I still don't know what steam-punk isOriginally Posted by The Crystal
You are not the only person in the world who say that FFVII is sci-fi/steampunk, you know.
My point is, using a general assumption is a bad way to support any argument.
But you think that FFVII is "sci-fi", don't you? So, my point still stand.I still don't know what steam-punk is
It's not an assumption. There are people who reagard FFVII as a sci-fi/steampunk game, but not FFVI.My point is, using a general assumption is a bad way to support any argument.
Those people still exist, you being part of them or not.
Wow, it looks like you basically never paid attention during lectures then. Fantasy isn't a sub-genre of Sci-Fi. They sit beside each other in what we call Speculative fiction.Actually, you've got it reversed there, buddy.
Fantasy is actually a sub-genre of Science Fiction. (Yeay for being a Lit major).
Also, mythology and magic are popular themes of Fantasy, they do not completely make up Fantasy. It doesn't need to be medieval with wizards and magic in order for it to be considered Fantasy.
FFVII is not Sci-Fi, it's steampunk, which is a sub-genre of Fantasy and Speculative fiction, not Sci-Fi.
I'm curious to know how steam punk is considered a sub-genre of fantasy rather than sci-fi when the general definition of sci-fi is a fantasy story with a heavy emphasis on science and scientific explanation. Then you have steam punk which is usually shown as a story taking place in a society similar to Industrial Revolution era Europe and America with a heavy emphasis of steam powered machines and technology, generally falling into futuristic notions of technology (steam powered robots for example).Wow, it looks like you basically never paid attention during lectures then. Fantasy isn't a sub-genre of Sci-Fi. They sit beside each other in what we call Speculative fiction.Actually, you've got it reversed there, buddy.
Fantasy is actually a sub-genre of Science Fiction. (Yeay for being a Lit major).
Also, mythology and magic are popular themes of Fantasy, they do not completely make up Fantasy. It doesn't need to be medieval with wizards and magic in order for it to be considered Fantasy.
FFVII is not Sci-Fi, it's steampunk, which is a sub-genre of Fantasy and Speculative fiction, not Sci-Fi.
I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just wondering where the logic comes from that people would consider it a sub-genre of fantasy?
Last edited by Wolf Kanno; 08-31-2008 at 08:45 AM.
True beauty exists in things that last only for a moment.
Current Mood: And it's been a long December and there's reason to believe. Maybe this year will be better than the last. I can't remember all the times I tried to tell myself. To hold on to these moments as they pass...
Talking about this... If we look at the FFVII series as a whole, I think that it can be considered sci-fi.
The world of FFVII was a steampunk world, but only when we had the original game. Now, it seems that the Compilation turned it in a sci-fi world.
I'm curious to know how steam punk is considered a sub-genre of fantasy rather than sci-fi when the general definition of sci-fi is a fantasy story with a heavy emphasis on science and scientific explanation. Then you have steam punk which is usually shown as a story taking place in a society similar to Industrial Revolution era Europe and America with a heavy emphasis of steam powered machines and technology, generally falling into futuristic notions of technology (steam powered robots for example).Wow, it looks like you basically never paid attention during lectures then. Fantasy isn't a sub-genre of Sci-Fi. They sit beside each other in what we call Speculative fiction.Actually, you've got it reversed there, buddy.
Fantasy is actually a sub-genre of Science Fiction. (Yeay for being a Lit major).
Also, mythology and magic are popular themes of Fantasy, they do not completely make up Fantasy. It doesn't need to be medieval with wizards and magic in order for it to be considered Fantasy.
FFVII is not Sci-Fi, it's steampunk, which is a sub-genre of Fantasy and Speculative fiction, not Sci-Fi.
I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just wondering where the logic comes from?
1. I've always understood it the way Ouch! explained it or the way Omecle explained it as Speculative Fiction.
2. From what I understand, steampunk requires more Victorian era science that somehow goes beyond just that (either with the aid of magic, or an "alternative" science progression to what we're used to) and depending on emphasis in the particular story, steampunk could be classified as either. That being said, I'm not quite seeing where the steampunk elements of FFVII come into play.
3. I'm going to go out on a limb and say FFVII is more cyberpunk (wikipedia agrees, though in this case, I'm not saying it's much of an authority).
On the actual idea of the most "Fantasy" of the games, I chose out of which one is the closest to the stereotypical Sword and Sorcery/High Fantasy subgenres as I understand them.
This means I disregarded any of the games I played which I considered more Science Fantasy or "realistic". I ended up choosing FFX for its integration of a "Summoner" into the culture and the way the dead act, the backstory the monsters are given, different races etc. as well as the whole double world concept.
That being said, I think games like FFIII and FFIV have more of a "fantasy" feel to them even though they're weak in developing some of the things FFX did. The thing is, FFIII and FFIV are both based on crystals of power and something like that is a pretty classic fantastical element (I think) not to mention the lesser technological aspect and the sense of "rifts" in the world caused by Good vs. Evil.
*shrug*
((Note, the computer I'm on lacks spell check, please forgive any errors I missed.))
Kes is spot on about the term steampunk originally being used as a type of divergent reality based on a different path of advancement from Victorian era steam technology. However, the term, as far as I understand it, has become an acceptable way to describe any world reliant on a technological system which is an equivalent alternative to our own.
