04LeonhardtI came here to laugh at youJoin Date: 2015-08-01Member: 206618Members
edited August 2015
Acknowledging that I pointed out what is ridiculous about your argument does not make it any less ridiculous.
Crying "strawman!" Does not invalidate the criticism.
Acknowledging that I pointed out what is ridiculous about your argument does not make it any less ridiculous.
Crying "strawman!" Does not invalidate the criticism.
Lethal weapons do not work from a design point. You can mod them in later.
Factually incorrect.
Actually this game is a game of discovery and adaptation, more so than a 'survival' game, to adapt is to survive in a sense. and as a colonization ship, taking weapons to worlds you don't know a thing about is a BAD idea, if any of the indigenous life is able to adapt to, and use those weapons against you it makes for a new life form that now has technology well beyond what they should have normally, making for a new, dangerous, unknown factor that threatens the success of the mission.
Case and point, the Aurora crashed, and based on the images I've seen of the Aurora (and in game) it was a scientific/civilian vessel, likely cruiser class based on size without any armaments on the hull. IE they wouldn't carry weapons, particularly if there are other forms of sentient life capable of star travel, since carrying weapons on a civilian vessel could have created interstellar territorial disputes. Hell even if humans are the only intelligent life in this game (to the point of interstellar travel that is) each world would have it's own laws and customs, and by not carrying weapons on the vessel that would make refueling at other human controlled worlds easier.
Kinda like how researchers traveling to the amazon don't take weapons with them, they'll take knives and other such tools, but not to fight with, rather to aid in specimen and sample gathering.
To be honest I find it really refreshing that you play a scientist/engineer rather than a soldier; and in keeping with that I find it unlikely that he would understand how to use conventional weapons, particularly if they are advanced.
Lets assume for arguments sakes that there were some kind of weapons or a fire-team aboard the Aurora to maintain order and deal with overly hostile life while the colony was being set up, why does that mean that our character should know how to use the presumably advanced and complex technology involved. How many of you would know how to operate an assault rifle with any degree of skill without training? Let alone maintain the damn thing. I know I certainly couldn't. Keeping in mind that the future might not necessarily have the American right to bear arms for the entire planet I find it unlikely that our scientist would have any idea how to use any small-arms tech he might find.
This to me pretty much rules out conventional weapons of any sort. On the other hand he IS presumably an engineer/scientist so I see no problem with creative jerry-rigged solutions otherwise known as "scienceing the **** out of this thing". Using otherwise benign technology to scare away, stun, incapacitate or perhaps even kill local wildlife is likely something he would eventually learn how to do and seems more in keeping with the themes of the game to me.
There has been a lot of back and forth on this issue, and I think that I have a way to make weapons work in the game. Give players two different sort of playstyles that the game is built around: working with the environment, and making the environment suit you. If one chooses to work with the environment, then they would have different things to do that would be good for that. They might use the DNA extractor and related items a lot for example, altering themselves to better suit this planet. They might deal with obstacles differently. Say that there is some cyclops-munching deathfish that lives in an area you need to go. A player that has chosen to adapt might study another creature that lives with it to discover how it defends itself, while a player who chooses to make the world around them adapt might build some form of weapon to drive off the creature. There could be a middle ground as well, for instance creating a more heavily armored sub. No one way would be better or worse, but they would all offer unique challenges that might suit different players. And any player who wants total pacifism can do that in their own world, while another person might choose to blast their way through things in their way.
I am all for having multiple solutions to the problem, in fact the devs seem to be doing this already with the Aurora as you can actually drive the seamoth into the side breach and be out of range of the Reapers. Or you could build the Cyclops and enter through the bow of the ship. Both are viable ways to reach the reactor and fix the radiation leak. However I don't wish to see more weapons, and would rather see more variations that require critical thinking. The game has always come across more along the lines of a puzzle games with survival elements, and would like to see that expanded. Using either the propulsion gun or a big brother variant to drop a boulder to block the 'deathfish' from leaving it's nest would be more satisfying then using a weapon to kill it, or as you suggested you could use DNA to somehow make the sub non-appetizing.
