Our little discussion in Star Trek started me thinking (cue groaning); what are your guys'es favorite Sci Fi universes?
This is really, really obvious for me; Dune, by several miles. The first book was an obsession of mine. Probably had a big impact on my interest in the Mid-East, Comparative Religion, tough poor people and whatnot.
Alpha Centauri fucking ruled. So did Fallout.
Anyone else?
Sci-fi I'd go with Star Wars from Knights of the Old Republic through the victory Celebration on Endor. All the crap after that is awful. I also dig the Warhammer 40k/Horus Heresy stuff. It's fun in a pulp-ish way. Babylon 5 was also quite good and nicely developed as a universe with a distinct history. I really like the settings where there's background enough to truly feel immersed within them. This tends to limit one off novels and movies as well as games.
I've never actually read Dune, but everyone here seems to be a fan more or less, so maybe I'll track it down sometime.
Quote from: Judas Iscariot on May 12, 2009, 12:35:04 AM
Sci-fi I'd go with Star Wars from Knights of the Old Republic through the victory Celebration on Endor. All the crap after that is awful.
Agreed, though as univeerse with background detail and race interaction I much prefer the B5 universe.
Stargate. The USAF with a fleet of intergalactic warships is awesome.
If we're talking games: probably a tie between Sun & Storm and Warhammer 40K.
If we're talking books, I'd agree with Dune and add Wolfe's Book of the New Sun.
Cinema/TV probably provide the least interesting entries, though the original Alien/Aliens universe is an interesting mess from the glimpses of it we get. I can't think of any TV Sci-Fi that I really enjoyed because of the universe it created, though as in all things Farscape and B5 are a cut above the rest.
Quote from: Syt on May 12, 2009, 12:37:51 AM
Agreed, though as univeerse with background detail and race interaction I much prefer the B5 universe.
I'm actually a fan of the Clone Wars era probably the most. It seems the most interesting to me, as there is no black and white struggle, just a whole bunch of grey area conflicts as opposed to the Rebellion v. The Empire or Jedi v. Sith.
I just watched Firefly and it was cool as shit. Why was it canceled after one season? :(
Jaron and I used to play this MUD called Planets: Quest for Galactic Domination though. There wasn't really a "backstory" to it or anything (unless you count "pwn everyone" to be a backstory), but it will always be what I look for in a sci-fi game. EVE came kinda close to what I was looking for, but having to mine for a month to afford some semi-decent shit sucked.
Star Wars will always have a special place in my heart, though. :wub:
Quote from: Fireblade on May 12, 2009, 12:55:42 AM
Star Wars will always have a special place in my heart, though. :wub:
Me too, I was 7 when the first movie came out; no matter how badly they fucked the series up I will always love the Star Wars universe.
the universe of Renegade Legion from games
Farscape from cinema/tv
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2009, 01:04:38 AM
Quote from: Fireblade on May 12, 2009, 12:55:42 AM
Star Wars will always have a special place in my heart, though. :wub:
Me too, I was 7 when the first movie came out; no matter how badly they fucked the series up I will always love the Star Wars universe.
There are only 3 Star Wars movies.
Actually, the worst problem with Star Wars is that George Lucas created it. :bleeding:
Quote from: Fireblade on May 12, 2009, 01:06:44 AM
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2009, 01:04:38 AM
Quote from: Fireblade on May 12, 2009, 12:55:42 AM
Star Wars will always have a special place in my heart, though. :wub:
Me too, I was 7 when the first movie came out; no matter how badly they fucked the series up I will always love the Star Wars universe.
There are only 3 Star Wars movies.
And the last one of those was borderline.
ewoks = (https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi195.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz133%2Fsbr32%2Fsmilies%2Fbleedingeye.gif&hash=e2d56f911c982eefa0ef27317c1e8837762620af)
Has anyone read any of the Saga of Recluce books by L.E. Modesitt? I have read a large handful and the world he created is pretty interesting, the books themselves tend to be a bit repetitive but the world is pretty unique.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saga_of_Recluce
Favorite universes are Warhammer 40k and Uplift.
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2009, 01:10:21 AM
Quote from: Fireblade on May 12, 2009, 01:06:44 AM
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2009, 01:04:38 AM
Quote from: Fireblade on May 12, 2009, 12:55:42 AM
Star Wars will always have a special place in my heart, though. :wub:
Me too, I was 7 when the first movie came out; no matter how badly they fucked the series up I will always love the Star Wars universe.
There are only 3 Star Wars movies.
And the last one of those was borderline.
ewoks = (https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi195.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz133%2Fsbr32%2Fsmilies%2Fbleedingeye.gif&hash=e2d56f911c982eefa0ef27317c1e8837762620af)
Has anyone read any of the Saga of Recluce books by L.E. Modesitt? I have read a large handful and the world he created is pretty interesting, the books themselves tend to be a bit repetitive but the world is pretty unique.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saga_of_Recluce
LOL yeah. I liked the world, but it got a bit boring with the Upteenth character going through the motions of the Mormon work ethics. :P
Anyway, I'm gonna go Dune for the best sci fi world.
Since you included fantasy, A Song of Ice and Fire, easily.
