Not really space-y but I’m obsessed with storm light archives which I think checks some of the boxes you’re talking about. That and everything else cosmere too.
Thank you for the suggestion! I’ve actually read that one and It’s my favorite story from Brandon Sanderson. I loved the characters and the fantasy setting! But yeah… it doesn’t really fit the sci-fi/futuristic world that I was looking for here.
Yeah it def is a lot more fantasy but I also feel the world is so alien seeming it could fit the bill. I love how crustacean heavy the fauna is. But yeah not a traditional sci-fi setting by any means
I’m on Oathbringer right now, and other than the physical size of the books, I don’t really have any complaints. I legit had to switch to Kindle version because the paperback was a pain to hang onto while reading.
The Red Rising Saga. I’m working through book 6 right now as an audiobook and I’m sneaking in a few minutes wherever I can. Definitely expands its scope as the series goes on and while I feel like I’m losing context for some of the new/returning characters at this point, I can follow enough to go along with it. The main character is born into the lowest caste of the society and works to infiltrate the highest caste. It’s a long ride and ebbs and flows from hopelessness to triumph throughout the course of it.
The Combat Codes Saga. Probably closer to science-fantasy then fiction, but an interesting idea about nations using hand-to-hand combat to settle wars, territory, etc…I have only read the first book so far but I enjoyed it a lot.
Alex Benedict - I would encourage this more as a filler or inbetween books series. Binging all of the books can make them feel very samey. The core idea is that all of the books except the first one are told from the perspective of a colleague/assistant/“jill of all trades” woman who works with one of the most famous artifact hunters in the far future. Each book is essentially chasing an archeological mystery of some sort.
The Jubilee Cycle - I found the first book a long time ago at random in one of those discount bookstores and picked it up based on the cover alone. It’s about a future where everything you do costs you money, to the point where political parties debate whether or not autonomic functions like breathing should cost money. The prose is a little dry and the author works as a translator, but I enjoyed the world that he built up as the main character peels back the layers of this society after he gets essentially bankrupted by a mysterious and unknown transaction.
Teixcalaan - Can’t link the series for some reason. The main character is an ambassador to the ruling empire of the galaxy, trying to figure out who killed her predecessor and a conspiracy surrounding him. It felt very dense when I started it but I enjoyed it a lot!
Thanks! All of these stories sound interesting. Red Rising has actually been on my bucket list for a while now, but I’ve been hesitant to try it because the summary sounded like the “stumbling from one flawed decision to the next” thing I was mentioning earlier. Having another person suggest it here, makes me want to try it now.
I think the flaws of the characters decisions either come from gambles that don’t pay off or there are levels and movements they don’t see happening (and sometimes both). Their failures feel…earned if that makes sense? To be fair, it’s been a few years since I started the series so it can mush all together in my head :)
For sure give Red Rising a shot. First book gets going pretty quickly and I like the sci-fi with spaceships, energy weapons/shields, but also some fantasy elements mixed in. I haven’t found a series like it so far.
You might enjoy Larry Niven’s “Known Space” series? It’s less one long story than many, many stories (some more interconnected than others) set in the same universe, but there’s a lot of it. Some stories are darker than others, but overall the tone is optimistic and the characters have their flaws but don’t suffer from the “stumbling from one flawed decision to the next one” problem.
I suspect some of the stories won’t have aged well, given some of them were written over 50 years ago, but Niven plays with a lot of interesting ideas, and I have never encountered a sci-fi author that writes genuinely alien aliens the way he does. There’s also lots of exploring space, futuristic cities, and alien landscapes.
I’ve only read Ringworld from that list (earlier this year). The story did a cool job of introducing the concept of an orbital ring and giving it a sense of scale, plus introducing some other cool concepts/ideas. It also introduced more species and planets and technology that made sense for a big Star Wars-like space opera book series. It was definitely dated as far as how female characters were written, though.
I thought Consider Phlebas did a better job of using a Ring World without it being the whole plot on its own, but I suppose Ringworld had to walk so others could run with it.
