here is all the arguments you need for having lethal weaponry in subnautica.
tyler111762
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada Join Date: 2015-05-17 Member: 204558Members
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada Join Date: 2015-05-17 Member: 204558Members
i know. i know, i've made this argument before. but i have rounded up the mmost popular arguments against weapons and im here to smack 'em around a bit.
1. this game isn't a first person shooter, we don't want guns.
2. subnautica is about exploring and not survival, so you don't need to kill the enemys
3. your a scientist who is supposed to be documenting life not killing it
4. you can just use the stasis rifle and a knife
5. they are trying to give you tools you can use as weapons instead of outright weapons.
6. the game will just be easy if you can kill the bad guys.
7. it will take away from the experience of having to run and hide from the big bad guys.
ok here goes nothing.
1. the game doesn't have to be filled with KILLA TRON 900 SUPER MISSLE LAUNCHER EXPLOSIN MACHINE GUNS ^#%%^&*^%!@)*&?.... i'll use one of my latest favorite games. alien isolation, in that game you have many forms of firearms, but if use them; your fucked. big time. a xenomorph will drop down and rip you a new one when it hears the shots. so what if we made killing things with firearms or whatever weapon they add attract big, scary, damn near unkilleable (with out endgame gear) beasty come and swim into your area, maybe when you kill enough and trigger it you hear a loud roaring sound and your screen shakes or somthing.
so that killing things indiscriminately has big repercussions, bringing in the meta of " im low on O2, i need to swim past this bone shark to get out, do i risk killing it and attracking the big guy or try and swim past it without it munching me"
2. this game has food, air, drink, and health bars. you collect resources to make it easier to keep those bars full. it's a survival game, sorry to burst your bubble.
3. what did gordon freeman do when life handed him a crowbar and told him headcrabs and vortigons were trying to kill him? did he say " oh no i can't kill them, i need to study them!" NO! you know what he said???? he said this "......................"
uh... well you get my point... when shit hits the fan people do what is necessary to get by. and killing the fish that is nibbling on your leg is probobly one of those things.
4. i am not fully opposed to this, however adding spears and harpoons for very early tech weapons instead of making me swim after a peeper swinging like Jason vourhes in a trailer park, let me stand on top of the life pod and spear fish, or use a harpoon gun like a Hawaiian sling http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SzI6BV3mL._SL1500_.jpg ( for those looking at the image the black thing is an elastic band) using this could be somthing excluded from the negetive effect i said in number one, these tools could either do small dammage ( four or five hits into a stalker) and have cheap ammo, or be used to slow the animal so you can knife.
then teching up to the stasis rifle, then mayb teching upto a bigger badder weapon for bone sharks and ect.
5. what is this, canadain firearms laws?!? five round magazines for a semi auto rifle, but if you have a ten round pistol mag you can put that into the rifle you can have ten????
my point is if i can do somthing any way, why not let me do it without pretending i can't do it.
6.once again i bring it back to alien isolation, sure you can kill the little bad guys. untill you feel the saliva of a hungry xeno dripping onto the back of you neck.
but as another user on this fourm @TotallyLemon posted, if a system was put in place to have predators and prey interact in an actual ecosystem, they could add negative impacts for over fishing/ removing predators/ extensive terraforming.
it would make you balance safety with longevity of the ecosystem and the world, making the player think, because killing this stalker herd might make peeper over breed killing off the kelp forest making medkits impossible to get, ect.
7. true. but what if it was very very difficult and expensive to do so. sure spears are god for peeper and stalker fishing, but killing anything bigger? good luck
sand sharks might laugh at anything less then say.... a large caliber rail gun that uses a special high energy power cell that is very expensive to make? and needing gold and depleted uranium fuel rods for projectiles? (uranium as the armour peircing core and gold as a conductor)
a reaper leviathan might only be killed by an exosuit mounted dark matter caster. making you harvest dark matter from the aroura's engines using the exosuit with a very expensive shielding module to contain it.
then once the weapon is mounted it slows the exosuit down, you need to load shells into the cannon by getting out of the suit and reloading it after every shot. like the sea moth battery.
there are ways to make it difficult to kill things.
