I'm just curious, all the people talking about the need for lethal weapony, has any of them tried crafting a propulsion cannon and upgrading it to a repulsion cannon with the workbench? It is actually quite powerful.
I'm not sure I'd agree with that statement. Yeah, you can push a boneshark or a stalker a decent distance with the repulsion cannon, but it just turns right around and comes back at you. If you gave them a fear reaction to it, swimming away at a decent clip for a few seconds, it would be a great, well, repulsion tool. (Obviously sea emperors and the like would just get angry.) I'd also like to suggest that the stasis rifle do more than freeze them for just a second or two. They should have a recovery period where they start off slow and progressively get faster over the course of a few seconds. I mean, we can only use these items when the character is in the water personally, when we're most vulnerable.
I'm just curious, all the people talking about the need for lethal weapony, has any of them tried crafting a propulsion cannon and upgrading it to a repulsion cannon with the workbench? It is actually quite powerful.
1. There you created a scenario in which lethal weaponry would be needed. This scenario doesn't exist so far, so no lethal weapons needed.
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 saved 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 expensive 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 convinced a single bit.
I guess humans are the only species that's preemtively defensive by being offensive... otherwise why bother with weapons?
1. However one such scenario could be released that needs it, and I have no doubt that weapons would be released on the same day.
2. But in a survival game filled with predators, it's reasonable you're going to need more defenses against them. Weapons are still common in most survival games, because they add a layer of defense, a good offense.
And for clarification, "the best defense is a good offense" doesn't necessarily mean preemptively attacking every predator in the game. Think about it like this, there's a man charging at you with a sword, and you also have one. Do you flee, wait to parry and counterattack, or rush at him to strike him down first. A good offense used defensively can be the second and third options. Straight offense is if there's a guy with a sword minding his own business, and going imakillhim.
Weapons are also good for mental security.
3.-4. Acceptable responses, good job.
5. But they aren't weapons, and with the level of tech shown in-game, something as advanced as a handheld particle cannon should be easy to a society with dark matter reactors. And if you don't want to build them you don't have to. They aren't necessary for survival, but they really help when you're surrounded by large groups of and/or larger predators.
6. Weapons can be a choice. You want to be a peaceful scientist, go right on ahead. You want to go on a destructive rampage, ruining this pristine world, then I'm going to be silently judging you, but go on right ahead. Stop limiting what other players can do.
7. It is still a means of balance and combined with the ecosystem thing, and with knowledge of it, players will make the best decisions that they can.
I myself don't care much for weapons, but the choice to have them should be there.
Also, tool idea, a shock prod, similar to the kinds used when swimming with sharks.
1. There you created a scenario in which lethal weaponry would be needed. This scenario doesn't exist so far, so no lethal weapons needed.
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 saved 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 expensive 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 convinced a single bit.
2. But in a survival game filled with predators, it's reasonable you're going to need more defenses
6. Weapons can be a choice. You want to be a peaceful scientist, go right on ahead. You want to go on a destructive rampage, ruining this pristine world, then I'm going to be silently judging you, but go on right ahead. Stop limiting what other players can do.
7. It is still a means of balance and combined with the ecosystem thing, and with knowledge of it, players will make the best decisions that they can.
I myself don't care much for weapons, but the choice to have them should be there.
Also, tool idea, a shock prod, similar to the kinds used when swimming with sharks.
By what you said in 6, you sorta do say to most people that you don't know what this game is based off of... There will almost certainly, and this has been said by devs many times, be no such rampaging of any sort
The devs simply don't want it to be something that is an attractive idea or to happen at all really
I think a lot of people bought subnautica with the wrong idea in their heads about what it is
Really now, I highly doubt they're going to incorporate anything in the game to bring about a violent end to any of their creatures. As a horticulturist and hobbyist, science is ingrained into what I do, so for my purpose temporarily, I will call myself a scientist. As such, I have no interest in just killing things for my own "gain(?)". Observing - yes, collecting - YES, some manipulation - sure, willy-nilly killing of free willy - no. This is counter-productive for me as a scientist of nature!
If you wanna blow creatures to bits, I suggest playing ns2
Really now, I highly doubt they're going to incorporate anything in the game to bring about a violent end to any of their creatures. As a horticulturist and hobbyist, science is ingrained into what I do, so for my purpose temporarily, I will call myself a scientist. As such, I have no interest in just killing things for my own "gain(?)". Observing - yes, collecting - YES, some manipulation - sure, willy-nilly killing of free willy - no. This is counter-productive for me as a scientist of nature!
If you wanna blow creatures to bits, I suggest playing ns2
They also have set the game up so that it would be inefficient anyways to BUILD the darned lethal weapons :P lol
Unless they're very cheap to make (Which would be absurd and I would instantly be disappointed with the game) you might as well just dodge around, build a stasis rifle, or something.
I can't stress it enough lol. Building those weapons would just be a waste of your resources, since even stalkers, bone sharks, etc. will leave you alone if you swim to the surface.
I am noticing a number of...problems, with this line of conversation, not due to what people are saying, but, what they are failing to say.
Most weapons are designed for use on dry land, even the Stasis Rifle points this out in how it's Stasis Field works (only activating upon collision with something). The thing with most conventional firearms, they cannot function properly under water, and laser/plasma/particle weaponry would outright fail to work at a distance farther than 6 inches due to the rather saline water that this world is made of. Any kind of 'weapon' would need to be a zip/pneumatic in nature to properly function, and at that point, why would you use a zip gun, instead of a tranq gun. I mean seriously, how cool would it be to tranq out a stalker, net it, drag it back to your base and proceed to study it/dissect it in a lab to learn all the secrets it's body holds?
Also to note, someone mentioned peepers eating kelp. Based on the physiology of the Peeper (particularly its beak) it can be noted that it must eat something rather hard. Likely it eats on the large Coral Plates and Tubes scattered around the area's it calls home, which would also explain its need for large eyes on either side, since some of those 'feeding grounds' are close to stalker territory.
On that note, Stalkers and other predators are easy to deal with, just like a shark, listen for the sound they make before attacking, turn to face them, and move out of the way when they get close. You're a person, your strongest tool should not be 'I can kill it' but rather 'I can outsmart it'.
Knowledge is the strongest 'weapon' in anyone's arsenal.
I am noticing a number of...problems, with this line of conversation, not due to what people are saying, but, what they are failing to say.
