Hard science or soft science fiction. Interstellar or Star Wars? The Martian or Minority Report? Star Trek or 2001: A Space Odyssey? In some circles there is a fierce debate over this, among fans who want more science in their sci-fi. This week, Ragemaster and Scott discuss the differences between the two and the pros and cons of each. In the end, it doesn't matter if the tale is grounded in real science or overloaded with transporters and faster than light travel, what matters is if there is a compelling story that explores the human condition and entertains you. If story manages to do those things its good science fiction, regardless of how accurate or inaccurate the science is.