1. this game isn't a first person shooter, we don't want guns.
2. subnautica is about exploring and not survival, so you don't need to kill the enemys
3. your a scientist who is supposed to be documenting life not killing it
4. you can just use the stasis rifle and a knife
5. they are trying to give you tools you can use as weapons instead of outright weapons.
6. the game will just be easy if you can kill the bad guys.
7. it will take away from the experience of having to run and hide from the big bad guys.
ok here goes nothing.
1. the game doesn't have to be filled with KILLA TRON 900 SUPER MISSLE LAUNCHER EXPLOSIN MACHINE GUNS ^#%%^&*^%!@)*&?.... i'll use one of my latest favorite games. alien isolation, in that game you have many forms of firearms, but if use them; your fucked. big time. a xenomorph will drop down and rip you a new one when it hears the shots. so what if we made killing things with firearms or whatever weapon they add attract big, scary, damn near unkilleable (with out endgame gear) beasty come and swim into your area, maybe when you kill enough and trigger it you hear a loud roaring sound and your screen shakes or somthing.
so that killing things indiscriminately has big repercussions, bringing in the meta of " im low on O2, i need to swim past this bone shark to get out, do i risk killing it and attracking the big guy or try and swim past it without it munching me"
2. this game has food, air, drink, and health bars. you collect resources to make it easier to keep those bars full. it's a survival game, sorry to burst your bubble.
3. what did gordon freeman do when life handed him a crowbar and told him headcrabs and vortigons were trying to kill him? did he say " oh no i can't kill them, i need to study them!" NO! you know what he said???? he said this "......................"
uh... well you get my point... when shit hits the fan people do what is necessary to get by. and killing the fish that is nibbling on your leg is probobly one of those things.
4. i am not fully opposed to this, however adding spears and harpoons for very early tech weapons instead of making me swim after a peeper swinging like Jason vourhes in a trailer park, let me stand on top of the life pod and spear fish, or use a harpoon gun like a Hawaiian sling http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SzI6BV3mL._SL1500_.jpg ( for those looking at the image the black thing is an elastic band) using this could be somthing excluded from the negetive effect i said in number one, these tools could either do small dammage ( four or five hits into a stalker) and have cheap ammo, or be used to slow the animal so you can knife.
then teching up to the stasis rifle, then mayb teching upto a bigger badder weapon for bone sharks and ect.
5. what is this, canadain firearms laws?!? five round magazines for a semi auto rifle, but if you have a ten round pistol mag you can put that into the rifle you can have ten????
my point is if i can do somthing any way, why not let me do it without pretending i can't do it.
6.once again i bring it back to alien isolation, sure you can kill the little bad guys. untill you feel the saliva of a hungry xeno dripping onto the back of you neck.
but as another user on this fourm @TotallyLemon posted, if a system was put in place to have predators and prey interact in an actual ecosystem, they could add negative impacts for over fishing/ removing predators/ extensive terraforming.
it would make you balance safety with longevity of the ecosystem and the world, making the player think, because killing this stalker herd might make peeper over breed killing off the kelp forest making medkits impossible to get, ect.
7. true. but what if it was very very difficult and expensive to do so. sure spears are god for peeper and stalker fishing, but killing anything bigger? good luck
sand sharks might laugh at anything less then say.... a large caliber rail gun that uses a special high energy power cell that is very expensive to make? and needing gold and depleted uranium fuel rods for projectiles? (uranium as the armour peircing core and gold as a conductor)
a reaper leviathan might only be killed by an exosuit mounted dark matter caster. making you harvest dark matter from the aroura's engines using the exosuit with a very expensive shielding module to contain it.
then once the weapon is mounted it slows the exosuit down, you need to load shells into the cannon by getting out of the suit and reloading it after every shot. like the sea moth battery.
there are ways to make it difficult to kill things.