Peter F. Hamilton’s books may fit the bill: Futuristic, not hopeless/dystopic, and the main characters tend to make reasonable decisions. Be wrned though that he favours deus ex machina conclusions. Most will suggest Pandora’s Star as a starting point (with good reason, as the Commonwealth Saga is quite expansive), but it does not have to be. I personally read the Night’s Dawn trilogy first. The Salvation trilogy also stands on its own, and for a completely standalone book Great North Road was a good read.
Adrian Tchaikovsky is another wonderful author! the Children of Time and Final Architecture series were quite enjoyable.
Redemption Space (Alastair Reynolds) is another series one that I like to recommend. Closer to The Expanse. House of Suns also is a great read by the same author, as are several of his other stories.
The White Space books by Elizabeth Bear should be on your reading list.
Vorkosigan Saga (Lois McMaster Bujold) is a bit dated but similar to Vatta’s War in the earlier books. Later on the plot tends to be more along the lines of whodunnit mystery… in space.
And let’s not forget another scifi favourite, Iain M. Banks! The Culture series are great of course, but I liked The Algebraist the best.
As a longtime Goodreads user I’m kind of smitten with Hardcover. It offers nearly everything I want: good database, lists, status, searching. Also has responsive developers and a promising roadmap. The one thing it’s missing is, sigh, my friends. hashtag-networkeffect. I’m a paying supporter.
I’ve been a paying supporter of Storygraph since its beta days, but I just don’t really get it. Its social aspects are awful. Maybe it’s great for automated book recommendations, but I have zero interest in that. I just want to see what my friends are reading, have read/reviewed, want to read. And I want to keep track of my books.
Bookwyrms looks promising but each time I try it I run into new stumbling blocks. I will keep playing with it, but for now my efforts are all on Hardcover.
Yeah I love hardcover, I only wish it were a little easier to create & see the private notes I’ve written for a book. They’re tucked away in the review page at the moment. Apart from that it’s great, does everything I need with a nice interface.
While there are really bad things about goodreads, the article/interviews give me a vibe of "boohoo, we want to decide what people like and now they decide it themselves and we don't like that."
Seriously. I'd love an alternative that's anywhere close to basic functionality, but this article is beyond stupid.
Yes, allowing people outside whatever stupid circle to review books and have their reviews considered by other people is a good thing.
Now, a lot of the reviews are trash because a lot of people have stupid opinions on books. Some people just want something to trash and have reviews that reflect that. But that's equally true of "real critics" and their opinions are often just as bad.
Edit: I wonder if I could make a browser extension that recognizes book objects on one of the alternatives and lets you bulk select and make changes that way, replicating the flow or function calls they use now.
It doesn't have lists at all, and while the tag sorting is nice, adding your own tags in bulk to replicate a list is entirely untenable.
I don't consider anything short of Goodread's table of all your books to select and make bulk changes remotely viable, and even that took me well over an hour the first time.
There is definitely an element of that from the article and I agree it’s ridiculous. Some authors and their followers attack those who give poor reviews (because they can’t accept criticism, instead arguing that a ‘professional’ review would give them a much better score) and on the other side you have people reviewing books that aren’t even out. In many cases it’s no longer a place to find genuine reviews, but an unmoderated wild west with crap at both extremes (a bit like Twitter in that respect). It’s a shame because there are plenty of people leaving great reviews, but it’s becoming much harder to find them.
I think sorting out actual quality reviews is harder than people think. Even something like Steam, where the cumulative user rating is relatively respected, surfaces a lot of junk reviews, because people respond to meme-ing and jokey shitposts more than actual high quality reviews. The signals even for a behemoth like Amazon to train an AI on just really aren't amazing. I know fakespot looks for outright fraud Amazon doesn't, but I think part of their success is that they're not the benchmark cheaters are trying to beat. In any case, "genuine" reviews and "quality" reviews aren't the same thing, and the latter is really hard to measure.
I think a more robust set of curation tools would have some value. Flipboard has been mentioned a bit lately for articles, and while I haven't used it, my impression is that the premise is that you subscribe to curated lists of different interests. Something like that for reviewers who catch the eye of curators could be interesting for a federated book platform.
