simply because starfighters, ground vehicles, and even guns are better simulated with a joystick, controller or keyboard, whereas a sword, bow, or wand seems like it would require you to use more than just your fingers.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Draxas on July 28, 2006, 06:31:37 pm
You know, there would be a total reversal of this opinion if World of Starcraft were released. Seriously.

The reason the results are what they are is WoW. The Sci-fi MMO scene is pathetic, currently, but that's what's popular right now. Since the way-more-awesome single player sci-fi games are being overlooked, fantasy is winning the popularity contest.

Of course, DS makes a good point about needing less to make a fantasy game feel complete. It's a lot less work to churn out a title based on a fantasy setting, which explains why there are so many more of them as well.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Arne on July 28, 2006, 10:23:15 pm
When it comes to books, I think I like Hard Sci-Fi better. I don't like the flimsy problem solving seen in some 'regular' SciFi and Fantasy. I'm okay with ...uh very soft SciFi and Fantasy though, like StarWars before the midichlorians entered the room, or DragonWarrior which is quite silly in a way that makes you not question the plausability of it.

When it comes to games I tend to prefer SciFi, much of the Fantasy stuff is dialog or level grinding. My favourite RTS and FPS games are SciFi. Generally I dislike Fantasy games cuz they're based on 'for the sake of game balance -exception rules', if you're class X you can't wear item Y "cuz we say so". SciFi seem to be more about emergent complexity dictating what is preferable to do in the game, rather than forced rules (atleast this goes for the games I like).

Oh, this thread was about mmorpgs? Nm. then, I don't play those, for reasons stated above.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Neonlare on July 29, 2006, 04:32:23 pm
I prefer Sci-Fi's over Fantasy most of the time due to the "mystery" of the genre. With Fantasy if you fight a demon well, it's a demon, it's fantasy, there's nothing to it because you know it's a figment of imagination.

Where as Science Fiction is a different ball-game. Theories put forward and so on feel sinister and forboding, in a Fantasy game you can tell what's coming from around the corner, with a Sci-Fi you dare not go around it in fear of what is around the corner, because you just don't know. Great examples would be Judge Dread, an apocalyptic world which is like a hell-hole, or Ur-Quan Masters, who knows what's happening outside of our little planet, and are we going to end up being dragged into it?

So Fantasy is Improvement and Fancy, Sci-Fi is Survival and Nightmares.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Defender on July 29, 2006, 05:09:01 pm
What about Sci-Fi/Fantasy? A mix of both beasts. I'm a big fan of both. some days I feel like space and space ships, some days it's swords, dragons and spells. I try not to limit myself too much, I have a big imagination that needs to roam. ;D


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Neonlare on July 29, 2006, 05:14:36 pm
What about Sci-Fi/Fantasy? A mix of both beasts. I'm a big fan of both. some days I feel like space and space ships, some days it's swords, dragons and spells. I try not to limit myself too much, I have a big imagination that needs to roam. ;D

That's the same with me but Science Fiction seems to echo more about exploration than action, Fantasy seems vice-versa...


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Anthony on July 29, 2006, 08:31:08 pm
In a way, that statement is true, because in Dungeons & Dragons based games, it's about levelling up the characters, and learning skills, and in Sci-Fi, it's fighting aliens and having the right technology.

But it gets more complicated now that games are combining elements from other genres.  Like the final fantasy games, it's getting more futuristic, and still maintaining that fantasy feel with magic powers, etc...

In the end, it's all about the creator's preferences, and trends in the video game industry...


Title: Re: Games
Post by: 1ceph on July 30, 2006, 09:17:49 pm
Quote
So Fantasy is Improvement and Fancy, Sci-Fi is Survival and Nightmares.
Agreed. Sci-Fi is generally a lot more mysterious. Probably because Sci-Fi is wider and have almost no restrictions for storyline/plot while Fantasy have certain bounds...
As for me, I like both of them.
BtW, Fantasy with Sci-Fi elements is not a bad thing too...


Title: Re: Games
Post by: NamelessPlayer on July 30, 2006, 11:17:18 pm
I have a slight preference towards sci-fi, but that's because I love technology. (Of course, one could bring up the quote "Any sufficently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." in response to this.)

That said, I think there are way too many fantasy MMOGs, and not enough sci-fi MMOGs. Hell, a mix of the two wouldn't be bad, either-imagine if Microsoft chose to use the Shadowrun license on a MMORPG with FPS-style combat instead of yet another team-based shooter. (It's a cyberpunk fantasy setting, if you don't understand how it relates.) I'd probably cough up plenty of money to play that game if they didn't botch it.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Neonlare on July 30, 2006, 11:32:08 pm
Another thing that sways me to Science Fiction stuff is the customization of different parts and the history of races and so on, Fantasy games are less so, it's usually a war between good and evil. With Sci-Fi, there's lots of conspiracy things going on, you never know which side is actually the "good" one...


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Data on July 31, 2006, 08:14:02 pm
Its true about good and evil in fantasy and sci-fi. It was, to me, very stupid when they tried to make undead seem good in Warcraft 'cause you can't have something without a soul or even a mind be good. And its like that in most fantasy; you have good side (usually human, elf, dwarf etc.) and evil side (orcks, undead, demons etc.) while in most Sci-Fi you have interstellar states and none of them are completely good or evil. Also, I think Sci-Fi is less popular because regular people can more easily relate to people traveling by land and using medieval thinkgs and magic then people traveling by hyperspace and quasispace using complexe formulas which are basiclly technobabble. I do prefer Sci-Fi myself because I'm interested in science and that sorta stuff.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Death 999 on August 02, 2006, 07:55:22 pm
Even with Sci-Fi there is room for personal improvement. In the game Missions of the Reliant, you could not upgrade your ship, (though you could buy better ammunition), but you COULD train your crew. It gave it a much more personal feel.

Many Sci-Fi games are missing this personal touch; it's a major loss.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Deus Siddis on August 03, 2006, 05:01:45 pm
Quote
In the game Missions of the Reliant, you could not upgrade your ship, (though you could buy better ammunition), but you COULD train your crew.

In Starflight you could upgrade your ship AND train your crew, as well as name them and pick their species (yes, I said species, not space dudes with pointy ears or bumpy heads.) And yet the game still focused on large scale space AND planetary exploration, not leveling up or running a delivery service like in other games. Combat was not dice rolling like in other RPGs. And all this was back in '85, same as Elite, making this easily the golden year (birthdate?) of space rpgs.


Quote
Many Sci-Fi games are missing this personal touch; it's a major loss.

They are missing a lot more than just that.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Lance_Vader on August 03, 2006, 08:25:01 pm
Fantasy is also the traditional setting for RPGs ever since D&D.  Science fiction is in second place, there, but it's not a terribly close second.

Sci-fi, however, has DOMINATED over fantasy on television and in movies.  Sci-fi games are not happening right now, but I'm sure something good will come along soon.


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Death 999 on August 08, 2006, 06:00:01 pm
Are you sure? It seems to me that HIGH fantasy is lacking on TV nowadays, but magic or supernatural effects appearing in a modern setting is somewhat more common on TV than science fiction. On Broadcast TV, at least (i.e. discounting the Sci-Fi channel)


Title: Re: Games
Post by: Lance_Vader on August 08, 2006, 11:20:40 pm
That's true, but those instances are usually right on the line between sci-fi and fantasy, so I haven't been counting them.