Whatever-punk

While I agree with everything else, this bit:
>Steampunk has a lot of promise as a genre.
Is so fucking wrong you can't even imagine. Steampunk was literally created as a test. Experiment. To see if its possible to transfer cyberpunk with its conflicts, struggle, rebellion and lack of acceptance into any other time period.
And guess what - you can't. Gibson openly admitted failure and simply stopped any interest in the "genre". Or rather - aesthtics.

Cogfop is a thing, because steampunk never really had a chance to be a thing in the first place, so morons took over for nothing more than aesthetics driven to extreme.

Cybernetics and computers don't define the culture or drive the economy, the megacorps do.

The longer I look at this map, the more perfect it gets

>Being this tier retarded
Both cybernetics and megacorps are required to have cyberpunk, you moron. The entire setting is about rich and powerful using techology that alienates everyone to everything and allow in-dept invigilation. Hence the entire "we live in cyberpunk" meme

Because some idiot decided that England was perfect for steampunk, despite the fact there were no major revolutions or even tensions during that time period.
Honestly, French Revolution would've made a much better political backdrop for steampunk.

Unconventional -punk settings, go.

>Gibson
>Some idiot
>19th century England was free from tension
How to spot idiot that knows jack shit about history.
Or what Gibson was actually writing.

I bet you didn't even read The Difference Engine. Hell, I would be surprised if you even heard about it, but still voicing out your uninformed opinion

>England
>no major revolutions or even tensions during that time period.
How uneducated one can be?

Bamboo punk, obviously
And it's older brother, paper punk

If I'm correct, there is also such thing like silk punk, used for Chinese fantasy book poking fun out of Chinese epics

Springpunk from Bacigalupi works.
Basically a biopunk that destroyed itself, went into brink of apocalypse and turned back, running on combination of biopunk remnants, feudal ties and spring-driven machines
Also, depressive af

Yes, Luddite movement and constant turmoil didn't exist, while everything was calm and tidy.

>Gibson openly admitted failure and simply stopped any interest in the "genre". Or rather - aesthtics.

Which is funny considering the Industrial Revolution contained pretty much all the essential components of cyberpunk. Quit thinking Gibson is the end all, be all of cyperpunk, or steampunk for that matter considering the term "steampunk" predates The Difference Engine by three years and was used to refer to books published several years before Difference Engine. Steampunk has never had anything to do with cyberpunk.

The more funny part is how it doesn't matter at all, because it's a dead-end setting which can be done better with other time periods.
Punk elements simply don't mix together with industrialisation, because industrialisation is all about masses and large groups. Punk is all about alienation, caused by destruction of "traditional" bonds, created exactly by industrialisation.

Who cares? Being an aristocrat inventor is way more fun than being an irish coalminer. And the last thing anyone wants is another "History" lesson about ebul nazis.

Just because it has punk in the name doesn't mean it needs to follow a formula and can't branch out into what the audience finds appealing.

>Just because it has punk in the name doesn't mean it needs to follow a formula

Same could be said of cyberpunk, as it's mostly just a reflection of economic uncertainty.

>cyberpunk can only be about homeless cyborgs fighting against megacorps

Fuck off neckbeard. If your theories on setting and theme are so great then write a novel.

Except nobody would buy it because the fundamental principle of anything given to the public is that it must be original and inventive, and that it must appeal to people in some way.

>hurr durr muh irish coalminers
This isn't a theme that is relevant in this day and age. The 14 hour work day was abolished. Employees have health and safety standards. Its beating a dead horse.

Well, yes.
It's about self-inducted social ostracisation and being an outcast, so how the fuck you want to be anything else than an outcast living on the edge?

You literally can't fucking grasp such simple thing like boundaries of a genre

...

>then write a novel
>Entire thread dedicated to explaining why steampunk was a failure and abandoned as fruitless
This is not your every day ignorance

>self-inducted social ostracisation and being an outcast

We call those poverty tourists.

>Its beating a dead horse.
Set in in 3rd world country.
Here, the horse is alive. And working 16 hours a day for bowl of rice

ITT: Millenials being utterly unable to understand punk movement, because their parents werestill in high school when it collapsed and died.

...

It takes a special kind of stupidity and autism, to pontificate so loudly about a topic you are utterly ignorant of.

Jules Verne was the pioneer of the steam-powered Victorian-era inventor/adventurer genre. His works came out a bloody century before any of Gibson's did.

Then that's Ricebowlpunk, not steampunk.

ITT: Millennials being utterly unable to grasp that the concept of "punk" exists beyond a late-20th century music fanbase.

Reminder that the Sex Pistols were signed to a major label.

>Verne
>Steampunk
Nice way to show you confuse cogfop with steampunk

>Jules Verne was the pioneer of the steam-powered Victorian-era inventor/adventurer genre. His works came out a bloody century before any of Gibson's did.

Steampunk is usually defined as retrofuturism. For Jules Verne it was just regular futurism.

Cogfop isn't a genre, dumbass.