Most weapons are designed for use on dry land, even the Stasis Rifle points this out in how it's Stasis Field works (only activating upon collision with something). The thing with most conventional firearms, they cannot function properly under water, and laser/plasma/particle weaponry would outright fail to work at a distance farther than 6 inches due to the rather saline water that this world is made of. Any kind of 'weapon' would need to be a zip/pneumatic in nature to properly function, and at that point, why would you use a zip gun, instead of a tranq gun. I mean seriously, how cool would it be to tranq out a stalker, net it, drag it back to your base and proceed to study it/dissect it in a lab to learn all the secrets it's body holds?
Also to note, someone mentioned peepers eating kelp. Based on the physiology of the Peeper (particularly its beak) it can be noted that it must eat something rather hard. Likely it eats on the large Coral Plates and Tubes scattered around the area's it calls home, which would also explain its need for large eyes on either side, since some of those 'feeding grounds' are close to stalker territory.
On that note, Stalkers and other predators are easy to deal with, just like a shark, listen for the sound they make before attacking, turn to face them, and move out of the way when they get close. You're a person, your strongest tool should not be 'I can kill it' but rather 'I can outsmart it'.
Knowledge is the strongest 'weapon' in anyone's arsenal.
Completely agree here, especially your last paragraph
JoeNapalmCity of BrassJoin Date: 2015-07-21Member: 206311Members
edited July 2015
At the end of the day, if the Devs vision is that this was an exploratory mission, not a military one, I can see a lack of out-and-out offensive weaponry.
The magic of Nanites can only reconstruct what you've recovered fragments of - if you didn't bring along the blueprints for Heat Harpoons and monofilament net casters, how do you expect the fabricator to make them?
They can't make everyone happy, really. While a flechettepedo minigun would slake my thirst for vengeance when I get ambushed by a Stalker or one of those swimming sea mine things, I am at a loss to remember when I've actually been killed by fauna - torn up plenty, but generally I have managed to haul @$$ out of the way after the initial strike.
(Check back with me once I've run into Dread Cthulhu)
I get people want to hit back at the predators but I think they are gasping the problem at the wrong end: Instead of offensive tools to eliminate the problem, why not passive defensive tools that prevents it becoming a problem in the first place?
Such as camouflage to not look like food or some tool that imitates an animal (Sea Emperor) that all other animals are afraid of? A sonic speaker that creates soundwaves that irritates predators or pacifies them? Perhaps the player can smear themselves in some plant that most predators would think is a poisonous plant? Why not look like a poisonous plant? Maybe something you can do to the Seamoth too, so those damn sharks would leave it alone.
Hell, with this level of tech on display, why not a special suit that makes you invisible? I certainly would like to explore caves in peace without Crashers ramming you. Or create a temporary and impenetrable force-field around you in case of a Reaper? Or just a force-field that creates an shocking electric field around, shocking and stunning anything that tries to hurt you?
2. But in a survival game filled with predators, it's reasonable you're going to need more defenses against them. Weapons are still common in most survival games, because they add a layer of defense, a good offense.
The argument is essentially: "other survival games solve this problem this way, so this game should do it too".
Survival is about staying alive, not dominating everything that threatens you by excessive force. When threatened by a predator you do not need to kill it, just scare it away (many predators that know humans do this, even things bigger than them like bears), avoid it or make it think that you are not food and not a threat.
Guns are a crude defense when you don't seek offense, especially when you don't need the creature's meat. Look at Native Americans, Kalahari Bushmen or any peoples that live in nature with only devices they can find on-hand. They are rarely attacked or eaten by predators because they know those predators, their behavior and patterns and thus know how to avoid them. Kalahari Bushmen for example make a fire and stay near it at all times at night because that's when lions hunt, thus dodging the problem altogether. That is survival and that is what a survival game should have.
5. But they aren't weapons, and with the level of tech shown in-game, something as advanced as a handheld particle cannon should be easy to a society with dark matter reactors. And if you don't want to build them you don't have to. They aren't necessary for survival, but they really help when you're surrounded by large groups of and/or larger predators.
They probably have them (and probably other lethal stuff), but why would they be on a terraforming ship that is supposed to transform dead worlds? Even as abstract data. What would they make them for? There are two answers:
1. Hostile aliens and I mean aliens with guns. If you are at the point when you need small arms against the aliens you likely have done many, many things drastically, terribly wrong that it is almost certainly too late. If you see hostile aliens (aliens that don't want to communicate and demonstrated hostile intent) you should have turned your ship around and GTFO, turn the problem over to someone equipped to deal with the situation. You are a crewmember of a terraforming ship, hostile first contact should not be something you are supposed to engage in.
2. Other people. Now think about that. Why would you upload the blueprints of a tool whose only use is to hurt other people on a terraforming ship? Nothing good. If somebody wants to make anti-people weapons than something has gone wrong and allowing them access to such would only make things worse. Better to not have any in the system and force any homicidal person to improvise, thus delay him and give the rest of the crew a chance.
3. Rocks and inanimate things, made by bored crewmembers to pass the time. This is a waste of resources and surely such technology would have far superior entertainment options.
I get people want to hit back at the predators but I think they are gasping the problem at the wrong end: Instead of offensive tools to eliminate the problem, why not passive defensive tools that prevents it becoming a problem in the first place?
Such as camouflage to not look like food or some tool that imitates an animal (Sea Emperor) that all other animals are afraid of? A sonic speaker that creates soundwaves that irritates predators or pacifies them? Perhaps the player can smear themselves in some plant that most predators would think is a poisonous plant? Why not look like a poisonous plant? Maybe something you can do to the Seamoth too, so those damn sharks would leave it alone.
Hell, with this level of tech on display, why not a special suit that makes you invisible? I certainly would like to explore caves in peace without Crashers ramming you. Or create a temporary and impenetrable force-field around you in case of a Reaper? Or just a force-field that creates an shocking electric field around, shocking and stunning anything that tries to hurt you?
2. But in a survival game filled with predators, it's reasonable you're going to need more defenses against them. Weapons are still common in most survival games, because they add a layer of defense, a good offense.
The argument is essentially: "other survival games solve this problem this way, so this game should do it too".
Survival is about staying alive, not dominating everything that threatens you by excessive force. When threatened by a predator you do not need to kill it, just scare it away (many predators that know humans do this, even things bigger than them like bears), avoid it or make it think that you are not food and not a threat.
