>>14247
Probably a good idea to establish first what kind of sci-fi story you're writing, starting with whether you're writing hard sci-fi or soft sci-fi.
Hard sci-fi = Pure autistic art, as you remain as close and detailed to reality or what may be realistic expectations for future developments in technology as possible.
Soft sci-fi = You're not too bothered about scientific accuracy and just want to see how people respond to something hypothetical, without regard to whether such a thing is possible.
If normal literary muses have not yielded you success thus far, I'd recommend reading the manual for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. The autists who made that vidya actually include some of their notes on how they planned their sci-fi narrative, in addition to a reading list of various science-fiction books which inspired them to make Alpha Centauri, especially when it comes to trying to explain to your audience technologies which do not exist in a plausible manner.
Also with regards to my own personal preference, the only thing that really peeves me with sci-fi is when authors feel compelled to include psychics and wizards, throwing magic against material matter whilst everything else remains consistent. I don't mean Lovecraftian sci-fi, where the reality-fuckery is consistent with the established concept that the reality-fuckery is not breaking the laws of reality, but merely the main character observing an area of time and space with different laws of reality than that which they are accustomed to.
I mean stuff like Star Wars where space wizards run around flying like superman, just because. It's just distracting to me.