Another vote for Dune and maybe also Star Wars for nostalgic reasons
Star Trek - Good universe which develops over time. But has the real liability of having every alien race represent a simple idea. You can pretty much define each race within one sentence, though there are some exceptions. 6/10
Dune - Starts out well with a balanced dynamic between apparently self interested groups. Has a solid background for each of the parties. It boils down to ever more complicated and intricate plots by more and more potent plots against a more and more powerful atreides good guy. Has alot of potential that isn't exploited. 7/10
Star Wars - Not really well constructed. The whole thing seems to happen in a small (very small) aristocratic class with a clear good/evil dynamic. Can't really see it as real. It has interesting characters and races (wookies et.al.) though. 3/10
Babylon 5 - Fantastic Universe with realistic behaviour. Manages to deal with most of the logical problems with space universes. Limits itself to only two time travels. Exploitation of it's potential only limited by bad storytelling and network executives. The Universe is the biggest reason I love the show. 9/10
Stargåte - Good universe. Most importantly the Universe helps the story. Within it's fantastical assumptions it works. Works for the story, but not very interesting. 6/10
Firefly - Good universe with lots of potential. I'm really sorry this one got cancelled. When I think about all the leaps and jumps in Serenity that need good filling up I really want this to have been done "right". 7/10
Farscape - Good universe with a great background story. Everybody seems to be some degree of evil and good. 8/10
Westeros - Fabulous. Nobody is Evil, not even Cercei, Nobody is Good, not even Jon Snow. 10/10
Asimov's Foundation - Good universe, and has the bonus of being completely at the service of the story and it's message. 7/10
Wheel of Time world - Good universe, but has the problem of invincible men of prophecy and almost invincible soldiers. Jordan falls into the trap of fitting the story for the universe rather than the other way round. 6/10
I have to think about it longer, but provisionally
Fantasy - The Lord of the Rings. I don't think I need to explain why.
SF - Asimov's Foundations (and Megatraveller, which is close to being Asimov's Galactic Empire with aliens)
Jack Vance, especially the Demon Princes.
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 03:03:17 AM
Jordan falls into the trap of fitting the story for the universe rather than the other way round. 6/10
It's been a while since I've read any of those books, so won't comment on that. But I don't see the virtue of "fitting the universe around the story." Readers don't like it when a book with a realistic setting does unrealistic things to further the plot. Likewise, fantastic settings should have a set of rules and some consistency.
Put me down for Asimov's Foundation as well.
Frontier Elite- One of the few instances of a somewhat realisitic sci-fi universe I've seen.
Quote from: Faeelin on May 12, 2009, 12:39:31 AM
Stargate. The USAF with a fleet of intergalactic warships is awesome.
Ageed!
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on May 12, 2009, 04:50:29 AM
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 03:03:17 AM
Jordan falls into the trap of fitting the story for the universe rather than the other way round. 6/10
It's been a while since I've read any of those books, so won't comment on that. But I don't see the virtue of "fitting the universe around the story." Readers don't like it when a book with a realistic setting does unrealistic things to further the plot. Likewise, fantastic settings should have a set of rules and some consistency.
I see the "virtue" being that the purpose of the universe (and all the characters) is to tell the story. I think the reason Jordan never finished the series is that he fell in love with the Universe and focused on it. In a sense he was more interested in placing some action in all parts of the map to give himself a reason to detail the culture and nature of each of those parts rather than progressing the story. I just believe that the setting should help further the story, not the other way round.
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 06:23:14 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on May 12, 2009, 04:50:29 AM
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 03:03:17 AM
Jordan falls into the trap of fitting the story for the universe rather than the other way round. 6/10
It's been a while since I've read any of those books, so won't comment on that. But I don't see the virtue of "fitting the universe around the story." Readers don't like it when a book with a realistic setting does unrealistic things to further the plot. Likewise, fantastic settings should have a set of rules and some consistency.
I see the "virtue" being that the purpose of the universe (and all the characters) is to tell the story. I think the reason Jordan never finished the series is that he fell in love with the Universe and focused on it. In a sense he was more interested in placing some action in all parts of the map to give himself a reason to detail the culture and nature of each of those parts rather than progressing the story. I just believe that the setting should help further the story, not the other way round.
I think Anhk-Morpork successfully esttablished itself as both an incredibly detailed setting on its on right as well as a platform for plots.
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 06:23:14 AM
I see the "virtue" being that the purpose of the universe (and all the characters) is to tell the story. I think the reason Jordan never finished the series is that he fell in love with the Universe and focused on it. In a sense he was more interested in placing some action in all parts of the map to give himself a reason to detail the culture and nature of each of those parts rather than progressing the story. I just believe that the setting should help further the story, not the other way round.
It's one thing to say the author should focus on the plot rather than the setting, it's another to say the setting should be designed around the plot. If the plot is so unrealistic that it requires a contrived setting, it's probably not worth writing.
Viking, I would agree with your evaluations above, but note that Firefly wasn't supposed to be a coherent, logical universe like most of the others you name. It was a setting, not a "universe" per se, and had few fast and firm rules. Thus, if the story needed to have cattle being moved by starship like they had historical been moved by train, you could do it even if it made no sense in any larger context.
It was a fun show and a fun setting, but there was no "there" there. I certainly don't feel deprived by the lack of any further stories in that 'verse.
A universesto add for consideration:
H.B. Piper's Terro-Human Future History. Built around the idea that history repeats itself, the series has fun for both history and SF fans.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on May 12, 2009, 06:50:24 AM
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 06:23:14 AM
I see the "virtue" being that the purpose of the universe (and all the characters) is to tell the story. I think the reason Jordan never finished the series is that he fell in love with the Universe and focused on it. In a sense he was more interested in placing some action in all parts of the map to give himself a reason to detail the culture and nature of each of those parts rather than progressing the story. I just believe that the setting should help further the story, not the other way round.
It's one thing to say the author should focus on the plot rather than the setting, it's another to say the setting should be designed around the plot. If the plot is so unrealistic that it requires a contrived setting, it's probably not worth writing.
so you basically consider all of sci-fi and fantasy "not worth writing" ? or have I misunderstood you?
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2009, 01:10:21 AM
Quote from: Fireblade on May 12, 2009, 01:06:44 AM
There are only 3 Star Wars movies.
And the last one of those was borderline.
ewoks = (https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi195.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz133%2Fsbr32%2Fsmilies%2Fbleedingeye.gif&hash=e2d56f911c982eefa0ef27317c1e8837762620af)
Quit being such a faggot.
Hard to say. My moods always change. I always liked Known Space to one degree or another. Foundation is neat.
Battletech, succession wars, pre-clan bullshit
Black Company. At least the North. Screw that shit in Taglios.
The Dread Empire
Pournelle's CoDominium/Empire of Man
Traveller. pre virus and New Era
Starfire, before David Weber fucked with it.
Urth of the New Sun.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 07:34:35 AM
Battletech, succession wars, pre-clan bullshit
The Succession Wars were great, the Clan Wars were alright, the Dark Ages retarded.