I'm all for multiple solutions for a problem, even if they aren't 'pacifist', but I don't see the need for new weapons as much as I do for leaving room for clever adaptation of existing tools. Using a propulsion gun mounted to a seamoth with a scavenged plasma canister to reenact Jaws with a reaper is perfectly valid as another solution to maybe using DNA or just sneaking past, and it still wouldn't need a new weapon.
While Aggression vs. Pacifism is a fine theme to explore, I'd like the game to eventually give the players tools to do something a little different.
I think it'd be cool to explore the choice of To change yourself to suite the environment or Force the environment to bow to your will.
So on the one hand, you could end up with dna modification for gills or night vision or webbed feet and fingers. Basically going full mutant fishman. Maybe dna mods for color changing skin as camo. Many many ideas you could go with. Maybe long range travel is hitching a ride with a big semi-tamed sea creature or developing an organic construct to act as a submarine.
vs
Building big honking subs, weapons, sonics to deter predators. Big bases that might shoot anything that goes near.
Does that end up looking very similar to a pacifism vs. aggression dynamic? Sure. But fighting to keep "humanity" vs. Adapting to the world is a theme that's more interesting to me to see explored.
I can't say what direction the game Dev's are looking to build the game into, but that's just my two cents.
tyler111762Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada Join Date: 2015-05-17Member: 204558Members
edited August 2015
[Mod Edit: Insults, personal attacks and flaming are not welcome on these forums. If you can't express your views without resorting to these, please find another outlet for your frustration.]
tyler111762Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada Join Date: 2015-05-17Member: 204558Members
and @ArkStrike im not trying to take you out of context man. that is just the context as i see it. if you feel diffrent, please make an ass out of me and correct me.
i don't want to make you out as a dick, hope you understand ok dude.
I have never played a suspenseful game and thought to my self "you know what would improve the atmosphere? BULLETS"
I would love for the subs to have non-lethals and other tools for dealing with monsters.
That being said i honestly I feel lethal weapons would take away from the game's overall feel. There are enough survival games based around combat systems.
I have never played a suspenseful game and thought to my self "you know what would improve the atmosphere? BULLETS"
I would love for the subs to have non-lethals and other tools for dealing with monsters.
That being said i honestly I feel lethal weapons would take away from the game's overall feel. There are enough survival games based around combat systems.
I have never played a suspenseful game and thought to my self "you know what would improve the atmosphere? BULLETS"
I would love for the subs to have non-lethals and other tools for dealing with monsters.
That being said i honestly I feel lethal weapons would take away from the game's overall feel. There are enough survival games based around combat systems.
alien isolation.
You could not kill the alien with the flamethrower in alien isolation, just piss it off. That's one of the reasons the game was so tense, all you could to is run and hide.
Acknowledging that I pointed out what is ridiculous about your argument does not make it any less ridiculous.
Crying "strawman!" Does not invalidate the criticism.
It does when my argument is in a different thread. Unless you can point out where in this thread is my argument repeated by someone else.
and slavery used to be legal in the united states. nothing is set in stone.
No but it is laughable that you think the two efforts are remotely similar.
They should make a harpoon gun to attach to two places so that you can stop sea creatures from approaching like the reaper leviathan but the string breaks after a while just to make it fair with the animal, as well as you have to maybe craft the ammo i dunno. normal guns would make it boring
Comments
Crying "strawman!" Does not invalidate the criticism.
Actually this game is a game of discovery and adaptation, more so than a 'survival' game, to adapt is to survive in a sense. and as a colonization ship, taking weapons to worlds you don't know a thing about is a BAD idea, if any of the indigenous life is able to adapt to, and use those weapons against you it makes for a new life form that now has technology well beyond what they should have normally, making for a new, dangerous, unknown factor that threatens the success of the mission.