Guns are a crude defense when you don't seek offense, especially when you don't need the creature's meat. Look at Native Americans, Kalahari Bushmen or any peoples that live in nature with only devices they can find on-hand. They are rarely attacked or eaten by predators because they know those predators, their behavior and patterns and thus know how to avoid them. Kalahari Bushmen for example make a fire and stay near it at all times at night because that's when lions hunt, thus dodging the problem altogether. That is survival and that is what a survival game should have.
5. But they aren't weapons, and with the level of tech shown in-game, something as advanced as a handheld particle cannon should be easy to a society with dark matter reactors. And if you don't want to build them you don't have to. They aren't necessary for survival, but they really help when you're surrounded by large groups of and/or larger predators.
They probably have them (and probably other lethal stuff), but why would they be on a terraforming ship that is supposed to transform dead worlds? Even as abstract data. What would they make them for? There are two answers:
1. Hostile aliens and I mean aliens with guns. If you are at the point when you need small arms against the aliens you likely have done many, many things drastically, terribly wrong that it is almost certainly too late. If you see hostile aliens (aliens that don't want to communicate and demonstrated hostile intent) you should have turned your ship around and GTFO, turn the problem over to someone equipped to deal with the situation. You are a crewmember of a terraforming ship, hostile first contact should not be something you are supposed to engage in.
2. Other people. Now think about that. Why would you upload the blueprints of a tool whose only use is to hurt other people on a terraforming ship? Nothing good. If somebody wants to make anti-people weapons than something has gone wrong and allowing them access to such would only make things worse. Better to not have any in the system and force any homicidal person to improvise, thus delay him and give the rest of the crew a chance.
3. Rocks and inanimate things, made by bored crewmembers to pass the time. This is a waste of resources and surely such technology would have far superior entertainment options.
You mean like say a module for the Sea Moth that makes it appear to be a large Rabbit Ray, which, from my observations, the Stalkers actively avoid going near?
Yeah, not kidding I've gotten attacked by one, started swimming toward the shallows, passed a rabbit ray turned to check on my stalker problem to dodge if needed only to see it high tailing it back toward its creep vines
I just basically made an account to give my idea of a little for both sides of the argument after reading all the comments I've decided to share my thoughts. On the Pro-weapon side self defence is an idea you hear every in the world it's an concept that people won't forget, so people will want there way when they realize they have to go swing at stalkers with knife. Personally, I have been able to deal with most predators with stasis rifles and Propulsion guns just dandy but I knew wasn't thinking i could escape the reapers with them and the seamoth always seamed liked a jumpscare Bullseye ready for the reaper. Finally, when I whent strolling on my seamoth getting last few things for a cyclops I decided to explore ( not Knowing the reapers guard undeveloped zones) I decided to leave the for base to be in surprise of a reaper spawning on me and I felt so unprepared and weak because I was thinking " there spawning every ware I'm not safe" so from then I've been too cowardly to play. But knowing even scarier things of greater are coming I feel like I need an armament to be like my safety blanky to get me through because still it's a great game . I'm starting think this through, because this is a science game and I'm a man of science.
Anti weapons statements: I truly believe now believe that need to add tools of other purpose to help us get by predators, because really it's a hard site trying to imagine seeing this puny diver shooting down a reaper or Sea emperor with an acceleration cannon or an aquatic adapted rail gun armed with an 2 ton plasteel slug( not sure if plasteel would be used in that scenario) just because there scary and in the way not sure that's enough even for the emperor and it seems pointless killing lesser predators. I'm honestly leaning towards the path of beating up the research function in the game to adapt to yourself to them and maybe you. I say first once when you get inside the aurora and you fix generator it gives off one last dying breath of opening a few door full of some possible supplies you may need like some schematics and access to a science lab that contains a science AI that you will take and use to make a science lab room in your sea base that will contains a mane computer with the AI and some others like one that is basically you science journal that lets you keep track of your research. But then you can start cooking with gas as you could then possibly make sea drones that could controlled there own or manually with a computer in your base as it searches for creatures to study and take bio analysts of and if science AI thinks it's not enough you can track the creature and tranq it with a tranquilizer to possibly perform an autopsy on near your base (possibly with an augmented seamoth ) depending on size of the beasty ) . After some time of your AI is scanning and making blueprints you could make new uprgrades and gear like stealth suits or a berserker suit from Studies of the reaper and maybe the option to make a power grid to construct tesla rod towers to prevent unwanted guest in your perimeter by studying the future electric eel coming to the game soon ( maybe upgrades seamoth to give its foes a sudden shock or give the seamoth robot claws from researching reapers).
I can see in both ways how some people may want one function or another but I prefer the idea of scientific adaption( but maybe it would be neat see after a weekfrom the explosion of the aurora if space pirates would investigate the wreckage and you needed to stealth you way around them your guys'is game not mine) I apologize for irrational ideas or bad grammar my bad.
On the Pro-weapon side self defence is an idea you hear every in the world it's an concept that people won't forget, so people will want there way when they realize they have to go swing at stalkers with knife.
Or they can use the Propulsion/Repulsion canon, or use a Seaglide or Seamoth or use the Statis rifle. The game becomes much safer once you have a Seamoth.
Finally, when I whent strolling on my seamoth getting last few things for a cyclops I decided to explore ( not Knowing the reapers guard undeveloped zones) I decided to leave the for base to be in surprise of a reaper spawning on me and I felt so unprepared and weak because I was thinking " there spawning every ware I'm not safe" so from then I've been too cowardly to play.
Reapers spawn in large numbers only around the Aurora. They will spawn by their lonesome in other biomes, if at all.
Sonar and an early warning system that could be installed into Seamoths would help this problem far more.
But knowing even scarier things of greater are coming I feel like I need an armament to be like my safety blanky to get me through because still it's a great game .
You need to be careful in this game, you can't just rush in anywhere, you have to pay attention to your surroundings.
What is actually much more needed is expanding the hostile-AI, fine-tuning it and allowing more realistic behavior. For example, most predators should back off once they are hurt by the player. Real sharks have been known to back off when they are punched or cut, even by bare hands. Right now the devs cranked up the hostile AI to ridiculous levels.
Anti weapons statements: I truly believe now believe that need to add tools of other purpose to help us get by predators, because really it's a hard site trying to imagine seeing this puny diver shooting down a reaper or Sea emperor with an acceleration cannon or an aquatic adapted rail gun armed with an 2 ton plasteel slug( not sure if plasteel would be used in that scenario) just because there scary and in the way not sure that's enough even for the emperor and it seems pointless killing lesser predators.