QuoteTraveller. pre virus and New Era
Yeah, that was a wacky change. Fucking Dulinor.
Books: Song of Ice and Fire (George RR Martin), Rama. Dune, and probably others I can't think of.
Movies/TV: Stargate SG1 is a favorite. Star Trek though I've become tired of them, Babylon 5 which I got into late, Dune, Star Wars though a bit cartoonish I like it over all.
Quote from: grumbler on May 12, 2009, 07:09:02 AM
A universesto add for consideration:
H.B. Piper's Terro-Human Future History. Built around the idea that history repeats itself, the series has fun for both history and SF fans.
:thumbsup:
I always loved Piper, and the effort to show that his T-F Future History was indeed coherent should have made this work better appreciated.
Gormenghast. :D
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 07:21:48 AM
so you basically consider all of sci-fi and fantasy "not worth writing" ? or have I misunderstood you?
You misunderstood.
I'm slightly surprised that Spellus isn't a fan of Turtledove's Videssos, since it is Byzantium/Persia/Armenia with magic.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 09:06:40 AM
I'm slightly surprised that Spellus isn't a fan of Turtledove's Videssos, since it is Byzantium/Persia/Armenia with magic.
Probably not even he could get through all 5 books (and that doesn't include however many books were in the later several series set in other time frames).
The whole problem with the Videssos 'verse is that, literally, "goddidit." Given the actual existence of an omnipotent god and an omnipotent devil, the meaningless actions of a few mortals becomes uninteresting.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 09:06:40 AM
I'm slightly surprised that Spellus isn't a fan of Turtledove's Videssos, since it is Byzantium/Persia/Armenia with magic.
I'm more surprised, even, that no one mentioned Gor yet.
Quote from: Syt on May 12, 2009, 09:28:56 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 09:06:40 AM
I'm slightly surprised that Spellus isn't a fan of Turtledove's Videssos, since it is Byzantium/Persia/Armenia with magic.
I'm more surprised, even, that no one mentioned Gor yet.
It slipped my mind. :blush:
Quote from: Syt on May 12, 2009, 09:28:56 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 09:06:40 AM
I'm slightly surprised that Spellus isn't a fan of Turtledove's Videssos, since it is Byzantium/Persia/Armenia with magic.
I'm more surprised, even, that no one mentioned Gor yet.
:bleeding:
Edit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4996410.stm
Edit2:There are an estimated 25,000 Goreans worldwide.
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 12, 2009, 09:28:56 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 09:06:40 AM
I'm slightly surprised that Spellus isn't a fan of Turtledove's Videssos, since it is Byzantium/Persia/Armenia with magic.
I'm more surprised, even, that no one mentioned Gor yet.
:bleeding:
Edit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4996410.stm
:lol:
Quote from: grumbler on May 12, 2009, 07:09:02 AM
Viking, I would agree with your evaluations above, but note that Firefly wasn't supposed to be a coherent, logical universe like most of the others you name. It was a setting, not a "universe" per se, and had few fast and firm rules. Thus, if the story needed to have cattle being moved by starship like they had historical been moved by train, you could do it even if it made no sense in any larger context.
It was a fun show and a fun setting, but there was no "there" there. I certainly don't feel deprived by the lack of any further stories in that 'verse.
A universesto add for consideration:
H.B. Piper's Terro-Human Future History. Built around the idea that history repeats itself, the series has fun for both history and SF fans.
I'd agree on Firefly.
It was quite a shitty, very nonsencial universe. But a awesome, awesome series.
Quote from: Neil on May 12, 2009, 07:31:20 AM
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2009, 01:10:21 AM
Quote from: Fireblade on May 12, 2009, 01:06:44 AM
There are only 3 Star Wars movies.
And the last one of those was borderline.
ewoks = (https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi195.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz133%2Fsbr32%2Fsmilies%2Fbleedingeye.gif&hash=e2d56f911c982eefa0ef27317c1e8837762620af)
Quit being such a faggot.
I'm a faggot for not likeing ewoks? :huh:
Quote from: Viking on May 12, 2009, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 12, 2009, 09:28:56 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 09:06:40 AM
I'm slightly surprised that Spellus isn't a fan of Turtledove's Videssos, since it is Byzantium/Persia/Armenia with magic.
I'm more surprised, even, that no one mentioned Gor yet.
:bleeding:
Edit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4996410.stm
Edit2:There are an estimated 25,000 Goreans worldwide.
HOTT
Haven't read a lot of SF and Fantasy, especially not in the last 15-20 years. Anyway...
Some universes I like:
LotR: sentimental reasons mainly.
Warhammer 40k: a triumph of corporate creativity. Great subtlety, especially considering that it is a commercial game setting for kids.
Quote from: Scipio on May 12, 2009, 07:46:35 AM
Urth of the New Sun.
Oh good, someone else here
has read those books. :thumbsup:
And yeah, in my original post I completely forgot Asimov's Foundation, which certainly belongs on the list.
Quote from: vinraith on May 12, 2009, 11:51:37 AM
Oh good, someone else here has read those books. :thumbsup:
And yeah, in my original post I completely forgot Asimov's Foundation, which certainly belongs on the list.
I don't get the foundation love. They were cute, sure, but they were also a bit... I dunno. Maybe it's just the way they're dated, to me. "Oh, this is my fission powered garbage can. And behold the triumph of Foundation miniaturization, a pocket calculator!"
I think the bigger problem is my enjoyment of the first three books was ruined by the stuff he wrote later, in his grand scheme to tie all his stories together.
Aasimov could write astonishingly well, though, and showed something that is now passe in most scifi, optimism about the future. The Stars, Like Dust, is a bit silly at times, but it's very clearly of a time when people (or at least white male scifi authors) felt optimistic about the future.
Quote from: grumbler on May 12, 2009, 09:21:22 AM
The whole problem with the Videssos 'verse is that, literally, "goddidit." Given the actual existence of an omnipotent god and an omnipotent devil, the meaningless actions of a few mortals becomes uninteresting.
