Sci-fi/fantasy art design elements you are sick of

[Zaxser]

Originally Posted by Zweit

I thought of a good one: Themed Planets. You know, where the entire surface of a made up planet is one uniform ecosystem (Tatooine the desert planet, Endor the forest moon, Hoth the ice planet, etc.) Star Wars gets away with it, but why should everyone else?

You mean a Planet of the Hats?

[Vermis]

Originally Posted by timpaatkins

And yes the girls (and guys in the "know", IE fashionable males) went absolutely bonkers for them. Manual labour workers and pub scum probably didn't.

Wow. Condescend much?

[Zweit]

Yes, Zaxer, exactly like that. It's easy to forgive Trek though, since the absurdity is part of what makes the series fun. (and who doesn't love the Roman Empire planet, or the Gorn for that matter? )


Putting wings on humanoids bugs me when they're anatomically incorrect or clearly too small to produce any lift. Hawkgirl, for example (the animated version at least) always left me wondering how exactly she was able to hover and zoom around like superman while barely moving her wings.

[Adam Synapse]

Originally Posted by Zweit

Hawkgirl, for example (the animated version at least) always left me wondering how exactly she was able to hover and zoom around like superman while barely moving her wings.

I believe I can answer this. When the original Hawkman was created during the Golden Age of comics his ability to fly was achieved not through his wings, but the harness he wore made out of an alien Nth Metal. In reality his wings were basically a set of stabilizers.
Now as the characters has further developed and evolved, what with the introduction of Hawkgirl a few years later, the characters origins have drastically changed from being a reincarnated Eygption Hawk God to being a member of the alien species, the Thangarians.

In Justice League, the alien origin is used. In the show is it revealed that the mace Sheana/Hawk Girl uses is made of Nth metal, the same material used to explain the original Hawkman's ability to fly so basically when she's hovering she's using her mace to stay aloft much like how Thor uses his hammer in order to fly

In the JU

[Jushra]

It seems like what we need is a new take on how to create. I'd like to cite 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy', as it took sci-fi, but made it new/fun (granted, and flame away, I never read the book(s), just saw the movie). A person can take a simple topic and run with it. The majority of artwork is a reflection on society, sci-fi is known to think forward, and that may have been lost somewhere along the lines, sacrificed to laser-wielding kings and up-armored queens.

I've had my share of stereotype characters (try cybernetic, winged angel type female with one mechanical arm with unreasonable armor). The stereotype/cliche can still be used, but only if it has purpose, as having purpose should really be the key to creating. Some of the strangest looking creatures in nature still have purpose to their oddities, and that should be the approach to creation. Why do they have X? Because it serves purpose Y.

Granted that's a cold approach, but it'll lend itself to purpose and functionality. I have a DVD by Nick Pugh on Originality in Design, and his approach works well, as he does A LOT of thumbnails before he goes after a design. I've started to do the same, as it helps come (albeit mine are smaller, I have about 30 on a 8.5x11 sheet, currently around 600 total).

Thats a bit of an unorganized ramble, and I really didn't contribute to the title of the thread (yet), so here goes:

1) Era/location sci-fi without proper reference.
2) Non-functionality
3) Aliens without purpose, other than to destroy.
4) 'Overthetopedness' - used to hide non-functionality.
5) Cool points winning over depth points (usually happens with character design)

[Nominus Expers]

Hrmm....

I can't say I agree with all the gripes given here, but mine in particular are common ones:

-Unoriginality
-Non-functionality
-Cop-outs (things like whole planets with one kind of terrain or the regurgitation of Giger)
-Idealized male and female forms/ lack of individuality.

I like things believable; I think someone said earlier that the best work in any genre is just a hair past what we know to be real. To that end when I'm designing something in science fiction I never, EVER rely on technological ideas that aren't at least conceivable advances of what I could go and buy right now with sufficient funding. In the case of fantasy, I've done my homework, and I work from my experiences and studies in metaphysics and such.
My characters have a deep reservoir of story depth to be drawn from, I've had a lot of trauma in my life and I've known a small army of people from all walks who've got similar stories. I use them as a base. If I ever run out, I go find more people.

I lack a lot of the technical skill to portray my ideas in professional quality, but then that's why I'm here.

I just wish more people did work to please themselves instead of the paying masses, but such is our time >_>

[CaNiBaLe]

I guess one of the reasons for gals being too sexualized and men being too manly in sci-fi and fantasy genres is exactly that, our fantasy! or at least one of them... but yet not the only one, so that's why I appreciate so much when I see a movie, or comic, or whatever covering other kind of fantasies (not necessarily genre-related) and not only the one that gets sold better in the market....