Case and point, the Aurora crashed, and based on the images I've seen of the Aurora (and in game) it was a scientific/civilian vessel, likely cruiser class based on size without any armaments on the hull. IE they wouldn't carry weapons, particularly if there are other forms of sentient life capable of star travel, since carrying weapons on a civilian vessel could have created interstellar territorial disputes. Hell even if humans are the only intelligent life in this game (to the point of interstellar travel that is) each world would have it's own laws and customs, and by not carrying weapons on the vessel that would make refueling at other human controlled worlds easier.
Kinda like how researchers traveling to the amazon don't take weapons with them, they'll take knives and other such tools, but not to fight with, rather to aid in specimen and sample gathering.
Lets assume for arguments sakes that there were some kind of weapons or a fire-team aboard the Aurora to maintain order and deal with overly hostile life while the colony was being set up, why does that mean that our character should know how to use the presumably advanced and complex technology involved. How many of you would know how to operate an assault rifle with any degree of skill without training? Let alone maintain the damn thing. I know I certainly couldn't. Keeping in mind that the future might not necessarily have the American right to bear arms for the entire planet I find it unlikely that our scientist would have any idea how to use any small-arms tech he might find.
This to me pretty much rules out conventional weapons of any sort. On the other hand he IS presumably an engineer/scientist so I see no problem with creative jerry-rigged solutions otherwise known as "scienceing the **** out of this thing". Using otherwise benign technology to scare away, stun, incapacitate or perhaps even kill local wildlife is likely something he would eventually learn how to do and seems more in keeping with the themes of the game to me.
I am all for having multiple solutions to the problem, in fact the devs seem to be doing this already with the Aurora as you can actually drive the seamoth into the side breach and be out of range of the Reapers. Or you could build the Cyclops and enter through the bow of the ship. Both are viable ways to reach the reactor and fix the radiation leak. However I don't wish to see more weapons, and would rather see more variations that require critical thinking. The game has always come across more along the lines of a puzzle games with survival elements, and would like to see that expanded. Using either the propulsion gun or a big brother variant to drop a boulder to block the 'deathfish' from leaving it's nest would be more satisfying then using a weapon to kill it, or as you suggested you could use DNA to somehow make the sub non-appetizing.
I'm all for multiple solutions for a problem, even if they aren't 'pacifist', but I don't see the need for new weapons as much as I do for leaving room for clever adaptation of existing tools. Using a propulsion gun mounted to a seamoth with a scavenged plasma canister to reenact Jaws with a reaper is perfectly valid as another solution to maybe using DNA or just sneaking past, and it still wouldn't need a new weapon.
We already have that, it's called the stasis rifle. Also works on all lifeforms without the need of a separate weapon or DNA adaptation.
we just need more EFFECTIVE weapons
I think it'd be cool to explore the choice of To change yourself to suite the environment or Force the environment to bow to your will.
So on the one hand, you could end up with dna modification for gills or night vision or webbed feet and fingers. Basically going full mutant fishman. Maybe dna mods for color changing skin as camo. Many many ideas you could go with. Maybe long range travel is hitching a ride with a big semi-tamed sea creature or developing an organic construct to act as a submarine.
vs
Building big honking subs, weapons, sonics to deter predators. Big bases that might shoot anything that goes near.
Does that end up looking very similar to a pacifism vs. aggression dynamic? Sure. But fighting to keep "humanity" vs. Adapting to the world is a theme that's more interesting to me to see explored.
I can't say what direction the game Dev's are looking to build the game into, but that's just my two cents.
and slavery used to be legal in the united states. nothing is set in stone.
i don't want to make you out as a dick, hope you understand ok dude.
I would love for the subs to have non-lethals and other tools for dealing with monsters.
That being said i honestly I feel lethal weapons would take away from the game's overall feel. There are enough survival games based around combat systems.
alien isolation.
You could not kill the alien with the flamethrower in alien isolation, just piss it off. That's one of the reasons the game was so tense, all you could to is run and hide.
It does when my argument is in a different thread. Unless you can point out where in this thread is my argument repeated by someone else.
No but it is laughable that you think the two efforts are remotely similar.