Again, the existing weapons are fairly effecting against all animals except the Reaper. For Reapers, your best bet is to simply run away or get to a Cyclops.
I say first once when you get inside the aurora and you fix generator it gives off one last dying breath of opening a few door full of some possible supplies you may need like some schematics and access to a science lab that contains a science AI that you will take and use to make a science lab room in your sea base that will contains a mane computer with the AI and some others like one that is basically you science journal that lets you keep track of your research.
There is already a special vehicle planned, called the exosuit.
Such a research function should be enabled by default, you already have the Fabricator analyzing specimens. There are specimen and plant analyzers planned in the game.
On the Pro-weapon side self defence is an idea you hear every in the world it's an concept that people won't forget, so people will want there way when they realize they have to go swing at stalkers with knife.
Or they can use the Propulsion/Repulsion canon, or use a Seaglide or Seamoth or use the Statis rifle. The game becomes much safer once you have a Seamoth.
Finally, when I whent strolling on my seamoth getting last few things for a cyclops I decided to explore ( not Knowing the reapers guard undeveloped zones) I decided to leave the for base to be in surprise of a reaper spawning on me and I felt so unprepared and weak because I was thinking " there spawning every ware I'm not safe" so from then I've been too cowardly to play.
Reapers spawn in large numbers only around the Aurora. They will spawn by their lonesome in other biomes, if at all.
Sonar and an early warning system that could be installed into Seamoths would help this problem far more.
But knowing even scarier things of greater are coming I feel like I need an armament to be like my safety blanky to get me through because still it's a great game .
You need to be careful in this game, you can't just rush in anywhere, you have to pay attention to your surroundings.
What is actually much more needed is expanding the hostile-AI, fine-tuning it and allowing more realistic behavior. For example, most predators should back off once they are hurt by the player. Real sharks have been known to back off when they are punched or cut, even by bare hands. Right now the devs cranked up the hostile AI to ridiculous levels.
Anti weapons statements: I truly believe now believe that need to add tools of other purpose to help us get by predators, because really it's a hard site trying to imagine seeing this puny diver shooting down a reaper or Sea emperor with an acceleration cannon or an aquatic adapted rail gun armed with an 2 ton plasteel slug( not sure if plasteel would be used in that scenario) just because there scary and in the way not sure that's enough even for the emperor and it seems pointless killing lesser predators.
Again, the existing weapons are fairly effecting against all animals except the Reaper. For Reapers, your best bet is to simply run away or get to a Cyclops.
I say first once when you get inside the aurora and you fix generator it gives off one last dying breath of opening a few door full of some possible supplies you may need like some schematics and access to a science lab that contains a science AI that you will take and use to make a science lab room in your sea base that will contains a mane computer with the AI and some others like one that is basically you science journal that lets you keep track of your research.
There is already a special vehicle planned, called the exosuit.
Such a research function should be enabled by default, you already have the Fabricator analyzing specimens. There are specimen and plant analyzers planned in the game.
Yes, exactly. Pay Attention, all creatures that are hostile, both actively, and passively in the Gasopod's case, make specific sounds before attacking. All of them. Learn to listen to them, even if they are not on screen, hearing that sound can save your life very, very easily if your quick.
NOTICE: I AM NOT ASKING FOR A WEAPON, READ CAREFULLY!
I don't know about you, but I find it very hard to explore and appreciate the beauty of Subnautica when a stalker is trying to rip my face off.
If there was a way to make them ignore you,(unless you attack them first of course) then you could explore and study the world around you.
This would fit very well in Subnautica.
1. There you created a scenario in which lethal weaponry would be needed. This scenario doesn't exist so far, so no lethal weapons needed.
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 saved 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 expensive 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 convinced a single bit.
I guess humans are the only species that's preemtively defensive by being offensive... otherwise why bother with weapons?
1. However one such scenario could be released that needs it, and I have no doubt that weapons would be released on the same day.
2. But in a survival game filled with predators, it's reasonable you're going to need more defenses against them. Weapons are still common in most survival games, because they add a layer of defense, a good offense.
And for clarification, "the best defense is a good offense" doesn't necessarily mean preemptively attacking every predator in the game. Think about it like this, there's a man charging at you with a sword, and you also have one. Do you flee, wait to parry and counterattack, or rush at him to strike him down first. A good offense used defensively can be the second and third options. Straight offense is if there's a guy with a sword minding his own business, and going imakillhim.
Weapons are also good for mental security.
3.-4. Acceptable responses, good job.
5. But they aren't weapons, and with the level of tech shown in-game, something as advanced as a handheld particle cannon should be easy to a society with dark matter reactors. And if you don't want to build them you don't have to. They aren't necessary for survival, but they really help when you're surrounded by large groups of and/or larger predators.
6. Weapons can be a choice. You want to be a peaceful scientist, go right on ahead. You want to go on a destructive rampage, ruining this pristine world, then I'm going to be silently judging you, but go on right ahead. Stop limiting what other players can do.
7. It is still a means of balance and combined with the ecosystem thing, and with knowledge of it, players will make the best decisions that they can.
I myself don't care much for weapons, but the choice to have them should be there.
Also, tool idea, a shock prod, similar to the kinds used when swimming with sharks.
1. That's what i meant. Creating content as means to the purpose of justifying other content is not a good choice of game design.
2. This ->
The argument is essentially: "other survival games solve this problem this way, so this game should do it too".
Survival is about staying alive, not dominating everything that threatens you by excessive force. When threatened by a predator you do not need to kill it, just scare it away (many predators that know humans do this, even things bigger than them like bears), avoid it or make it think that you are not food and not a threat.
Also... imo the best defense is a really, damn good defense. Why focus on offense when armor or some sort of shield could be protection enough. You could also defend yourself with repelling chemicals made from gasopod balls or sth idunno.
5. I really hope the being surrounded doesn't become a common scene in SN. So getting surounded would be the punishment the player gets for being way to careless.
6. This is a nono. There is no choice in games. Well, there is, but most player won't be like "i have the choice so i decide not to". You have the choice of not wasting precious power-cells by not building a seamoth. But as most players want to reach the maximum potential the game lets them have, they will go for it. Which in this case would be swimming around well-armed and therefore destroying the message. It's more like an illusion of choice. And i know the SN without guns ... a new player playing it for the first time will think of them as a normal part of the game and not start to question the choice of weapons.
7. Just because a cheap gun is overpowered doesn't mean an expensive one isn't overpowered as well.
You need to be careful in this game, you can't just rush in anywhere, you have to pay attention to your surroundings.