I'll add some "sick of" which I think haven't been mentioned so far:

- gravity issues in sci-fi. Ok, let's suppose it's so far in the future that they DID discover an artificial gravity engine device somehow, I find that pretty unreal and ambitious,, but still ok, is sci-fi BTW.But what about the coherency about this "device"? it (the device) has to be installed somewhere in the ship right? the bottom of it I assume. But how comes it only affects the pilot/s inside the ship? what about the meteors they enconter? what about when it lands? or the pilot exiting the cockpit and floating, or if the ship gets too close to another ship? do the "devices" interact and make any gravity problems? in most of what I've seen have completely ignored this point.
- Artificial Intelligence going rampant and messing with the ship/facility/world/reality dimension . Don't get me wrong, I love this genre, but lately it's been too much of the same thing.
- Alien invasions. Stop it already!
- Planets with only one city/wheater. I just don't get how can a whole planet only have desert fields, or swamps, or beautiful forests (or even cities), and not have any other kind of weather on it, or geography. What about the poles? the latitude and longitude? and there's always only one (or two) important cities PER planet... why wasting a whole planet for one scenery location? it seems that the Earth is the only planet that can have such variety of locations. Two series that remind me of this right now is Starwars and Dragonball Z, but I know there are many others.


I can't think of any other right now, cheers

[Nominus Expers]

Originally Posted by lady_kito

do the "devices" interact and make any gravity problems? in most of what I've seen have completely ignored this point.

You're quite right. This is addressed in one episode of Joss Whedon's 'Firefly'; and while there have been promising results in the field of artificial gravity, controlling it would be a very serious issue.

Which reminds me of one more thing that bugs me....

HOVERTANK = HOCKEY PUCK. Stop it. If it's armored, and flies, it is an armored aerial weapons platform/gunship.

[princetrickz]

im tired of seeing animal people, them alone just weird me out

[Abacus]

Here's my beef as a world designer:
I dislike contrived fantasy worlds... Maybe it's because I like sociology so much, but I can't stand when a world defies all known social logic. Cultures created out of nothing, they change over time, they should show their age change. Differing aesthics, cultural tensions, etc. I also hate really poorly written histories. Also - class stratification, racial tension, individual agency. It should all be present.

"A Mage Did It" - Darwinism is SO much cooler than some otherplanar being crapping out some static, never changing race with their characteristics set in stone like from some bad eugenics textbooks. D&D did fantasy a world of hurt.

I can't relate to those kinds of settings, they're too plastic. I think the best settings are the ones you can relate to on some level.

Then you have magic systems that are just bells and whistles (literally bells, in one case) and "complex sets of sigils" - it's all just gimicky. You know what Tolkien's magic was? Linguistics. Developed over thousands of years. Badass.

For some reason, I can forgive alot of bad sci fi, but not fantasy. It probably goes back to the history thing. Sci fi all has its roots in the present, using our world as its history in some way. It's easier to see "how."

[Reign]

So, art design elements I'm sick of:

fantasy:

stereotypical visuals of fantasy races, you know, elves all flowery and with bows, fat filthy axe-wielding dwarves, etc. Especially the hairdoos. Why all the fuckin elves have straight long hair, wouldn't they get bored with something so plain? And really, can we finally throw out the unspeakable fashion taboo and see a dwarf without a beard?

Medieval architecture and ornamentation, especially if done without research. There are so many different interesting ways to build a castle or a tavern. Why the hell all I can see is an army of bad copies of one single stereotypical design?

sci fi:

lasers - they were cool when I was 6.

spaceports. There are some really cool alternatives to the old plain improved airport.

OMG decompression! - a visual that Ive seen in far too many movies.

[Demo]

Some on posted the idea of an orc and an elf mixed to gether
i beleive thats what u call mudding up your colors

[Farvus]

Ok. Now when we have list of cliche stuff, lets start making original sci-fi/fantasy art .

[Oden]

Originally Posted by Farvus

Ok. Now when we have list of cliche stuff, lets start making original sci-fi/fantasy art .

will it even look like sci-fi/fantasy art?

[GoatFetus]

Originally Posted by duszesprzedamtanio

And really, can we finally throw out the unspeakable fashion taboo and see a dwarf without a beard?

A dwarf without a beard? HERESY!

[Abacus]

Originally Posted by GoatFetus

A dwarf without a beard? HERESY!

If I'm not mistaken, beardless dwarves are just gnomes.

[GoatFetus]

But they're not dwarves. His comment was talkking about having a dwarf without a beard. And a dwarf without a beard is a gnome. Also gnomes lead more toward magic and technology than dwarves I think.

Also this might sorta be off topic but does anybody know of any good sci-fi/fantasy crossovers?

[J Wilson]

Originally Posted by GoatFetus

And a dwarf without a beard is a gnome. Also gnomes lead more toward magic and technology than dwarves I think.

Unless you throw them into the water and they float, in which case they are a witch. You can test this by seeing if they are heavier than a duck.

[Orunitier]

^ I love that movie.

[Zaxser]

http://xkcd.com/16/

That is all.

[shannanigan]

Originally Posted by GoatFetus

But they're not dwarves. His comment was talkking about having a dwarf without a beard. And a dwarf without a beard is a gnome.

Ummm... I'm not sure you've got that right. I have several little bearded guys in my backyard... and they aren't called Garden "Dwarves", LOL!

I really hate the bimbo warrior thing. I ran across a picture of what I can only assume is a RoboCop wet dream (or would that be oily?). The future female "officer" had heavy armored arms, legs and helmet... but was butt nekkid otherwise. Can someone please explain to me how protecting your extremities will save you from harm when your boobs, guts and woo-ha are hangin' out? Seriously....

Also... I like facial scars. Sorry... I'm lame. LOL!