No matter how badly you want to rip out cyberpunk and throw it into the Victorian-era, the reason your stupid shovel rebellion idea will never be appealing is because the most fascinating aspect of the Victorian era was always the expansion of civilization to the entire world, finding and settling new places and the myriad of new inventions that were changing the world.

If you don't like that, then it's your issue. Plenty of people appreciate Verne. Definitely he is a better author than you can aspire to be.

If written today most of Verne's novels would be considered Cogfop, as they're mostly about scientists and men of means going on adventures around the globe with fantastic technology.

>Not knowing what steampunk is
>Literally confusing it with adventure genre
>Unable to grasp basic genre division
Keep shooting. So far you hit only your own feet

*sigh*

Cyberpunk by Bruce Bethke
infinityplus.co.uk/stories/cpunk.htm

Cyberpunk in the 90s by Bruce Sterling
streettech.com/bcp/BCPtext/Manifestos/CPInThe90s.html

A few years ago I came up with a city shaped like a bullseye, with the very rich in the center, surrounding a giant well, and the poorer in successive layers further out, with thinner and thinner walls protecting them from the elements, and less and less water available to them.

Meanwhile, inside the core of the city, the powerful bribe scientist-wizards to build them all sorts of machines, powered by the very water the poor need to survive.

This is all in the middle of a seemingly endless desert, and the city is kept "in order" by steam-powered robots with artificial intelligence that beat anyone seen disobeying.

The story was to be a retelling of Robin Hood where Robin is an willing, chosen to lead the merry men only in a tactical capacity, with other decisions made through more egalitarian means.

The Sheriff is an almost invisible assassin-bot made of magically hardened glass, who is only visible at all because in certain light you can see a glimmer or a puff of steam.

Is this not steampunk at all?

You seem to think that Verne is Steampunk. He may have had many elements of, and definitely inspired it but as said he was just writing sci-fi far enough back that it seems retrofuturistic, without actually being retrofuturism.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steampunk

The reason you are suffering such tardrage over "waah people are doing things with the setting I don't like" is because you arbitrarily decided that steampunk should be a mirror of cyberpunk, and have nothing to do with any of the authors that actually inspired interest in the setting and concept.

To Jules Verne, it may have been futurism and adventure, but that was literally what inspired the idea of retrofuturism. People reading his works now.

So just accept it that the genre is based off of what he did. Your completely self-made and arbitrary definition interests no one.

>Bruce Bethke
>"The invention of the c-word was a conscious and deliberate act of creation on my part. I wrote the story in the early spring of 1980, and from the very first draft, it was titled "Cyberpunk." In calling it that, I was actively trying to invent a new term that grokked the juxtaposition of punk attitudes and high technology. My reasons for doing so were purely selfish and market-driven: I wanted to give my story a snappy, one-word title that editors would remember.
>Offhand, I'd say I succeeded.
>How did I actually create the word? The way any new word comes into being, I guess: through synthesis. I took a handful of roots --cyber, techno, et al-- mixed them up with a bunch of terms for socially misdirected youth, and tried out the various combinations until one just plain sounded right."

I never said I considered Verne steampunk, just that if published today he'd be considered cogfop.

Cogfop is not a real genre recognized anywhere outside of Veeky Forums.

I might as well start calling Veeky Forumss vision for steampunk "shovelwar" and act as if it's a real word.

I've seen on Reddit and tumblr too, for what its worth. It is a real word, it's just a colloquialism.

And Veeky Forums's vision for steampunk would be called "workerrevolt."

ITT:

"Hey, you want to run a campaign in a Victorian setting filled with cool steam-powered gadets and airships?"

"Sure! That sounds great! I loved Jules Verne as a kid! I want to be Prospero Moneyvollini, the first man to climb Mount Mountington."

"No, you have to play as a poor beggar living in a flophouse who starts a revolution to kill Prospero Moneyvollini! Wouldn't that be so much deeper!"

"Will... I get to use cool gadets to fight my socialist uprising?"

"NO. That shit's gay. Stop destroying the genre."

I don't agree. Tarant (I think that was its name) in Arcanum was a fantastic example of capitalistic exploitation mixed in with some healthy scientific racism in a fantasy steampunk world. There's plenty of room for punk there.

For goodness' saks, look at Dickens. Look at Austen. Look at Shelley. The entire corpus of 19th century British literature is about the marginalized, whether because of poverty (Dickens), failure to adhere to social expectations (Austen), or being obviously different (Shelley).

The failure of lackluster modern writers shouldn't be an indictment of the genre.

"Jokes on you, I'm running a sequel game where you're the servants of Prospero Moneyvollini out to avenge his death at the hands of poor beggars whilst simultaneously framing his wastrel nephew for the deaths of Moneyvollini and the beggars so that you might claim a portion of his estate as pension!"

>Anything we can do to a rat, we can do to a human
>And there are a whole lot of things we can do to a rat
>That is the essence of Cyberpunk

>dieselpunk
stop

Neither of those things is required to have cyberpunk.

>WELCOME TO THE RICE FIELDS MOTHERFUCKER

That's unsurprising since it's the same people on all three sites.

Someday today's technology will be old enough for its own -punk genre.
What will we call it? Applepunk? Googlepunk?

Pepsipunk.