Doesn't this ruin most fantasy works then?
Even Tolkien, in LOTR, talks about some sort of invisible hand guiding things so righteousness prevails.
Middle Earth, though its trite now, as it has lost a lot of mystique.
... Westeros (damn you FatMan)
Tigana (a one shot, but a good one). Kaye is pretty good at creating "alternatives." As he would create a new world every book, but all based on some period of real history, his worlds seemed to make enough sense without him having to spend a lot of time on it.
the alt NA in Piper's "Lord Kalvan". I loved the politics around the gunpowder controlling church.
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2009, 11:31:30 AM
I'm a faggot for not likeing ewoks? :huh:
Yes. Trying to be too cool for school only results in failure and faggotry.
I like the various multiverses in both Marvel & DC comics. as far as movies go Trek-verse probably. though I like the Star Wars universe also. (much more than most of the movies.... so much potential) also Firefly is a nice and well defined considering the dearth of material. B5-verse is also very cool.
Westeros fails since it happens to be a bland industrial city in central Sweden.
Quote from: Neil on May 12, 2009, 12:14:53 PM
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2009, 11:31:30 AM
I'm a faggot for not likeing ewoks? :huh:
Yes. Trying to be too cool for school only results in failure and faggotry.
While the ewok hate is has grown to a kind of frantic nerd rage reserved for people that care too damn much about those movies to begin with, it's not unreasonable to mourn the original, darker plot elements of that third movie. Han sacrificing himself to destroy the Death Star, for example, always struck me as a poetic way to go out (and a way to avoid hundreds of crappy novels about him, for that matter).
Quote from: The Brain on May 12, 2009, 12:19:02 PM
Westeros fails since it happens to be a bland industrial city in central Sweden.
I know Belgium is fiction, but I didn't think Västerås was fictional as well?
Quote from: Faeelin on May 12, 2009, 11:58:47 AM
I don't get the foundation love. They were cute, sure, but they were also a bit... I dunno. Maybe it's just the way they're dated, to me. "Oh, this is my fission powered garbage can. And behold the triumph of Foundation miniaturization, a pocket calculator!"
The originals suffered from this, but also from the fact that the only memorable character in them was The Mule, and he was memorable solely because Asimov made him a freak.
QuoteI think the bigger problem is my enjoyment of the first three books was ruined by the stuff he wrote later, in his grand scheme to tie all his stories together.
Aasimov could write astonishingly well, though, and showed something that is now passe in most scifi, optimism about the future. The Stars, Like Dust, is a bit silly at times, but it's very clearly of a time when people (or at least white male scifi authors) felt optimistic about the future.
The later books definitely lacked even the limited appeal of the first books. Asimov was like Niven, I think: he could create great concepts for stories, but was a mediocre writer at best so most of these great story ideas became mediocre books.
Quote from: vinraith on May 12, 2009, 12:23:36 PM
While the ewok hate is has grown to a kind of frantic nerd rage reserved for people that care too damn much about those movies to begin with, it's not unreasonable to mourn the original, darker plot elements of that third movie. Han sacrificing himself to destroy the Death Star, for example, always struck me as a poetic way to go out (and a way to avoid hundreds of crappy novels about him, for that matter).
I don't have any problem with a happy ending.
The ewoks taught us an invaluable lesson about racism, and so are just fine.
Quote from: Faeelin on May 12, 2009, 12:01:10 PM
Doesn't this ruin most fantasy works then?
Even Tolkien, in LOTR, talks about some sort of invisible hand guiding things so righteousness prevails.
In LOTR, the "supernatural" forces acting for good have little ability other than to subtly effect weather and the like. In The legion series, the good guys triumph when the devil literally drags his minion (the main bad guy) into hell, in the middle of the climactic battle.
Quote from: Neil on May 12, 2009, 12:39:45 PM
The ewoks taught us an invaluable lesson about racism, and so are just fine.
That thud you just heard is all your cred from the past 7 years crashing around your ears.
Quote from: grumbler on May 12, 2009, 12:46:49 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 12, 2009, 12:39:45 PM
The ewoks taught us an invaluable lesson about racism, and so are just fine.
That thud you just heard is all your cred from the past 7 years crashing around your ears.
You cannot lose that which you never had. It is the power of the troll.
Quote from: grumbler on May 12, 2009, 12:39:01 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 12, 2009, 11:58:47 AM
I don't get the foundation love. They were cute, sure, but they were also a bit... I dunno. Maybe it's just the way they're dated, to me. "Oh, this is my fission powered garbage can. And behold the triumph of Foundation miniaturization, a pocket calculator!"
The originals suffered from this, but also from the fact that the only memorable character in them was The Mule, and he was memorable solely because Asimov made him a freak.
Well, a lot of the main characters in Foundation suffered from the same traits that most sci-fi protagonists of the period had: That clever, scientific and enlightened men who kept their cool in any situation and used reason coupled with advanced scientific understanding to solve their problems. That said, it's hard to say that Hari Seldon and Salvor Hardin aren't memorable.
I mourn for the idealism of those days, and for the magic that was implied by the word 'atomics'.
QuoteAsimov was like Niven, I think: he could create great concepts for stories, but was a mediocre writer at best so most of these great story ideas became mediocre books.
Still, some of their individual works stand out as rather well done. The novels Foundation and Ringworld are both rather good, true classics of the genre and period.
Quote from: grumbler on May 12, 2009, 12:39:01 PM
the only memorable character in them was The Mule, and he was memorable solely because Asimov made him a freak.
:mad: Hari Seldon was memorable. As was that chick whose name I forget... oh wait :Embarrass:
Also, Daneel, but Daneel is in everything Asimov does so doesn't really "count" as a memorable Foundation-specific character.
Quote from: Tyr on May 12, 2009, 10:09:59 AM
I'd agree on Firefly.
It was quite a shitty, very nonsencial universe. But a awesome, awesome series.
I stopped watching the movie when they had crazy, super violent massed cannibal pseudo-zombies that.....can fly starships and coordinate attacks.