My main issue with the article is the premise that "professional" reviewers are objectively any higher quality on average than user reviews. A sizable proportion of them are very detached from what real people care about. I absolutely critically read non-fiction, and am somewhat judgy if a certain rigor isn't applied, but for fiction? How is that fun? It's OK for a story just to be cheap fun. It's OK for different authors to have different writing styles and different levels of attention to detail and different levels of grittiness to their stories. There is absolutely actual bad writing out there, and some gets published, but a story not being for you doesn't mean that voice doesn't connect with someone else. A lot of book critics are huge snobs.
Great points. Does Steam get around this slightly by having different tags intended for meme reviews? I.e. I think I’ve seen ‘10 people said this review made them laugh’ or something along those lines. That at least makes it a bit easier to filter out the ‘actual’ reviews. I wonder if the cumulative total (on both Steam and Goodreads) averages out the joke/genuine reviews, assuming that a) enough people have left a review and b) there hasn’t been any review bombing.
And yeah there are plenty of books, games and shows out there that I’ve absolutely loved but they’ve been reviewed terribly by professional reviewers. I think on the whole people assign too much weight to arbitrary totals - “Oh this book is a 6/10 so I shouldn’t waste my time on it”. But if you think like this, you’ll miss out on so much.
They do have more that just the thumbs up/down, but for the most part I have to read several reviews and pick out the ones that actually tell me what I care about. Even high effort well done reviews just might not mean anything to me if they're focused on elements that I don't care about. I think the joke reviews still are "accurate" in the sense that the reviewer goes up or down based on how they feel about the game; they just don't have useful text.
I personally tend just not to review fiction. I will absolutely tell you what I like about an author or a series, but I have no interest in breaking down the plot or picking apart individual books. (As an example, my favorite author is Karen Rose. I think all of the books in her Romantic Suspense series are straight up masterfully done, own them all on audiobook, and listen 3+ times a year. I will happily give a couple paragraphs about what traits draw me to her writing. I won't pick and choose between the books and say "this is four star, this is five star". I happen to find Into The Dark particularly compelling out of the Cincinnati arc, but I'm not going to ever individually break down books in the series to give individual reviews. I basically consider them a single work and read them as such.)
I almost never give fiction less than 4 stars, either. 4 stars is my baseline. 5 is standout. There are some (including wildly popular or cult classics) that I just don't find interesting, but I'll just not rate/review them if I don't have anything to say. On a semi-related note, I see "overrated book" discussions every once in a while and so many of the comments are people falling into the same trap critics do. In a lot of cases they're picking apart books clearly targeted for kids to maybe YA and reading them like they're grad students analyzing some classic in an era where every line had 15 different allegories thrown in. You don't have to pick everything apart like that.
Picking out parts of reviews that you find relevant is a good idea; your enjoyment of any kind of media is subjective and therefore unique to every person. I guess if you can find a particular reviewer with similar tastes, who also happens to have read a lot of the books you’re interested in, their reviews could be a good indicator of whether you’ll enjoy a book. And yes a 4 tends to be my baseline for book reviews; anything less and I didn’t enjoy it that much. 5 is pretty much perfect.
Over-analysis is definitely an issue. It’s inappropriate a lot of the time like you say. Writing a good review is tricky! You have to take into account the target audience, when it was written, whether it’s part of a larger series and so on. Authors and readers are too often obsessed with their overall rating for a book, but the real indicator is what people have actually written in genuine reviews, and whether you agree with that opinion. Unfortunately websites like Goodreads don’t make those reviews easy to find.
Literature is not a popular contest. A lot of great books would have been buried if we let review sites take control. Not to mention the amount of astroturfing and trolling tainting the “reviews”.
I don’t think it can because Lemmy only federates article type objects. It does federate with Mastodon, Kbin (except I had a problem following my Bookwyrm account - not sure if that was fixed), etc - basically the microblog supporting ActivityPub services.
Literature
Active