Comments
(Day Three: the Sea Emperor is still camping outside of my hatch, running out of food, May have to eat Eyegore my pet peeper if this keeps up.)
2. So it is a survival game... where exactly does "survival" connect to your point? I find survival games that require you to kill everything that threatens you very tiring.
3. Gordon was faced with hostile alien invading earth and he was pitted against them in a kill or be killed manner. In subnautica basically you are the invader of a planet with rather primitve lifeforms. Sure some are aggressive towards you but as would be any carnivore predator on earth. You are not as limited in your actions that you'd have to kill everything in sight, like gordon had to.
4. I see a fishing harpoon as yet another tool, not a weapon. The knife could be seen as a lethal weapon too, since you can kill smaller predators rather easy (if you are to take the risk)
5. Using for example the propulsion cannon uses a lot of precious energy. Also... have you tried to actually kill something in subnautica with one of those things? It's downright tedious! All those gadgets may look like weapons, but i don't think they qualify more than floaters do (floaters safed my butt more than once)
6. This again is just another scenario to justify weapons. Of course the eco-balance idea has more to give to the game than just a means to limit firearms, but it would work just as fine without weaponry. The other way around not so much.
7. Making things expenisve or rare is the worst way of balancing a game could go for. It just makes the difference in game feel bigger before and after you manage to get your hands on said things. Also as soon as it's easier to avoid a creature a hundred times rather than killing it... guess what i'm gonna do!
As i expected, a few "we could add this and that"-ideas to create a game in which guns wouldn't break the difficulty curve, the good old "harpoons are weapons, too" and the "survival and exploration doesn't exclude guns"-argument... i think a read all of this before and i'm still not convienced a single bit.
I guess humans are the only species that's preemtively defensive by being offensive... otherwise why bother with weapons?
as the game sits now, firearms would ruin it, my point is as the game develops and bigger, badder fish are added, as new mechanics we suggest are added, as the game grows, these are in my mind good ways that the game could be added upon, and not detracted from, by adding weapons.
though i know some people will never be convinced weapons are a good thing....just like in real life -_-
is that a Majoras Mask reference?
and my opinion on the weapon situation, all I want is a spear... just an extended knife so chasing peepers isn't so annoying...
Flayra is Charlie Cleveland, founder of Unknown Worlds Entertainment, and creator/lead programmer for Subnautica.
You can waste your time with these topics all you want, Subnautica will remain non-violent.
Why?
Because of this thread of children enjoying the game:
http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/137388/so-my-kids-and-i-really-like-subnautica-ok-we-love-it
and the other threads of parents and grand-parents enjoying the game. Non-Violence appeals to more people than violence and that's the way it's going to stay.
So a stalker chasing and biting you bloodly, an exploding fish chasing you after giving you a jumpscare, or a reaper leviathan killing you in one attack is non-violent?...
This only citing a few of the stuff that can happen to you in this game if you get in the wrong place at the wrong time!
please...I agree that having lethal weapons might not be that good, but at least try to be realistic because this game is anything but non-violent.
Violence is about the intention and meaning (or meaninglessness*) behind it.
Violence is the difference between killing enough to eat, and hunting a species to extinction. One is natural life, the other is violence.
* I can't believe that word didn't get a red squiggle
At any rate adding lethal weapons to game wouldn't make it violent anyways, mostly because i doubt you can kill off all the life forms in the game just by yourself, and you'd use it mostly as a defense/hunting mechanism, unless of course you'd be so stupid to abuse it...
However i think that more than making lethal weapons the devs could work on upgrades for the weapons we already have, a stasis rifle with long duration field and rapid fire capacity would be better than any spear or harpoon.
EDIT: did squiggle get a red squiggle?
The entire game you many not even see the cannibalistic mutants, so you don't have to kill anything, but fish and pick berries. One of the best methods is actually avoiding combat until you have adequate resources and defenses. It's kinda like how Robinson Crusoe hid himself away until morals forced him to fight the natives.