What is actually much more needed is expanding the hostile-AI, fine-tuning it and allowing more realistic behavior. For example, most predators should back off once they are hurt by the player. Real sharks have been known to back off when they are punched or cut, even by bare hands. Right now the devs cranked up the hostile AI to ridiculous levels.
[/quote]
At the moment being aware of your surroundings will not help against reapers, because they appear out of thin air (water?) an inch from your face. At the moment, you pretty much seem to need the cyclops.
I just signed up soley to make a point in this discussion. I have not played Subnautica yet myself, but I fully intend to purchase it within the next 7 days when I get my next paycheck. I have, however, seen Jacksepticeye play it for hours on youtube.
Here is my point. Add weapons, don't add weapons, I could care less - but stop using the argument that this is supposed to be a peaceful scientific exploration mission.
Bullpucky. That may be the vision/idea/inspiration/intent/whatever, but from what I've seen so far this game is a survival game. I have yet to see one instance of the protagonist studying anything, researching anything but debris from the Aurora, or doing anything whatsoever other than trying to stay alive (or building tools to make staying alive easier).
This may change in the future (and I quite frankly hope it does), and you may get the opportunity to examine indigenous life and discover all sorts of interesting things, but I haven't seen anything of the sort so far.
At the present time this is a survival game plain and simple. If you want to roleplay you are a scientist on a mission of discovery that's your right, but it's not presently a part of the game mechanics so it is an invalid argument point in the context of this discussion.
Edit:personally what I'de like to see added is some sort of cryogenic food storage implemented, along with any form of predator deterrent suggested be it shield, decoy, speargun, learned aversion to the repulsion blast, holographic image of a major predator or anything else anyone could dream up, because I do agree that as it stands it's a bit unbalanced in favor of the indigenous predators. Say what you like about the large submersible being safe, but I saw those sawtooth shark things attacking it in Jack's video and doing damage to both him and the sub, (and that's a smaller swimming predator).
I just signed up soley to make a point in this discussion. I have not played Subnautica yet myself, but I fully intend to purchase it within the next 7 days when I get my next paycheck. I have, however, seen Jacksepticeye play it for hours on youtube.
Here is my point. Add weapons, don't add weapons, I could care less - but stop using the argument that this is supposed to be a peaceful scientific exploration mission.
Bullpucky. That may be the vision/idea/inspiration/intent/whatever, but from what I've seen so far this game is a survival game. I have yet to see one instance of the protagonist studying anything, researching anything but debris from the Aurora, or doing anything whatsoever other than trying to stay alive (or building tools to make staying alive easier).
This may change in the future (and I quite frankly hope it does), and you may get the opportunity to examine indigenous life and discover all sorts of interesting things, but I haven't seen anything of the sort so far.
At the present time this is a survival game plain and simple. If you want to roleplay you are a scientist on a mission of discovery that's your right, but it's not presently a part of the game mechanics so it is an invalid argument point in the context of this discussion.
Edit:personally what I'de like to see added is some sort of cryogenic food storage implemented, along with any form of predator deterrent suggested be it shield, decoy, speargun, learned aversion to the repulsion blast, holographic image of a major predator or anything else anyone could dream up, because I do agree that as it stands it's a bit unbalanced in favor of the indigenous predators. Say what you like about the large submersible being safe, but I saw those sawtooth shark things attacking it in Jack's video and doing damage to both him and the sub, (and that's a smaller swimming predator).
I'm normally inclined to leave posts I find silly alone, so I'll compromise and give you an analogy...
What you said amounts to this
I'm watching someone make videos of a building that isn't done yet, and I haven't seen any sprinkler system therefore there is none. Also, we shouldn't listen to people who don't want fire alarms because there is no sprinkler system
No, actually I don't. The only problem I see is that I don't even remotely understand your response. I think you must have completely misinterpreted what I said. Also, obviously you must be looking for an argument, otherwise why start your reply with "I'm normally inclined to leave posts I find silly alone..." ?
No, actually I don't. The only problem I see is that I don't even remotely understand your response. I think you must have completely misinterpreted what I said. Also, obviously you must be looking for an argument, otherwise why start your reply with "I'm normally inclined to leave posts I find silly alone..." ?
Well, you said that no one should use the argument that scientists don't use weapons... If they can help it
And your reason for that was because there was no evidence of being a scientist
And I'm saying that the features such as the DNA transfusions, analyzing creatures etc., aren't in the game... Yet
Meanwhile, the devs have said that the player is there to terraform the planet, which seems to require some knowledge of science
So right off the bat, there actually is evidence
Here is my point. Add weapons, don't add weapons, I could care less - but stop using the argument that this is supposed to be a peaceful scientific exploration mission.
Bullpucky. That may be the vision/idea/inspiration/intent/whatever, but from what I've seen so far this game is a survival game.
Your argument is again the circular logic of "other survival games have guns, so if this is a survival game this should have guns too!". So this argument is bullpucky all by itself.
Researchers into Amazonian jungles or Arctic expeditions do not go armed to the teeth, prepared to exterminate anything that looks at them funny. What they do is instead hire local people (or people experienced in their chosen terrain) that know the animals and keep the researchers away from them (along with other hazards), only using guns as a last measure. Researchers actually want to harm wildlife as little as possible.
But case you didn't notice, the game already has guns. It just doesn't kill the target outright. The propulsion/repulsion and statis gun is adequate defense against anything except Reapers (for which your best defense is a Seaglide if not a Cyclops).
Edit:personally what I'de like to see added is some sort of cryogenic food storage implemented, along with any form of predator deterrent suggested be it shield, decoy, speargun, learned aversion to the repulsion blast, holographic image of a major predator or anything else anyone could dream up, because I do agree that as it stands it's a bit unbalanced in favor of the indigenous predators.
Right now there is a bug that makes predators overaggressive, but when that is away this is simply not true. Play the game and make a judgement based on that, not on what you see in gameplay videos.
Once I had a Seamoth and one of the defence-guns, I had few problems with predators.
No, actually I don't. The only problem I see is that I don't even remotely understand your response. I think you must have completely misinterpreted what I said. Also, obviously you must be looking for an argument, otherwise why start your reply with "I'm normally inclined to leave posts I find silly alone..." ?