Also, Bastian, I'm not sure what your professors have been telling you, but I've never heard fantasy described as a sub-genre of science fiction. I stand by my previous statement of science fiction being a sub-genre of fantasy or, as both Omecle and Kes have acknowledge, a sub-genre of speculative fiction. I'm sorry, chief, you're the one bass ackwards in this case. Also, I'm also a literature major (with a focus in creative writing), so it seems that we're at a stalemate in that regard.
I just fail to see how science fiction (defined as "a form of fiction that draws imaginatively on scientific knowledge and speculation in its plot, setting, theme, etc.") could possibly be a sub-genre of fantasy (defined as "an imaginative or fanciful work, esp. one dealing with supernatural or unnatural events or characters"). It seems that science fiction carries the definition with more specific requirements. By these definitions, fantasy is clearly the broader genre, and it's impossible for a sub-genre to be broader in scope than its parent genre.
Wow, this topic got derailed pretty badly
True beauty exists in things that last only for a moment.
Current Mood: And it's been a long December and there's reason to believe. Maybe this year will be better than the last. I can't remember all the times I tried to tell myself. To hold on to these moments as they pass...
Hardly. How can we accurately gauge which game best personifies fantasy until we agree on what exactly it means to be a fantasy title. Whether fantasy is science fiction or science fiction is fantasy is very much on topic as it determines the direction of the argument.
You have a point
I've always considered fantasy and science fiction to be different genres though I've always understood sci-fi to be originally a sub-genre of fantasy. I just feel that by today's standards, sci-fi has reached a point of specification and detail in which I feel it could be considered its own genre. Setting, emphasis on technology and super science, as well as the fact that most supernatural phenomenon has a logical and pseudo-scientific explanation for occurring. For instance, despite basically being magic, the ether abilities from the Xenosaga series have a scientific explanation for being plausible, whereas most magic in the FF universe has none.
I think the real problem falls from whether we define fantasy as its general term (which I personally feel is stupid) or whether we should refer to things by their respective sub-genres?
True beauty exists in things that last only for a moment.
Current Mood: And it's been a long December and there's reason to believe. Maybe this year will be better than the last. I can't remember all the times I tried to tell myself. To hold on to these moments as they pass...
I don't think it has become acceptable to apply steampunk to any alternative tech system, actually. Unless it's clearly designed to look like such, Maco (spelling?) based tech is not going to be equivalent to steam based or clockwork (which tends to also fall under steampunk, I understand). In this case, the technological aspect of this game can be considered SF but since it's not "hard" SF (ie. those books that put more thought into the plausibility and timeline of the technology than the actual plot), and in fact has a strong magical element, the subgenre would probably best defined as Science Fantasy.
Also, cyberpunk seems to be another good term for FFVII as that is "Classic cyberpunk characters were marginalized, alienated loners who lived on the edge of society in generally dystopic futures where daily life was impacted by rapid technological change, an ubiquitous datasphere of computerized information, and invasive modification of the human body" (once again, found on Wikipedia, though this is actually sourced). Clearly, this is FFVII, yes?
I've been seeing a lot more people becoming aware of steampunk than cyberpunk and then using the term for both. Prescriptive vs. descriptive grammar blah blah blah, it's still wrong.
Though either way, this throws FFVII outside the "classic" fantasy idea which uses little to no technology. It still is fantasy, though.
Would everyone agree that embodying the idea of fantasy would require both magic and mystic creatures (prefferably dragons)? And then at least some of the following: a medieval-esque setting, other races, a legend/prophesy of somesort, a vs. A Bad Guy / Overloard (instead of "society", government, or a corporation), and limited technology?
I know that that's a pretty much purely Western view of fantasy, but I'm ignorant of any others.
((Still no spell check))
Sci Fi as genre predates Fantasy as a genre. Certainly there were fantastical stories being written (and passed along by word of mouth) since nearly the dawn of time, but what I'm talking about is that its actual definition of a genre in the literary sense didn't being until the early 80s or late 70s where as Science Fiction originated in the 50s.
Anyway, with further research it looks like we're all wrong. Fantasy is no longer considered to be a "subgenre" it's now a "related genre" . . .
Fantasy has been around a lot longer than the 1950's. Tolkien did not create the genre.Sci Fi as genre predates Fantasy as a genre. Certainly there were fantastical stories being written (and passed along by word of mouth) since nearly the dawn of time, but what I'm talking about is that its actual definition of a genre in the literary sense didn't being until the early 80s or late 70s where as Science Fiction originated in the 50s.
I don't think you're getting what I'm saying. As a marketed genre in the bookselling world, the Sci Fi genre predated Fantasy, which only became a recognized genre in the late seventies/early 80s. Fantasy was in the beginning concidered a subgenre of Sci Fi. That has since changed.
Obviously what we would NOW categorize as Fantasy (Lord Dunnsany, L. Frank Baum, Wilde, Hawthorne) predate even the genre of Sci Fi.
While Ouch! is right and the genre really does predate Tolkien as a recognised genre but LoTR, as well as the Chronicals of Narnia were both published in the 1950s.
This means, Bastian, that both Lewis and Tolkien woudl have said they were either writing SciFi or what? Not fantasty, according to your argument.
What about Lewis Carrol? And The Wizard of Oz?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