Subnautica should be a choose your own adventure game, similar to The Forest. Too kill or not to kill, that is your decision. Being non-confrontational means no risk of injury in a fight, but getting stuck in an enclave, while passively hiding from a reaper, might get you killed once you run out of air. Toxing the reaper may be the only means of survival. Certain biomes may not have edible flora, so you might have to chow down on some peeper buddies - likewise, the fauna might be poisonous - carnivores and vegetarians will rue the day they don't conform to emergency situations.
Why on earth (or unnamed water world) would you hunt fishies with a harpoon when subnautica already has a attracting device. Gravsphere
as for defence and survival...
If I know a big bad biting something is out there, and I have food and drinkwater close by in safer areas, I would damn well not travel to the big baddy without something better to defend me.
And no a weapon while submerged in dark pitchblack deep water does not count. That big sub however...
Also as we can see in the art, supplies and tech is from alterra corp. (The same folk who supply the combat stuff for NS2 marines.)
Now all weapons in this time period (NS2 wise) are made with help of military nanites. Why on earth would military nanites listen to a mere civilian colonist like us?
Because we aren't on Earth we are on *name of the water planet here*
Hey, uwe picked the company name.. Im just saying :P..
nitpicking aside, I dont truly see a reason to have weaponry.
The problem is, whether there is or not, lethal weapons are irrelevant. You could destroy the eco-system just fine as it is right now through a huge variety of ways.
I'd like to turn this argumentation on its head. Answer me a few questions to my satisfaction, and I'll break down and agree that this game needs these lethal weapons. Because instead of trying to argue against the reasons why people say they would not like to see them in the game, I have yet to see any compelling arguments as to why they should be in the game. It's always easy to try to attack opinions, but it's a bit more challenging to define your own and then defend them. Since you're claiming your thread has arguments, but actually only argues against the objections against the inclusion of lethal weaponry.
What good will lethal weapons do this game in its current and future state and shape?
How will they improve the game? How will they enhance the play experience?
How will they contribute to the survival aspect, or the exploration aspect respectively?
1. give players a choice as to how they want to play an open world survival game. ( thats the simple answer)
2. they improve the game by giving you more options to approach a situation. especially if any of the aforementioned counterplay would be added. and it enhances the experience by making it A. more realistic. and B. more relate-able to the real world ( yes those two things are different.) even with fins on there is no way a human could keep up with or swim away from fish in this game, especially if they are hungry, swimming after a peeper for fifteen minutes swinging at it wildly with a heat blade is not a realistic method of harvesting food.
as far as predators go, i'll tell you this from experience, in a survival situation charging a predator with a knife is last ditch at best, suicidal at worst.
being able to shoot a projectile and keeping distance from the threat is what makes sense, especially if that predator is capable of taking down a human with little effort.
the more realatable to the real world comes from the fact that the absolute first thing you decide to make as a form of self defence tool is a gravity gun. not say, taking a scrap metal rod and shoving a stalker tooth in the front, and poking stuff that trys to attack you with it?
3. they will contribute to the survival aspect in a way of, "im working my way up from nothing, getting tools to make my survival easier. i am now capable of fending off a stalker! woo!"
i have lost myself in the woods before, and your first instinct is how do i keep myself safe ( and dry but i think thats a mute point on this planet XD ), fed, and sheltered.
we have the escape pod, (shelter check) we can eat mushrooms and vines, and slow fish ( food check ) now how do i keep myself safe. in the woods i would suggest sharpening sticks and facing them outward from camp, and making a bow and arrow for harvesting squirrel and rabbit, on this world id suggest a Hawaiian sling and a fencing.
this accompanied with low tech base building, like fencing of an area or making a raft or primitive floating structure would give the player a sence of progressing to late game, where better options other than killing would be available for food collection and dna splicing to circumvent combat.
First off with the lighter tanks and fast fins you swim almost as fast as the seaglide (so i'm told). Even then, again, just using the stasis rifle solves 99% of all potentially fatal encounters. Plus, screw reality since we are on an alien planet that just happens to have 90% of the current sea life neither hostile, poisonous, and completely edible. Not to mention landing in a pod in the perfect area to get on our feet. Plus having resources so readily available....statistically that would be very 'un-realistic'.