Well, you said that no one should use the argument that scientists don't use weapons... If they can help it
And your reason for that was because there was no evidence of being a scientist
And I'm saying that the features such as the DNA transfusions, analyzing creatures etc., aren't in the game... Yet
Meanwhile, the devs have said that the player is there to terraform the planet, which seems to require some knowledge of science
So right off the bat, there actually is evidence
Sorry for the confusing post
At no point in time did I say scientists do or don't use weapons. Several other persons in this thread stated that the game was all about scientific exploration and therefore required no weapons. Nor did I say there was no evidence of being a scientist. What I said was there was no game mechanic justifying the argument other persons have made.
Here is my point. Add weapons, don't add weapons, I could care less - but stop using the argument that this is supposed to be a peaceful scientific exploration mission.
Bullpucky. That may be the vision/idea/inspiration/intent/whatever, but from what I've seen so far this game is a survival game.
Your argument is again the circular logic of "other survival games have guns, so if this is a survival game this should have guns too!". So this argument is bullpucky all by itself.
Researchers into Amazonian jungles or Arctic expeditions do not go armed to the teeth, prepared to exterminate anything that looks at them funny. What they do is instead hire local people (or people experienced in their chosen terrain) that know the animals and keep the researchers away from them (along with other hazards), only using guns as a last measure. Researchers actually want to harm wildlife as little as possible.
But case you didn't notice, the game already has guns. It just doesn't kill the target outright. The propulsion/repulsion and statis gun is adequate defense against anything except Reapers (for which your best defense is a Seaglide if not a Cyclops).
Edit:personally what I'de like to see added is some sort of cryogenic food storage implemented, along with any form of predator deterrent suggested be it shield, decoy, speargun, learned aversion to the repulsion blast, holographic image of a major predator or anything else anyone could dream up, because I do agree that as it stands it's a bit unbalanced in favor of the indigenous predators.
Right now there is a bug that makes predators overaggressive, but when that is away this is simply not true. Play the game and make a judgement based on that, not on what you see in gameplay videos.
Once I had a Seamoth and one of the defence-guns, I had few problems with predators.
Did you actually even do more than skim my post? At no point in time did I say a thing about adding guns to the game. I said I didn't care one way or the other if weapons were added. I said that I believed the game slightly favored the predators at this point, and something to even things would be nice. Specifically: " along with any form of predator deterrent suggested be it shield, decoy, speargun, learned aversion to the repulsion blast, holographic image of a major predator or anything else anyone could dream up". The only time I even used the word gun was in mentioning speargun in a long list of passive defenses in case you didn't notice.
Perhaps instead of jumping right into laying into people's posts like an idiot, people on here should actually read and be sure they understand what the person has said before shooting off their reply.
For those who seem to be too enmeshed in their own personal spin on what other people post in this argument, I'll spell out my reply in nice simple terms without the extra baggage so you won't get confused. I don't care if there are weapons or guns. I do however think the predators are slightly overpowered right now. The game mechanics at present don't support the argument that the game is designed with scientific pursuit as the main gameplay goal. I'd like to see a freezer for food.
Is that simple and clear enough for everyone involved?
you said there's no game mechanic that says we're scientists... well, see, there is... namely the DNA transfuser gun lol. I have a hunch a biologist or some other type of scientist would love to study and interact with the many life forms, especially their dna
the predators are most certainly not overpowered, they're quite the opposite lol
there ya go, there's your entire argument that I'm trying to understand right?
welcome to the forums
(If you think we're trolling you, you're wrong lol)
Comments
getting noticed by a dev? wow. movin on up.
1. However one such scenario could be released that needs it, and I have no doubt that weapons would be released on the same day.
2. But in a survival game filled with predators, it's reasonable you're going to need more defenses against them. Weapons are still common in most survival games, because they add a layer of defense, a good offense.
3.-4. Acceptable responses, good job.
5. But they aren't weapons, and with the level of tech shown in-game, something as advanced as a handheld particle cannon should be easy to a society with dark matter reactors. And if you don't want to build them you don't have to. They aren't necessary for survival, but they really help when you're surrounded by large groups of and/or larger predators.
6. Weapons can be a choice. You want to be a peaceful scientist, go right on ahead. You want to go on a destructive rampage, ruining this pristine world, then I'm going to be silently judging you, but go on right ahead. Stop limiting what other players can do.
7. It is still a means of balance and combined with the ecosystem thing, and with knowledge of it, players will make the best decisions that they can.
I myself don't care much for weapons, but the choice to have them should be there.
Also, tool idea, a shock prod, similar to the kinds used when swimming with sharks.
If you dont know who Flayra is... http://unknownworlds.com/about/
Really now, I highly doubt they're going to incorporate anything in the game to bring about a violent end to any of their creatures. As a horticulturist and hobbyist, science is ingrained into what I do, so for my purpose temporarily, I will call myself a scientist. As such, I have no interest in just killing things for my own "gain(?)". Observing - yes, collecting - YES, some manipulation - sure, willy-nilly killing of free willy - no. This is counter-productive for me as a scientist of nature!
If you wanna blow creatures to bits, I suggest playing ns2
They also have set the game up so that it would be inefficient anyways to BUILD the darned lethal weapons :P lol
Unless they're very cheap to make (Which would be absurd and I would instantly be disappointed with the game) you might as well just dodge around, build a stasis rifle, or something.
I can't stress it enough lol. Building those weapons would just be a waste of your resources, since even stalkers, bone sharks, etc. will leave you alone if you swim to the surface.
even ran into a boneshark or the likes with a sub on full speed?
Last I checked the end result was a very dead fishy.
Most weapons are designed for use on dry land, even the Stasis Rifle points this out in how it's Stasis Field works (only activating upon collision with something). The thing with most conventional firearms, they cannot function properly under water, and laser/plasma/particle weaponry would outright fail to work at a distance farther than 6 inches due to the rather saline water that this world is made of. Any kind of 'weapon' would need to be a zip/pneumatic in nature to properly function, and at that point, why would you use a zip gun, instead of a tranq gun. I mean seriously, how cool would it be to tranq out a stalker, net it, drag it back to your base and proceed to study it/dissect it in a lab to learn all the secrets it's body holds?
Also to note, someone mentioned peepers eating kelp. Based on the physiology of the Peeper (particularly its beak) it can be noted that it must eat something rather hard. Likely it eats on the large Coral Plates and Tubes scattered around the area's it calls home, which would also explain its need for large eyes on either side, since some of those 'feeding grounds' are close to stalker territory.
On that note, Stalkers and other predators are easy to deal with, just like a shark, listen for the sound they make before attacking, turn to face them, and move out of the way when they get close. You're a person, your strongest tool should not be 'I can kill it' but rather 'I can outsmart it'.
