Just wait to you to you get too God Emperor. Oohh boy!
I bloody love that book and I know quite a few people that do too. The people that don’t know about it I explained to it as Game of Thrones with a heavy dose of soft and hard science fiction and deeply philosophical= trippy as balls.
@Cataphrak Let it be known sir, that to much of the CoG community like myself, you’re the most masterful presence in CS writing. I know I for one look at your Infinity series games as stylistically something I could only hope to perhaps emulate someday. Stylistically, I find myself not able to simplify enough- elegantly enough, for such a grand scope. It would be a pleasure to both chase after grandmaster writings like Dune, or personal favorite authors (such as, for me, Patrick Rothfuss, Brent Weeks, and Glen Cook)… and, at the same time, to be fair, I’m chasing after -you- in the realm of CS writing, and what I think as a style best fits writing these games.
Writing really is an art form. I’m not down on myself- but I genuinely do think you’ve mastered the craft somewhat better than I have at this point.
I never understood why Dune was seen as a hard read - thanks to everyone for explaining that.
God Emperor? No, it’s Heretics and Chapterhouse where things really get unintelligible.
I got into the first chapter and lost the book on the train and never bother get another one. Yeah that intro is weird man.
I like them with logic and a sense of fun together. Is that weird?
In sci fi, I have two main requirements for the setting - is the science plausible, and is the culture thoughtful? Science should be described well enough to sell it, but details don’t have to be explained.
The average person doesn’t known that much about why a microwave or computer works, but there are reasonable theories of electricity, radiation, and programming underlying them. I’ll often look into speculative technology or the basic principles of why inventions work, brainstorm from there, and explain just enough not to run into inaccuracies with the details of their execution. I enjoy making a fantastically useful future invention seem banal, commonplace - people will complain about its limitations, dream about better versions, or completely ignore its existence.
Future societies are where sci fi really has a chance to shine. Too many authors, I feel, emulate the technophile, Star Trek aesthetic, severely utopian/dystopian extremes embodied by Hollywood or classic genre starters like Asimov or Bradbury. While these can work (they certainly did for those two) some of the most interesting stories are about unexpected developments in the lives of normal humans, who happen to live awhile from now. The best example I can point to of this style is Cordwainer Smith, who wrote about the Rediscovery of Man.
It’s useful to avoid writing of culture as monolithic; while it’s reasonable to posit that the “world culture” of Earth will continue to break down national boundaries, the most plausible future is one where different groups (the identifiers of which can be based on any number of characteristics) continue to hold different values.
As for fantasy, I tend to enjoy either urban fantasy (mythological tropes or creatures blended into the modern world), or classic fairy tales taken in an different direction. Enduring legends do so because they are psychologically valid, while new interpretations add an allowance for individual creativity and added perspectives on traditional tropes.
Giving humanity a single ruling culture and having nonhumans (like aliens) that are essentially just reskinned humans just seems odd anyway.
Speaking of which: pretending everything would have exactly the same inner workings as humans might actually be worse but giving us a nature documentary about the races before we actually get to the story isn’t that great either.
I’m personally a big fan of Dark Souls’ world building. I think it would be good if you could just give the player/reader just barely enough background so they don’t feel completely lost and the general mood of your world (gloomy, tense, happy, etc.) Then once the game/book start, you could let them discover the world by themselves and form their own opinion on what they’re seeing. So I guess what I’m trying to say is, be vague but not too vague that the player/reader feel lost.
Thank you for the replies! I suppose my story is more soft sci-fi, so there’s a big focus on characters/cultures than technology, though that aspect is still persistent in both realms. I think what I’m struggling on is how to present historic lore to players who choose their ancestors within adding on ten pages of information. Codex is fine, but as some of you pointed out, they’re not for everyone. I think framing is the best option; having information presented to you as events relating to the lore occur, or from different characters.
Super late, but… I honestly feel that the most important bit about “realism and logical reasoning” in science fiction and fantasy, is that it ought to be internally consistent. Figure out the rules of the world of the story, and stick to them.
And hey, I like codexes, but framing in super useful. I’m weird in that I like reading the histories of the worlds I read about and play in 
Being an uneducated heathen I know little about hard or soft sci-fi.
When I do read, I want the world to seem real, without endless pages of explanations that do not add to the story. Give me a little tit bit of science fact and let my imagination fill in the rest. It is the same with place names, throw me a few weird things and I am happy, but if you need to include a dictionary of meanings at the back of the book (Dune) then it is probably a little too much.
Please note that I loved reading Dune and the reference is not meant to be derogatory.
You had no clue how ready I was to get to head biting. I love Dune too!!!
You know, this may be completely off topic, but i think an Orwellian sci-fi setting where there is an engineered ‘eternal war’ between various human and alien political and/ or religious factions, and your character is essentially rescued from their indoctrination by a customizeable (new word) agent who works for an organization that tirelessly works to break the centuries old cycle of deliberately maintained ignorance and hatred.
You know, light stuff.
Feel free to have your opinions on this, but I actually think that settings and all the history of the city matter little to the story. No one really likes someone blabbing about the city for 10 pages, unless it’s a necessity to fully enjoy the story. Sure, a good explanation or two can help, but excessive knowledge about unimportant stuff that won’t come off later? I think that’s something readers usually forget. Readers want to see what happens to the characters, and at the end of the day, readers will mostly remember not the places, but the actors.
Settings and history matter just as character is. However, being matter doesn’t mean must be explained. All the worldbuilding is important to the writer, and while not really to the readers, it will give you bonus points if someone asks the questions.
Not this reader. Lothlorien stuck with me much more than Galadriel; Gormenghast Castle, more than Titus; the Lily Sea at the End of the World more than King Caspian. Of course I love characters too, but a well-written place is a joy unto itself, not just a backdrop.
That doesn’t mean every place is worth blabbing on about for 10 pages. As I’ve said elsewhere, avid worldbuilders deserve the question, “Is your world really half as interesting as you think it is?” But by the same token, I think it’s helpful for authors to ask themselves, “Are your characters really half as interesting as you think they are?”
You, Paul Wang/@Cataphrak and @Goshman are some my favorite world builder on this site. You know how to take real world places influences and social nuances both good and bad and weave it into your world building so it affects the narrative. So things like social class Social Capital status wealth and gender faith government etc that matters.
I’ve read novels where the worlds aren’t very well developed. Even if irritating immersion-breaking setting inconsistencies don’t regularly crop up (and they almost always do) because the author never gave much thought to world-building, these worlds don’t feel as vivid or as lived-in. There is a big difference between developing a well thought-out and internally consistent setting, and bogging down the reader with information that isn’t relevant to the story.
I feel sad and guilty of this. I find out that I many things are cuttable in my work, and the ones I’ve did actually make my WiP read better.