Quote from: grumbler on May 12, 2009, 12:46:49 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 12, 2009, 12:39:45 PM
The ewoks taught us an invaluable lesson about racism, and so are just fine.
That thud you just heard is all your cred from the past 7 years crashing around your ears.
Fuck you. What's the lesson we learn from the ewoks? Always exterminate the indigenous life. Even though they might be inferior and seem helpless, they can be dangerous. If your people had taken those lessons to heart, 9-11 would never have happened.
Your ignorance and refusal to become enlightened makes me sad. Well, insofar as I am capable of feeling sad for others.
Star Wars, from the original three movies, is my favorite. I like how it combines 30s sci-fi serials, Nazi propaganda films, westerns and samurai movies into a workable setting.
The favorite universe I've created is the universe that's as Canadian as possible, given the circumstances:
http://www.fictionpress.com/s/2287566/1/The_Amazing_Adventures_of_Captain_Canada (http://www.fictionpress.com/s/2287566/1/The_Amazing_Adventures_of_Captain_Canada)
I agree with BR about the Marvel Universe; not so much about the DC (though the Savonarola of Earth-3 hates the Marvel Universe and loves the DC one...) One web-comic universe I like is the steam punk universe of Girl Genius:
http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/ (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/)
The best part of that universe is that women who inhabit it seem to be incapable of having less than a c-cup. :)
QuoteNazi propaganda films
The jedi in the 3 prequels are the gestapo of the Republic.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 01:21:33 PM
QuoteNazi propaganda films
The jedi in the 3 prequels are the gestapo of the Republic.
Really? I thought they were more like political commissars.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 01:21:33 PM
QuoteNazi propaganda films
The jedi in the 3 prequels are the gestapo of the Republic.
So, from your persepctive the Jedi are evil? :unsure:
I don't know about you but I think most of us would like to punch Yoda's little fugly face in with a hammer.
Quote from: Savonarola on May 12, 2009, 01:23:03 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2009, 01:21:33 PM
QuoteNazi propaganda films
The jedi in the 3 prequels are the gestapo of the Republic.
So, from your persepctive the Jedi are evil? :unsure:
Yep. A bunch of child rapers in their temple too.
Quote from: The Brain on May 12, 2009, 01:27:37 PM
I don't know about you but I think most of us would like to punch Yoda's little fugly face in with a hammer.
That guy was just such an epic failure in everything he did.
Any of the world's depicted by Ballard. RIP :(
Dune coon.
Discworld. Only commies and Martinus' don't like Discworld. The Kay's setting for the Fiovanar Tapestry was enjoyable too. The Confederation of the Night's Dawn books is also well portrayed.
Planescape.
Alternative England/Faerie of Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on May 12, 2009, 02:55:01 PM
Discworld. Only commies and Martinus' don't like Discworld.
Amen, brother.
As round and flat as a geological pizza, although without the anchovies. :cheers:
Star Trek or The Culture series.
Why is Star Trek a favorite? Its so silly. All the aliens somehow managed to evolve into near-perfect replicas of our own species and can breed with them, almost all alien species are ultra high concept, one note constructions, etc...at this point the best thing the universe has going for it is Retro-Future awesomeness.
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:07:32 PM
Why is Star Trek a favorite? Its so silly. All the aliens somehow managed to evolve into near-perfect replicas of our own species and can breed with them, almost all alien species are ultra high concept, one note constructions, etc...at this point the best thing the universe has going for it is Retro-Future awesomeness.
That was explained in that Next Generation episode where most of the races where engineered by ancient alien superpowers to be based off of similar life.
Quote from: Neil on May 12, 2009, 07:11:42 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:07:32 PM
Why is Star Trek a favorite? Its so silly. All the aliens somehow managed to evolve into near-perfect replicas of our own species and can breed with them, almost all alien species are ultra high concept, one note constructions, etc...at this point the best thing the universe has going for it is Retro-Future awesomeness.
That was explained in that Next Generation episode where most of the races where engineered by ancient alien superpowers to be based off of similar life.
Unless they are all of the same stock there is no way they could possible interbreed. How would sperm survive in a Vulcan's vagina, or vice versa? Let alone being able to, you know, enter the egg, start up, and be carried to term, and then not be retarded or sterile.
Yeah as Neil said, it was explained in TNG but really the interspecies mating was done mainly for storyline and character purposes.
Quee have you watched many episodes of TNG or DS9?
EDIT - Star Trek isn't the only scifi TV show that had interspecies breeding. IIRC Babylon 5 and Farscape both had it too.
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:14:29 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 12, 2009, 07:11:42 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:07:32 PM
Why is Star Trek a favorite? Its so silly. All the aliens somehow managed to evolve into near-perfect replicas of our own species and can breed with them, almost all alien species are ultra high concept, one note constructions, etc...at this point the best thing the universe has going for it is Retro-Future awesomeness.
That was explained in that Next Generation episode where most of the races where engineered by ancient alien superpowers to be based off of similar life.
Unless they are all of the same stock there is no way they could possible interbreed. How would sperm survive in a Vulcan's vagina, or vice versa? Let alone being able to, you know, enter the egg, start up, and be carried to term, and then not be retarded or sterile.
They're all the same, and the alien love gurus are better at engineering species than you are.
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:14:29 PM
[Why is Star Trek a favorite? Its so silly. All the aliens somehow managed to evolve into near-perfect replicas of our own species and can breed with them, almost all alien species are ultra high concept, one note constructions, etc...at this point the best thing the universe has going for it is Retro-Future awesomeness.
Meh. I just thought TNG was fun. DS9 was the best
quality of the Trek series, and actually addressed that interbreeding question when Worf and Jadzia were trying to have a baby.
Anyway, I'm more encyclopedic on Star Trek, but I'm more of a Star Wars nerd at heart. Particularly for the majority of the expanded universe stuff that took place from Rogue Squadron up until Vision of the Future. When they brought the Yuuzhan Vong into it, it killed my interest as quickly as Voyager killed my interest in Trek.
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:07:32 PM
Why is Star Trek a favorite? Its so silly.