But charging a predator ends badly for you up until you get the rifle. After that, you not only don't need to ever kill one but if you wish to you just calmy swim up and skin it alive. There is literally nothing challenging with that encounter once you have the stasis rifle, and all without anything more lethal then a knife. Realistically I find no need for any weapons at this point unless there will be a constant threat of something that the stasis rifle can't handle. So far, while supposedly the rifle works against them, you have reapers. But in that case, you just act cautiously...like you would around any sort of large predator in real life. If you are swimming out in the open with a reaper nearby you will get the same reaction from me if you were swimming around a great white in the open...in that you deserve to get chomped at that point. That doesn't mean you need weapons it means you need to be smarter about your actions.
Finally...just shoot the stasis rifle at the peeper and swim up to it. You don't have to chase it, and plenty of fish don't swim away as you get near. Plus if you lean the behavior of the peepers it's easy to direct it to the seabed where you can easily pick it up. I've never had to really chase them.
This isn't like the movies, most of the time any animal that has been able to stalk and kill a human it was due to the human doing something stupid. Animals tend to stick with their instinctual knowledge of what is food, and humans usually are not on that list. Works in this game too, as you can build the stasis rifle within an hour or so of starting out. There are no predators in the shallows (hence 'safe shallows' biome) and the one by the kelp doesn't really go after you unless you get to close....just like real animals. Only the bone shark will make a pass at you and by then you should have been able to build a stasis rifle.
So in short you have failed to provide compelling reasons for weapons. There is no need for them other then you want them, which isn't bad in and of itself, but that doesn't mean the devs have to add them.
You could just practice situational awareness. I've never had a problem diving around the Aurora simply by making sure I knew where I was putting the hatch. You don't shoot sharks either, you make sure you know where they are and how they can get to you.
Modify a peeper so that is has gaspod gas glands, and release it near a predator. The predator eats it and gets knocked out (glands too small to kill
Use the existing ecosystem as a method of survival!
I'm a little late to the show, but I had to take this.
1. As the game stands, they really wouldn't do much good, and frankly right now they aren't necessary. In its future state, however, and as I've pointed out in my own thread, they'd offer a final, "last stand" solution to an extremely large, possibly intelligent, and definitely hostile creature that nothing else is working on, especially if nothing else is working because the code s**t the bed (it happens no matter how much you try to fix it, and we all know it).
2. "Improving the game" is the wrong question, and hardly relevant - how does adding in yet one more hostile with no ready way to handle it improve the game? Enhancing the play experience, on the other hand, is very relevant- they enhance it by giving you options. More options in an open-ended game like Subnautica are a good thing. Although I'll be the first to admit that non-lethal is okay by me... if non-lethal includes some sort of permanent solution. Otherwise I, and others, are going to get mighty tired of ducking some giant fish on their home turf because we need that stupid lithium and it's the only one we've found.
3A. Survival: The state or fact of continuing to live or exist, typically in spite of an accident, ordeal, or difficult circumstances. In general terms, in any sort of survival situation, you do what you have to, anything you have to, in order to continue to survive... or you don't. If you're lost and starving but won't eat what's available because you're a vegan and it's not part of your self-imposed diet, you're not going to survive long; likewise if you're a pacifist that can't, won't, or refuses to understand that running, hiding, or evading a threat will only work for so long. The non-lethal, pacifist approach can work 99 times out of 100... but I'd rather not be denied the lethal option that 100th time, just because.
3B. Exploration: Let's give a hypothetical scenario. I'm out exploring, and X creature comes into the area. This creature is large enough, and hostile enough, to destroy or severely damage my vehicle. For whatever reason, I haven't been able to scare it off, lead it off, or divert its attention sufficiently to keep myself safe. The simple fact that Creature X is in my way, will not or cannot be diverted, bypassed, or distracted by any available non-lethal means, and will attack or already is attacking means that I either have to abandon exploration, or go to the lethal solution... which you and others insist not be made available. That scenario might be improbable, but it isn't impossible, and even if it only happened once every ten hours that would be enough to turn me off to the game, or at least the "exploration for exploration's sake" aspect... which is kind of a big part of the game.