Knowledge is the strongest 'weapon' in anyone's arsenal.
Completely agree here, especially your last paragraph
The magic of Nanites can only reconstruct what you've recovered fragments of - if you didn't bring along the blueprints for Heat Harpoons and monofilament net casters, how do you expect the fabricator to make them?
They can't make everyone happy, really. While a flechettepedo minigun would slake my thirst for vengeance when I get ambushed by a Stalker or one of those swimming sea mine things, I am at a loss to remember when I've actually been killed by fauna - torn up plenty, but generally I have managed to haul @$$ out of the way after the initial strike.
(Check back with me once I've run into Dread Cthulhu)
-Jn-
Such as camouflage to not look like food or some tool that imitates an animal (Sea Emperor) that all other animals are afraid of? A sonic speaker that creates soundwaves that irritates predators or pacifies them? Perhaps the player can smear themselves in some plant that most predators would think is a poisonous plant? Why not look like a poisonous plant? Maybe something you can do to the Seamoth too, so those damn sharks would leave it alone.
Hell, with this level of tech on display, why not a special suit that makes you invisible? I certainly would like to explore caves in peace without Crashers ramming you. Or create a temporary and impenetrable force-field around you in case of a Reaper? Or just a force-field that creates an shocking electric field around, shocking and stunning anything that tries to hurt you?
The argument is essentially: "other survival games solve this problem this way, so this game should do it too".
Survival is about staying alive, not dominating everything that threatens you by excessive force. When threatened by a predator you do not need to kill it, just scare it away (many predators that know humans do this, even things bigger than them like bears), avoid it or make it think that you are not food and not a threat.
Guns are a crude defense when you don't seek offense, especially when you don't need the creature's meat. Look at Native Americans, Kalahari Bushmen or any peoples that live in nature with only devices they can find on-hand. They are rarely attacked or eaten by predators because they know those predators, their behavior and patterns and thus know how to avoid them. Kalahari Bushmen for example make a fire and stay near it at all times at night because that's when lions hunt, thus dodging the problem altogether. That is survival and that is what a survival game should have.
They probably have them (and probably other lethal stuff), but why would they be on a terraforming ship that is supposed to transform dead worlds? Even as abstract data. What would they make them for? There are two answers:
1. Hostile aliens and I mean aliens with guns. If you are at the point when you need small arms against the aliens you likely have done many, many things drastically, terribly wrong that it is almost certainly too late. If you see hostile aliens (aliens that don't want to communicate and demonstrated hostile intent) you should have turned your ship around and GTFO, turn the problem over to someone equipped to deal with the situation. You are a crewmember of a terraforming ship, hostile first contact should not be something you are supposed to engage in.
2. Other people. Now think about that. Why would you upload the blueprints of a tool whose only use is to hurt other people on a terraforming ship? Nothing good. If somebody wants to make anti-people weapons than something has gone wrong and allowing them access to such would only make things worse. Better to not have any in the system and force any homicidal person to improvise, thus delay him and give the rest of the crew a chance.
3. Rocks and inanimate things, made by bored crewmembers to pass the time. This is a waste of resources and surely such technology would have far superior entertainment options.
You mean like say a module for the Sea Moth that makes it appear to be a large Rabbit Ray, which, from my observations, the Stalkers actively avoid going near?
Yeah, not kidding I've gotten attacked by one, started swimming toward the shallows, passed a rabbit ray turned to check on my stalker problem to dodge if needed only to see it high tailing it back toward its creep vines
Anti weapons statements: I truly believe now believe that need to add tools of other purpose to help us get by predators, because really it's a hard site trying to imagine seeing this puny diver shooting down a reaper or Sea emperor with an acceleration cannon or an aquatic adapted rail gun armed with an 2 ton plasteel slug( not sure if plasteel would be used in that scenario) just because there scary and in the way not sure that's enough even for the emperor and it seems pointless killing lesser predators. I'm honestly leaning towards the path of beating up the research function in the game to adapt to yourself to them and maybe you. I say first once when you get inside the aurora and you fix generator it gives off one last dying breath of opening a few door full of some possible supplies you may need like some schematics and access to a science lab that contains a science AI that you will take and use to make a science lab room in your sea base that will contains a mane computer with the AI and some others like one that is basically you science journal that lets you keep track of your research. But then you can start cooking with gas as you could then possibly make sea drones that could controlled there own or manually with a computer in your base as it searches for creatures to study and take bio analysts of and if science AI thinks it's not enough you can track the creature and tranq it with a tranquilizer to possibly perform an autopsy on near your base (possibly with an augmented seamoth ) depending on size of the beasty ) . After some time of your AI is scanning and making blueprints you could make new uprgrades and gear like stealth suits or a berserker suit from Studies of the reaper and maybe the option to make a power grid to construct tesla rod towers to prevent unwanted guest in your perimeter by studying the future electric eel coming to the game soon ( maybe upgrades seamoth to give its foes a sudden shock or give the seamoth robot claws from researching reapers).
I can see in both ways how some people may want one function or another but I prefer the idea of scientific adaption( but maybe it would be neat see after a weekfrom the explosion of the aurora if space pirates would investigate the wreckage and you needed to stealth you way around them your guys'is game not mine) I apologize for irrational ideas or bad grammar my bad.
Or they can use the Propulsion/Repulsion canon, or use a Seaglide or Seamoth or use the Statis rifle. The game becomes much safer once you have a Seamoth.
Reapers spawn in large numbers only around the Aurora. They will spawn by their lonesome in other biomes, if at all.
Sonar and an early warning system that could be installed into Seamoths would help this problem far more.
You need to be careful in this game, you can't just rush in anywhere, you have to pay attention to your surroundings.
What is actually much more needed is expanding the hostile-AI, fine-tuning it and allowing more realistic behavior. For example, most predators should back off once they are hurt by the player. Real sharks have been known to back off when they are punched or cut, even by bare hands. Right now the devs cranked up the hostile AI to ridiculous levels.
Again, the existing weapons are fairly effecting against all animals except the Reaper. For Reapers, your best bet is to simply run away or get to a Cyclops.
There is already a special vehicle planned, called the exosuit.
Such a research function should be enabled by default, you already have the Fabricator analyzing specimens. There are specimen and plant analyzers planned in the game.
Yes, exactly. Pay Attention, all creatures that are hostile, both actively, and passively in the Gasopod's case, make specific sounds before attacking. All of them. Learn to listen to them, even if they are not on screen, hearing that sound can save your life very, very easily if your quick.