I think that's part of its appeal; at least of the original series. Space Hippies, evil Spock with a goatee, Greek gods, robots who explode when exposed to paradoxes and many bizarre parallel earths all coexist and are all entertaining.
as a young person I was enamored of Riverworld, but I got better. Still have a soft spot for To Your Scattered Bodies Go, though.
Oh any of the universes depicted in John Varley's novels, Gene Wolfe, Philip K. Dick's as well. These guys are my "Master Class"
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on May 12, 2009, 09:18:47 PM
as a young person I was enamored of Riverworld, but I got better. Still have a soft spot for To Your Scattered Bodies Go, though.
Oh any of the universes depicted in John Varley's novels, Gene Wolfe, Philip K. Dick's as well. These guys are my "Master Class"
Philip K. Dick was freaking amazing at rich settings. We need more of that kind nowadays; Timothy Zahn also did a spectacular job on his Cobra Trilogy.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on May 12, 2009, 09:18:47 PM
as a young person I was enamored of Riverworld, but I got better. Still have a soft spot for To Your Scattered Bodies Go, though.
It's an interesting concept though. All that old-time stuff is fascinating to me.
Cobra was cool. Varley is good too.
Quote from: Neil on May 12, 2009, 07:11:42 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:07:32 PM
Why is Star Trek a favorite? Its so silly. All the aliens somehow managed to evolve into near-perfect replicas of our own species and can breed with them, almost all alien species are ultra high concept, one note constructions, etc...at this point the best thing the universe has going for it is Retro-Future awesomeness.
That was explained in that Next Generation episode where most of the races where engineered by ancient alien superpowers to be based off of similar life.
I earlier explained this to Spellus in this thread. Pay attention, both of you :mad:
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:14:29 PM
Unless they are all of the same stock there is no way they could possible interbreed. How would sperm survive in a Vulcan's vagina, or vice versa? Let alone being able to, you know, enter the egg, start up, and be carried to term, and then not be retarded or sterile.
You're overthinking this (as usual). Roddenberry and his successors never tried to pretend Star Trek was hard science fiction.
All ST races evolving to be humanoid...Sure, I can believe that. With or without alien intervention. The inter-breeding though is silly even with these ancient aliens.
Quote from: Caliga on May 13, 2009, 07:16:06 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 07:14:29 PM
Unless they are all of the same stock there is no way they could possible interbreed. How would sperm survive in a Vulcan's vagina, or vice versa? Let alone being able to, you know, enter the egg, start up, and be carried to term, and then not be retarded or sterile.
You're overthinking this (as usual). Roddenberry and his successors never tried to pretend Star Trek was hard science fiction.
In fact there is so much pseudo-scientific nonsense on the show that most egregious sort of technobabble is known as Treknobabble. For Languish's amusement here is a Treknobabble Generatonr:
http://maycontainnuts.me.uk/treknobabble/default.htm (http://maycontainnuts.me.uk/treknobabble/default.htm)
QuoteYou just need to enhance the energy degradation of a photon torpedo warhead to generate more power to a chronoton particle leak in the plasma conduits.
QuoteYou need to reverse the flow of graviton particles to the anti-matter injectors to prevent localised harmonic interference to the warp reactor.
QuoteYou just have to recalibrate the transporter beam to initiate a feedback loop in the warp reactor.
Quote from: Tyr on May 13, 2009, 07:28:17 AM
All ST races evolving to be humanoid...Sure, I can believe that. With or without alien intervention. The inter-breeding though is silly even with these ancient aliens.
:frusty:
Quote from: Tyr on May 13, 2009, 07:28:17 AM
All ST races evolving to be humanoid...Sure, I can believe that. With or without alien intervention. The inter-breeding though is silly even with these ancient aliens.
In Star Trek ships can travel 1000 times the speed of light with no relativistic effects on time. Certainly a little alien inter-breeding is no less believable than that.
Quote from: Savonarola on May 13, 2009, 07:42:24 AM
Quote from: Tyr on May 13, 2009, 07:28:17 AM
All ST races evolving to be humanoid...Sure, I can believe that. With or without alien intervention. The inter-breeding though is silly even with these ancient aliens.
In Star Trek ships can travel 1000 times the speed of light with no relativistic effects on time. Certainly a little alien inter-breeding is no less believable than that.
:yes:
Methinks people like Spellus and Josq should not be watching scifi shows at all.
Quote from: Savonarola on May 13, 2009, 07:42:24 AM
Quote from: Tyr on May 13, 2009, 07:28:17 AM
All ST races evolving to be humanoid...Sure, I can believe that. With or without alien intervention. The inter-breeding though is silly even with these ancient aliens.
In Star Trek ships can travel 1000 times the speed of light with no relativistic effects on time. Certainly a little alien inter-breeding is no less believable than that.
Or that military vessel is compose almost entirely of middle age guys.
Quote from: Razgovory on May 13, 2009, 07:45:52 AMOr that military vessel is compose almost entirely of middle age guys.
:huh:
Quote from: Savonarola on May 13, 2009, 07:42:24 AM
In Star Trek ships can travel 1000 times the speed of light with no relativistic effects on time. Certainly a little alien inter-breeding is no less believable than that.
Thats silly too of course but it wasn't the subject at hand.
Quote from: Tyr on May 13, 2009, 08:00:52 AM
Quote from: Savonarola on May 13, 2009, 07:42:24 AM
In Star Trek ships can travel 1000 times the speed of light with no relativistic effects on time. Certainly a little alien inter-breeding is no less believable than that.
Thats silly too of course but it wasn't the subject at hand.
I think you are missing the point by about a light-year. Trek isn't about hard science or believability. notice that outside of DS9 continuity of any sort is near non-existent. Trek offers pop corn space opera in a relatively hopeful and idealistic setting.
Quote from: Savonarola on May 13, 2009, 07:42:24 AM
In Star Trek ships can travel 1000 times the speed of light with no relativistic effects on time. Certainly a little alien inter-breeding is no less believable than that.