Call me crazy, but I'd call discharging an energy weapon or harpoon or whatever into what one might jokingly call the face of a Reaper trying to eat me defending myself, provided, again, I can't in some way reliably divert, immobilize, or neutralize it. And, just by the by, anybody that honestly thinks this game is in any way suitable for kids under about 12 or 14, you're nuts. It'd be a cold day in hell before I let a kid play Subnautica, unless I absolutely hated that particular kid and wanted him/her to have nightmares.
Nah, you're right, that's all we need, a titanium toothpick that breaks after a few dozen uses for reasons and a stasis rifle that only usually holds something larger than a boneshark for a few seconds even at full charge... provided you don't miss, but how could you shooting at a swift-moving apex predator in its natural environment with a projectile that moves at about half the speed of smell while likely panicking just a bit?
My smart remarks aside, however, and while I don't disagree that weapons would be pretty pointless at this stage (even the repulsion cannon is just a fun toy at most), it's just a bit ridiculous to suggest that there's no tactical advantage to having a long-range solution of some kind to things like the Reaper, or Sea Dragon when it's implemented. A lot of us just happen to think that proper weaponry should be among those solutions, is all.
Considering we don't know how intelligent any of the creatures currently implemented or planned are/are going to be, you're already one point down; they might go after the player for their own reasons, not in any way related to animal instinct. Secondly, these are alien creatures that don't even know what a human is, so the ones that aren't intelligent would just know it's a biologic and small enough to be edible; the ones that are intelligent might attack because of previous encounters or observations, or just because they can. Third, and most important, real animals, especially apex predators, are known to go after whatever's available if they get hungry enough, or did you not want to mention that?
Also, the devs don't have to not add weapons just because you don't want them any more than they have to add them because I do. I'd like to think nobody's getting special treatment.
you have good points here, I really like the idea of adding SOME form of weaponry that can maybe knock out a predator (a cheap, one shot wonder, but one shot ONLY, alternative to the stasis rifle which is actually expensive to make if you are new to the game)
The problem with 1, 3A, and 3B, at least those are the ones I have thought of as being problematic, is that you assume the devs WILL make a creature that is impossible to bypass using non-lethal means. Considering how all evidence points to the fact that the devs will not be making a game where killing outside of for food is an option, I doubt this will be the case, as they won't make a super mega reaper leviathan alternative that can only be avoided... simply because they know that will frustrate us to no end, and they already don't want to make a creature that can kill anything with no real counter so to say (a non lethal counter to be specific)
Those 3 nit picks aside, I like that you do point out one issue: the Reaper Leviathan DOES make the Aurora very difficult to approach for newer players.
You know the more I think about it the more I am beginning to assume that the people who do actually want lethal weapons are new :P I could list lots of reasons but there's no point unless someone wants me to
the Reaper can only be stunned by hitting it in the face (which is damned hard to do unless it somehow spawns next to you, turns around and lets you blast it right then and there) OR, it just glitches out. Unfortunately the Reaper literally spawns itself in at random in the game, which can seriously piss me off (random jump scares are something I consider abhorrent) when I hear a roar near the Aurora I KNOW there is a reaper behind me. I'm always in my cyclops so it doesn't matter, but it is still irritating.
However... The reaper, once spawned, will act like a bird of prey, coming in for a dive and usually "flying" or swimming back out again for another run, which is usually how I am able to dodge around it in a seamoth. I could do it swimming too but it was more difficult
So, yes I have to agree all in all, the reaper might need a bit of tweaking (or maybe the Stasis Rifle needs some tweaking... instead of a slow firing ball, it shoots a pellet or beam that can stun anything. Perhaps that could be an upgrade you make at the workbench
Didn't mean to only nitpick your 3 points so sorry if I came across as aggressive
So, my opinion goes like that:
There should be a lethal weapon/weapons in subnautica, but not yet. The game has a few species that would love to kill you as many times as possible but look, there are not too many of them. Not just talking about species! I met 2 bonesharks on that red grass biome, just 2! And with current biome size , it just makes no sense to add more.
