Sci-fi: the speed of light problem

Sci-fi can vary from almost fantasy with lasers instead of magic to being very realistic indeed. However, the speed of light does pose a problem.

Essentially, travelling that fast is reckoned impossible because it's the maximum speed anything can travel. (And that’s disregarding the dilation of time, as described by Einstein and sung about by Brian May in ’39).

This matters because the galaxy is so widely spread out that travelling almost anywhere beyond the solar system requires a very fast system of travel. Voyager was launched in 1977, and only reached the edge of the solar system last year (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13704153).

So, there are a few options:

Ignore science: this is the simplest method of resolving the problem. Just use warp speed or hyperspace or whatever you want to call it, and don’t bother explaining how it works. The only potential problem is if you’re trying to make your sci-fi story as realistic (scientifically) as possible.

Alien technology: pretty similar to the above, but with a crucial difference. A system of gates (as used in the very enjoyable Stargate SG-1 series), for example, enables travel over huge distances but does not allow the human race to have a similar tech level in other areas. So, you get the travel options but can keep everything else more realistic and lower tech.

Don’t go that far: keeping the human race confined to the solar system, and perhaps one or two of the nearest stars reached by sleeper ships, can work perfectly well. Mining on other planets and moons (or the asteroid belt), wars over territory and so forth doesn’t really need a far flung empire.

The actual decision made doesn’t especially matter provided it doesn’t jar with the rest of the universe the writer’s created. Maximum realism of 27^th century firearms coupled with a magic box with Light Speed Engine written on it would rather break immersion.

I tend not to read as much sci-fi as fantasy. The last books I read were Toby Frost’s excellent Space Captain Smith series. This is probably because I prefer history to science, and find the general fantasy worlds (medieval England, Rome, Byzantium, Middle-Earth etc) more to my taste. That said, I think I might try hunting down some new sci-fi.

Thaddeus

Slightly light blogging

I’ve been working hard (well, working) on redrafting the old book I’ll be submitting to Angry Robot. In fact, I’ve not read anything except for a few pages of Gibbon for quite a while. So, I’ve not really had time to think of fantastically exciting things of which to blog.

Anyway, I’ve almost finished the text stuff, and then there’s just (ha) the synopsis and cover letter to do, I think.

I should be done with the donkey work of the submission in the next few days, and hopefully I’ll have some more stuff to read and maybe even interesting things to blog then.

Thaddeus

PS I’m never sure whether or not this sort of thing comes across as taking the piss. Writing ‘I have no time to write anything’ is a bit like turning up for work, proclaiming I’m too ill to work, and then leaving.

Dragon Age 3 musings

Whilst I really like RPGs, there haven’t been that many I’ve either bought or wanted to buy recently. Final Fantasy seems to have decided maximum linearity is what people want, and I’m somewhat loathe to join even a good series (Mass Effect) halfway through, because the first game wasn’t released for the PS3.

That leaves the Elder Scrolls and Dragon Age.

I loved Origins, despite its flaws (notably freezing, although, as per Skyrim, this can be greatly reduced by turning off auto-save). The cast of characters were strong, their little interactions were enjoyable, the Warden’s relationship with each of them could develop in differing ways and I liked the combat. Dragon Age’s lore and world are also big plus points for me. The various nations of Tevinter, Orlais, Antiva and so on sound fascinating, and the Qunari make a nice addition to the classic troika of men, elves and dwarves.

However, Dragon Age 2 was a missed opportunity. The Qunari broke tradition and actually worked better with some retconning, but the party members and segmented plot didn’t hang together as well as in Origins. Worst of all, the game was clearly rushed, forcing the makers to copy and paste dungeons repeatedly.

Others have been less charitable than me, and rate the game as poor or mediocre.

So, what do we know of Dragon Age 3? Not much, but that in itself is a good thing. I think I’m right in saying that if it had been released as quickly as 2 then it would already be out by now. I’m hoping this means the team behind it will be given the time necessary to do justice to Origins and improve on 2.

The game will be influenced by Skyrim’s open world approach, according to Bioware’s CEO Ray Muzyka. This would mark a huge, and welcome, departure from DA2, which occurred in one city, and Origins, which had a wider geographical range but still operated in discrete locations.

It also seems that the game will take place over a much wider area than Origins, which occurred in the somewhat English Ferelden. So, we might get to visit multiple countries, and I hope we get to see Par Vollen and Tevinter, amongst other places.

Then there’s the party. Individual members of DA2 were fine, I liked Isabela and most of the others (except Anders, the miserable bugger) but they didn’t really seem to be a team. In Origins the party was excellent and the strong driving force of the Archdemon added a sense of purpose and unity. It’s likely that the two significant characters we see at the end of DA2 will be back, and I certainly hope they join the party. It’d also be nice to get a female Qunari on board. I think a Mabari could work, but it would need to be more developed than the one that featured in Origins.

In terms of plot, we know the bare bones already. Chantry falling to bits, mages and templars at war and it’s highly probably the protagonist will be tasked with unifying the chantry once more, or at least ending the war. As long as the execution is fine, it should work well.

I don’t buy that many games, but when I do I like to play them almost to death (I’m still playing Skyrim) and I hope that DA3 can cut out the freezing and return to a more Origins style of storytelling.

Thaddeus

Does the ratings system actually work?

The use of a ratings system whereby readers can offer reviews and give a headline rating for a book is widely used, and a really useful way of sorting wheat from chaff and getting a quick idea of how good a book is.

Or is it?

I remember being mildly amused that the excellent book Wild Swans, a personal history of three generations of Chinese women in the wider context of the Cultural Revolution, got almost entirely 5 or 1 star ratings. People who hated it considered it to be a tale of falsehood for political reasons.

This is less likely to happen with fantasy, but because there are sometimes religious or political allegories (my personal favourite being Narnia, where Jesus stars as a talking magic lion) this could occur.

I never review a book here if I don’t finish it. The reason is simply that a book can start brilliantly and nosedive, or start shakily but become fantastic (The Lies of Locke Lamora is excellent but the start is a little slow). Sometimes reviewers don’t actually review the whole book, but only the start.

There’s also the occasional person who is clearly mad as a bicycle, and finds something incredibly strange or insignificant to get cross about. Happily, this doesn’t happen often.

A more fantasy-specific problem is that there are a huge number of subgenres. If someone buys a book expecting Abercrombie-style grim realism and find it’s more sword and sorcery they might give it a lot rating, even if it’s an excellent sword and sorcery yarn. That’s more a case of the buyer not doing a little research beforehand (maybe downloading a sample if possible), expecting butter, getting cheese and complaining because it’s impossible to spread.

The real problem is one of taste. No two people have quite the same view. I know a chap who shares my enjoyment of Mr. Abercrombie’s books, but I was staggered when he revealed he thought Mr. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire was tedious.

I think there’s also a trend bias. Right now plucky farmhands are out, gritty woe is in. So, this means it’s probably easier to get a better set of reviews of you write like Mr. Abercrombie and less so if you have a more old-fashioned black and white view of morality. This would also reflect the approach that agents/publishers often take when selecting and rejecting potential books and authors.

The ability to download samples (or read them online) is a real boon, as a prospective reader can get a feel for an author or book without forking out only to discover a dud.

I think reviews work pretty well as a guide, but they should be taken for what they are: a collection of subjective opinions which may or may not tally with your own view. In fantasy, where there’s huge variance in terms of magic prevalence, grittiness, modern or archaic politics and dialogue and so on it’s well worth reading a few reviews and finding out whether people believe the writer is a bit feeble, or whether they dislike the book because they wanted dragons and witches and ended up with political intrigue.

Thaddeus