Actually, the differences between those two statements are that (a) while we don't know any way in which something can exceed the speed of light, or that exceeding the speed of light can be done without relativistic effects, we cannot say that it is impossible; while (2) one part of the definition of a species is the ability of individuals to produce fertile offspring, so it is not possible for two beings to produce a fertile child without being of the same species.
There is a difference between speculating about the possible and speculating about the impossible.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on May 13, 2009, 09:14:14 AM
I think you are missing the point by about a light-year. Trek isn't about hard science or believability. notice that outside of DS9 continuity of any sort is near non-existent. Trek offers pop corn space opera in a relatively hopeful and idealistic setting.
I think this is important to keep in mind. I, personally, find this kind of "universe" boring, as the writers are never forced by the limits of their universe to be clever and creative (the same comment I would make about the Firefly and BSG universes). That doesn't mean that the shows are boring, of course, just that one doesn't regret the loss of the universe when the show ends.
I enjoyed DS9, for instance, and watched most of the episodes. Nothing in it made me want to watch Voyager, though, and I saw maybe the first half-dozen shows before bailed on it for good.
The B5 universe I miss because there were things there that had not been resolved and that were inherent in the nature of the universe.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on May 13, 2009, 09:14:14 AM
Quote from: Tyr on May 13, 2009, 08:00:52 AM
Quote from: Savonarola on May 13, 2009, 07:42:24 AM
In Star Trek ships can travel 1000 times the speed of light with no relativistic effects on time. Certainly a little alien inter-breeding is no less believable than that.
Thats silly too of course but it wasn't the subject at hand.
I think you are missing the point by about a light-year. Trek isn't about hard science or believability. notice that outside of DS9 continuity of any sort is near non-existent. Trek offers pop corn space opera in a relatively hopeful and idealistic setting.
I know that. Trekies still try to believe otherwise though.
Its rather funny really, TOS was just the American version of Dr.Who. A crazy adventures series with the Federation and all that merely being a framing device. With the latter iterations of Trek though it just balooned into something else...or at least it tried, it still had the early setting to try to salvage/build upon.
Star Trek TOS was never about creating a coherent and believable universe, it was just the thinnest of fictional foils (guys in a spaceship traveling around to, well, discover stuff) for a series of otherwise unconnected sci-fi mini-stories whose charm was first that almost anything could happen and second the relationship between the recurring characters.
Only as it continued did its universe grow some substance, much in the same way that a ship's hull grows barnacles. Naturally this universe lacked coherence and realism - it was always a patchwork. No-one ever sat down a la Tolkien and dreamed up a setting in advance - that all happened later (and of course could never really be a coherent whole).
Firefly and Starcraft's korpulu sector, for the South..IN SPESS factor.
the grim darkness of the 41st millenium was always cute, as well.
I have to agree that Star Trek TOS and TNG were originally not about the universe, but for fun sci-fi stories. Some of them The earlier seasons of both series all raised good moral questions (TNG more so than TOS) - where does life begin? Is it ok to judge strange cultures? How to communicate with races wholly alien to you? TNG even had a good show about terrorism in a surprisingly unbiased show that had parallels to Northern Ireland or Israel (well, not wholly unbiased, Starfleet says in the end, "Screw you, we will not get involved in your petty infighting."). On top of that they offered good drama when they wanted.
That aspect was mostly lost when TOS turned into "culture of earth's past of the week" in season 3 and TNG turned into a soap opera about Family Worf and Data's Pinocchio complex some time during season 5 and 6.
I have to admit the holodeck episodes of TNG and VOY annoyed me quite a bit. Kinda the opposite of the X-Files, where the episodes dealing with the overarching plot annoyed me, and I much preferred the monster-of-the-week episodes.
Quote from: Caliga on May 13, 2009, 10:32:59 AM
I have to admit the holodeck episodes of TNG and VOY annoyed me quite a bit. Kinda the opposite of the X-Files, where the episodes dealing with the overarching plot annoyed me, and I much preferred the monster-of-the-week episodes.
Or in DS9 where they took a break of the Dominion War (or whatever crisis was going on) to pull an Oceans 11 style caper on the holodeck in the Las Vegas casino sim. :lol:
I always wondered if the cast insisted on the holodeck episodes as a tool to help them avoid being typecast. :lol:
Quote from: Queequeg on May 12, 2009, 12:24:16 AM
Our little discussion in Star Trek started me thinking (cue groaning); what are your guys'es favorite Sci Fi universes?
I like real history.
I dig most periods in history.
Aside from that...
Fantasy:
- Middle Earth
- Song of Ice and Fire
Sci-Fi:
- Stargate SG1/Atlantis
- Fallout
- Terminator
- 1633 Ring of Fire
- X-men
- Heroes
- Homeworld
- Wing Commander
- Independece War
- Galactic Civilizations
- Alpha Centaury
Quote from: Caliga on May 13, 2009, 10:36:16 AM
I always wondered if the cast insisted on the holodeck episodes as a tool to help them avoid being typecast. :lol:
Which only worked for Brent Spiner, who's always been a damned good character actor, anyway.
Dwight Schulz... not so much. :contract:
Quote from: Caliga on May 13, 2009, 10:36:16 AM
I always wondered if the cast insisted on the holodeck episodes as a tool to help them avoid being typecast. :lol:
:lol: Never thought of it that way, and you may be right. For myself, I never watched a re-run or DVD episode of a holodeck or Q or Luaxana Troi episode in any incarnation of Trek. Not worth the lifespan spent. YMMV.
I realized I'm not really enamored with any fantasy setting or universe. My nerdom is failing.
Quote from: Caliga on May 13, 2009, 10:36:16 AM
I always wondered if the cast insisted on the holodeck episodes as a tool to help them avoid being typecast. :lol:
I've always thought along those lines too. They're thespian wank episodes that let them show their range.
Quote from: grumbler on May 13, 2009, 08:14:17 PM
Quote from: Caliga on May 13, 2009, 10:36:16 AM
I always wondered if the cast insisted on the holodeck episodes as a tool to help them avoid being typecast. :lol:
:lol: Never thought of it that way, and you may be right. For myself, I never watched a re-run or DVD episode of a holodeck or Q or Luaxana Troi episode in any incarnation of Trek. Not worth the lifespan spent. YMMV.