If we could do something what Minecraft did (I bring up Minecraft as a example, cause its sandbox game) we would have a playground for bonesharks and other killers. I think that feature is called extreme biomes, or something like that. So, every biome takes way more terrain than it would do on standard world, simple as that. So, once we have the space for these guys, nice. But okay, you kill a boneshark, nice, it doesnt move anymore! Finally you can collect your silver without losing 40 hp points! Okay, is boneshark going to sit there being useless? Why not have some bones and meat off him?
Okay, we somehow stepped from weapons to meat and bones
So okay, you have the bones, you put them in the locker. Now, meat, much meat, So much meat! I just cant eat it all! Let me save that remaining meat for later, right? makes sense, why eat everything at once? I dont want it to be rotten however, hmm... I need a fridge. Okay lets build on.... there is no fridge! (yet)
and it would go on...
So, once again I agree 100% on lethal weapons. But look, you just simply have no reason to have it now, unless you want to waste ammo/battery or w/e on stalkers or on other mid-size creatures. The game is in too early development stage to add it, must be added later however. There is REALLY no point in killing anything yet when you get nothing from it! Right now, statis rifle works fine. But believe me, later, lethal weapons is a must have.
Hunting should be changed aswell with lethal weapons. But not earlier/later. Small fish are too easy to catch, and big ones dont even give anything off them.
What hunting patch would do, it would change the behaviour of small fish, so it would escape almost on sight, if we still want to catch them, traps are way to go, you wont waste time on swimming just to catch them. Predators on the other hand, well, traps would be huge for them! A hunting rifle (and I dont mean any MG's or anything like that) is a way to go. Not your typical Remington however
And the weapon cannot be too big/heavy! make it compact and light.
Now, at the end, I apologize for my poor english
And later today (2:48 am here atm) I will add some improvments to what I said up above!
Anyway, have a nice day everyone!
I don't really like the reasoning for lethal weaponry-- you can go off and just KNIFE a boneshark to death with EXTREME ease in this game, I bet I could take on 3-4 with a knife and no medkits and still win.
That's one of my main reasons why lethal weaponry is just a weird thought, you don't need to spend the resources to defend yourself in this game since the creatures are so easy to deal with by dodging around
This game is bloody TERRIFYING. I haven't even SEEN a reaper and just the idea of it scares the crap out of me. Maybe I'm the 1% of people who play this but I'd like weaponry just as a method to make myself feel safe. At this point I'm not even playing it anymore just because all that's left to do for me right now is go explore deeper water, and places closer to the Aurora but... even my giant(ish?) sub doesn't make me feel secure, so I don't bother.
However, I do agree that this game doesn't NEED it right now. I haven't even tried the stasis rifle but from reading this thread I can understand the points raised well enough. I just hope, personally, that there comes a point in development when the developers decide that weaponry would be a logical addition. Because I wanna feel safe.
Your cyclops will keep you safe, go for it dude, you have nothing to fear while your cyclops is there for you
See this is my point-- the newer players in general don't know how to deal with Stalkers, Bonesharks, (reapers lol) or anything predatory, so they are in favor of lethal weaponry. I'm not ACCUSING you of being for it, I"m just saying it is something I've noticed.
Trust me-- if you play enough hours and dodge around enough stalkers and bonesharks (which I say all the time, is too easy to do) then you'll soon realize the game just doesn't need that stuff.
I don't even need a stasis rifle to survive, and I haven't died once in a 5 hour playthrough so far
the only times I don't feel safe is around the Aurora for obvious reasons, but even then I bring my cyclops-- which means that I AM safe, I just don't FEEL safe because of the constant reaper always roaring in my ear lol