I don't know about you, but I find it very hard to explore and appreciate the beauty of Subnautica when a stalker is trying to rip my face off.
If there was a way to make them ignore you,(unless you attack them first of course) then you could explore and study the world around you.
This would fit very well in Subnautica.
1. That's what i meant. Creating content as means to the purpose of justifying other content is not a good choice of game design.
2. This ->
Also... imo the best defense is a really, damn good defense. Why focus on offense when armor or some sort of shield could be protection enough. You could also defend yourself with repelling chemicals made from gasopod balls or sth idunno.
5. I really hope the being surrounded doesn't become a common scene in SN. So getting surounded would be the punishment the player gets for being way to careless.
6. This is a nono. There is no choice in games. Well, there is, but most player won't be like "i have the choice so i decide not to". You have the choice of not wasting precious power-cells by not building a seamoth. But as most players want to reach the maximum potential the game lets them have, they will go for it. Which in this case would be swimming around well-armed and therefore destroying the message. It's more like an illusion of choice. And i know the SN without guns ... a new player playing it for the first time will think of them as a normal part of the game and not start to question the choice of weapons.
7. Just because a cheap gun is overpowered doesn't mean an expensive one isn't overpowered as well.
You need to be careful in this game, you can't just rush in anywhere, you have to pay attention to your surroundings.
What is actually much more needed is expanding the hostile-AI, fine-tuning it and allowing more realistic behavior. For example, most predators should back off once they are hurt by the player. Real sharks have been known to back off when they are punched or cut, even by bare hands. Right now the devs cranked up the hostile AI to ridiculous levels.
[/quote]
At the moment being aware of your surroundings will not help against reapers, because they appear out of thin air (water?) an inch from your face. At the moment, you pretty much seem to need the cyclops.
Here is my point. Add weapons, don't add weapons, I could care less - but stop using the argument that this is supposed to be a peaceful scientific exploration mission.
Bullpucky. That may be the vision/idea/inspiration/intent/whatever, but from what I've seen so far this game is a survival game. I have yet to see one instance of the protagonist studying anything, researching anything but debris from the Aurora, or doing anything whatsoever other than trying to stay alive (or building tools to make staying alive easier).
This may change in the future (and I quite frankly hope it does), and you may get the opportunity to examine indigenous life and discover all sorts of interesting things, but I haven't seen anything of the sort so far.
At the present time this is a survival game plain and simple. If you want to roleplay you are a scientist on a mission of discovery that's your right, but it's not presently a part of the game mechanics so it is an invalid argument point in the context of this discussion.
Edit:personally what I'de like to see added is some sort of cryogenic food storage implemented, along with any form of predator deterrent suggested be it shield, decoy, speargun, learned aversion to the repulsion blast, holographic image of a major predator or anything else anyone could dream up, because I do agree that as it stands it's a bit unbalanced in favor of the indigenous predators. Say what you like about the large submersible being safe, but I saw those sawtooth shark things attacking it in Jack's video and doing damage to both him and the sub, (and that's a smaller swimming predator).
I'm normally inclined to leave posts I find silly alone, so I'll compromise and give you an analogy...
What you said amounts to this
I'm watching someone make videos of a building that isn't done yet, and I haven't seen any sprinkler system therefore there is none. Also, we shouldn't listen to people who don't want fire alarms because there is no sprinkler system
See the problem here?
Well, you said that no one should use the argument that scientists don't use weapons... If they can help it
And your reason for that was because there was no evidence of being a scientist
And I'm saying that the features such as the DNA transfusions, analyzing creatures etc., aren't in the game... Yet
Meanwhile, the devs have said that the player is there to terraform the planet, which seems to require some knowledge of science
So right off the bat, there actually is evidence
Sorry for the confusing post
Your argument is again the circular logic of "other survival games have guns, so if this is a survival game this should have guns too!". So this argument is bullpucky all by itself.
Researchers into Amazonian jungles or Arctic expeditions do not go armed to the teeth, prepared to exterminate anything that looks at them funny. What they do is instead hire local people (or people experienced in their chosen terrain) that know the animals and keep the researchers away from them (along with other hazards), only using guns as a last measure. Researchers actually want to harm wildlife as little as possible.
But case you didn't notice, the game already has guns. It just doesn't kill the target outright. The propulsion/repulsion and statis gun is adequate defense against anything except Reapers (for which your best defense is a Seaglide if not a Cyclops).
Right now there is a bug that makes predators overaggressive, but when that is away this is simply not true. Play the game and make a judgement based on that, not on what you see in gameplay videos.
Once I had a Seamoth and one of the defence-guns, I had few problems with predators.
Don't remember the last time I died
Way too much, but because im dumb, not because i lack lethal weapons
At no point in time did I say scientists do or don't use weapons. Several other persons in this thread stated that the game was all about scientific exploration and therefore required no weapons. Nor did I say there was no evidence of being a scientist. What I said was there was no game mechanic justifying the argument other persons have made.
Did you actually even do more than skim my post? At no point in time did I say a thing about adding guns to the game. I said I didn't care one way or the other if weapons were added. I said that I believed the game slightly favored the predators at this point, and something to even things would be nice. Specifically: " along with any form of predator deterrent suggested be it shield, decoy, speargun, learned aversion to the repulsion blast, holographic image of a major predator or anything else anyone could dream up". The only time I even used the word gun was in mentioning speargun in a long list of passive defenses in case you didn't notice.
Perhaps instead of jumping right into laying into people's posts like an idiot, people on here should actually read and be sure they understand what the person has said before shooting off their reply.
For those who seem to be too enmeshed in their own personal spin on what other people post in this argument, I'll spell out my reply in nice simple terms without the extra baggage so you won't get confused.
I don't care if there are weapons or guns. I do however think the predators are slightly overpowered right now. The game mechanics at present don't support the argument that the game is designed with scientific pursuit as the main gameplay goal. I'd like to see a freezer for food.
Is that simple and clear enough for everyone involved?
Thanks for the warm welcome trolls.
you said there's no game mechanic that says we're scientists... well, see, there is... namely the DNA transfuser gun lol. I have a hunch a biologist or some other type of scientist would love to study and interact with the many life forms, especially their dna
the predators are most certainly not overpowered, they're quite the opposite lol
there ya go, there's your entire argument that I'm trying to understand right?
welcome to the forums
(If you think we're trolling you, you're wrong lol)