:yes:
Q episodes = we couldn't think of a clever way to end this sub plotline so... POW, DEUS EX MACHINA :cool:
Lxwana Troi episodes = hi, I'm Gene Roddenberry's wife, and I'm bored. Give me airtime PLZ :)
Quote from: Caliga on May 13, 2009, 08:19:57 PM
:yes:
Q episodes = we couldn't think of a clever way to end this sub plotline so... POW, DEUS EX MACHINA :cool:
Lxwana Troi episodes = hi, I'm Gene Roddenberry's wife, and I'm bored. Give me airtime PLZ :)
:thumbsup:
Lwaxana was good in precisely one episode of TNG and one episode of DS9. Other than that, yeah, she seemed kinda pointless.
Q ... I'm a big John de Lancie fan (it was a shame that Legend tanked), so I've got to give Trek cred for springboarding him, but I absolutely hated Q right from the get-go. I'm amazed TNG made me into such a Trekkie, when they
kicked off the series with an impossibly overpowered character who could only serve deus ex machina roles.
Quote from: Caliga on May 13, 2009, 10:36:16 AM
I always wondered if the cast insisted on the holodeck episodes as a tool to help them avoid being typecast. :lol:
It wouldn't be surprising after seeing what happened to the original cast.
Of course, it didn't help them much.
Quote from: Neil on May 13, 2009, 09:00:41 PM
It wouldn't be surprising after seeing what happened to the original cast.
Of course, it didn't help them much.
See above. It only worked for Brent Spiner and Patrick Stewart, who were already pretty well-established as character actors.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on May 13, 2009, 08:44:11 PM
Lwaxana was good in precisely one episode of TNG and one episode of DS9. Other than that, yeah, she seemed kinda pointless.
Really? What episodes were those? I can't think of a single episode she was in that wasn't bad.
QuoteQ ... I'm a big John de Lancie fan (it was a shame that Legend tanked), so I've got to give Trek cred for springboarding him, but I absolutely hated Q right from the get-go. I'm amazed TNG made me into such a Trekkie, when they kicked off the series with an impossibly overpowered character who could only serve deus ex machina roles.
I enjoyed Q's interaction with the crew in TNG, but his appearances outside TNG were disastrous. de Lancie and Stewart worked well together, but Brooks just didn't have the same chemistry and Janeway was intolerable.
Quote from: Lettow77 on May 13, 2009, 10:20:19 AM
Firefly and Starcraft's korpulu sector, for the South..IN SPESS factor.
the grim darkness of the 41st millenium was always cute, as well.
:lol: Yeah, I figured you'd be all over the whole ex-Confederate theme in Firefly.
I wonder who the Bobby Lee of Firefly was.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on May 13, 2009, 08:44:11 PM
Q ... I'm a big John de Lancie fan (it was a shame that Legend tanked), so I've got to give Trek cred for springboarding him, but I absolutely hated Q right from the get-go. I'm amazed TNG made me into such a Trekkie, when they kicked off the series with an impossibly overpowered character who could only serve deus ex machina roles.
Agree that the actor is great, but TNG, ironically, dealt with the issue of omnipotence extremely well (in probably the best episode of the entire series, the one where they go to the planet that is entirely destroyed except for a little patch kept intact by, well, the "Space Tom Bombadil" and found him overpowered by the grief of being omnipotent). How the same team could do that episode and then, with even a semi-straight face, have "Q" was impossible to understand.
Why hit a home run in a major-league ballpark and then be satisfied with getting singles in T-ball? :huh:
Quote from: Neil on May 13, 2009, 09:16:45 PM
I enjoyed Q's interaction with the crew in TNG, but his appearances outside TNG were disastrous. de Lancie and Stewart worked well together, but Brooks just didn't have the same chemistry and Janeway was intolerable.
Brooks worked in more of a rough-and-tumble format, so yeah, there was no chemistry there. With Janeway, it's a shame that Genevieve Bujold dropped the role at the last minute; I was unhappy from the beginning with Kate Mulgrew as a replacement, and she had almost no chemistry with any other element from Voyager- it took a couple seasons before she even had any with Robert Beltran (Chakotay).
Quote from: DontSayBanana on May 13, 2009, 09:45:05 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 13, 2009, 09:16:45 PM
I enjoyed Q's interaction with the crew in TNG, but his appearances outside TNG were disastrous. de Lancie and Stewart worked well together, but Brooks just didn't have the same chemistry and Janeway was intolerable.
Brooks worked in more of a rough-and-tumble format, so yeah, there was no chemistry there. With Janeway, it's a shame that Genevieve Bujold dropped the role at the last minute; I was unhappy from the beginning with Kate Mulgrew as a replacement, and she had almost no chemistry with any other element from Voyager- it took a couple seasons before she even had any with Robert Beltran (Chakotay).
The terrible writing didn't do her any good either. When she was willing to sacrifice her crew in order to save the life of a holographic masturbatory aid, the character loses a lot of respect.
Quote from: grumbler on May 13, 2009, 09:30:41 PM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on May 13, 2009, 08:44:11 PM
Q ... I'm a big John de Lancie fan (it was a shame that Legend tanked), so I've got to give Trek cred for springboarding him, but I absolutely hated Q right from the get-go. I'm amazed TNG made me into such a Trekkie, when they kicked off the series with an impossibly overpowered character who could only serve deus ex machina roles.
Agree that the actor is great, but TNG, ironically, dealt with the issue of omnipotence extremely well (in probably the best episode of the entire series, the one where they go to the planet that is entirely destroyed except for a little patch kept intact by, well, the "Space Tom Bombadil" and found him overpowered by the grief of being omnipotent). How the same team could do that episode and then, with even a semi-straight face, have "Q" was impossible to understand.
Why hit a home run in a major-league ballpark and then be satisfied with getting singles in T-ball? :huh:
The grief of being omnipotent? Being omnipotent means never having to grieve.