We are not "bringing" politics into the game. The game was conceived and designed from the very beginning to be about avoiding the use of lethal weapons as a way of solving problems. If that frustrates you, I'm sorry, but it's not going to change.
Wait, you mean I'm not supposed to be launching acid mushrooms into everything? Or using the stasis rifle as a free-stabbing exploit? Or shoving monsters into volcanic vents? Or electrocuting the crap out of things with my Seamoth for jollies? Or using the Cyclops as a battering ram?
And all this time I just thought you were teaching me to be creative with my aquatic genocide. Shucks.
Using a tool to kill doesn't make it a weapon
By definition a weapon is anything used for inflicting damage.
A shovel is a weapon if you hit someone over the head with it.
Ahh, but its something designed to do that. A very important distinction.
Also, mocking the devs? Not cool.
We are not "bringing" politics into the game. The game was conceived and designed from the very beginning to be about avoiding the use of lethal weapons as a way of solving problems. If that frustrates you, I'm sorry, but it's not going to change.
Wait, you mean I'm not supposed to be launching acid mushrooms into everything? Or using the stasis rifle as a free-stabbing exploit? Or shoving monsters into volcanic vents? Or electrocuting the crap out of things with my Seamoth for jollies? Or using the Cyclops as a battering ram?
And all this time I just thought you were teaching me to be creative with my aquatic genocide. Shucks.
Using a tool to kill doesn't make it a weapon
By definition a weapon is anything used for inflicting damage.
A shovel is a weapon if you hit someone over the head with it.
Ahh, but its something designed to do that. A very important distinction.
Also, mocking the devs? Not cool.
Ahh now you are shifting the goalposts, First you implied that tools are not weapons now you claim that it has to be designed to be a weapon.
All that matters is lethality, IMO the most lethal weapon in the game is the seamoth.
And FYI I'm not mocking him, I'm making fun of his completely ridiculous argument. That is seriously the worst I have ever heard.
I actually support the Devs not adding guns to the game but that whole "games are political" line made me laugh
The Devs are adults and don't need you to defend their internet honor BTW, they can handle someone disagreeing with them
We are not "bringing" politics into the game. The game was conceived and designed from the very beginning to be about avoiding the use of lethal weapons as a way of solving problems. If that frustrates you, I'm sorry, but it's not going to change.
Wait, you mean I'm not supposed to be launching acid mushrooms into everything? Or using the stasis rifle as a free-stabbing exploit? Or shoving monsters into volcanic vents? Or electrocuting the crap out of things with my Seamoth for jollies? Or using the Cyclops as a battering ram?
And all this time I just thought you were teaching me to be creative with my aquatic genocide. Shucks.
Using a tool to kill doesn't make it a weapon
By definition a weapon is anything used for inflicting damage.
A shovel is a weapon if you hit someone over the head with it.
Ahh, but its something designed to do that. A very important distinction.
Also, mocking the devs? Not cool.
Ahh now you are shifting the goalposts, First you implied that tools are not weapons now you claim that it has to be designed to be a weapon.
All that matters is lethality, IMO the most lethal weapon in the game is the seamoth.
And FYI I'm not mocking him, I'm making fun of his completely ridiculous argument. That is seriously the worst I have ever heard.
I actually support the Devs not adding guns to the game but that whole "games are political" line made me laugh
The Devs are adults and don't need you to defend their internet honor BTW, they can handle someone disagreeing with them
Actually, I'm quoting the direct dictionary definition of a weapon, which is: a thing designed for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage. I'm not shifting anything. You're misreading. Also, a lot of games have political messages. Skyrim goes into a lot of racist stuff, Deus Ex has even more stuff about discrimination, Spec Ops: The Line gets into mental issues and PTSD, the list goes on and on. Not all games have political stuff, but a lot of them do.
*sigh* No matter what the game, someone's gonna demand the ability to use guns. I've seen someone on the Sims forums demand access to some, and Minecraft even has mods that let you have guns.
I'm glad the devs are sticking to their "guns" (as it were). We have to adapt to the world we're on and use what we have to defend ourselves, even if that means using the equipment we have for non-intended purposes (such as my use of the Propulsion Cannon + Acid Mushrooms to defend my seabase). And I prefer to not fight through every situation if I don't have to. Avoidance, running away and evading threats lets me use less resources in the long run.
And FYI I'm not mocking him, I'm making fun of his completely ridiculous argument. That is seriously the worst I have ever heard.
I actually support the Devs not adding guns to the game but that whole "games are political" line made me laugh
The Devs are adults and don't need you to defend their internet honor BTW, they can handle someone disagreeing with them
I would still say that Insane has a point. Games as a creative work can and often do carry a political message. Maybe not always and maybe not very strongly but it's usually there. Even if those political statements just mix in with the rest of the story for narrative reasons.
Or is there a good argument to say that games are by default non-political? Especially considering the examples made by dealwithitdog.
I laughed out loud several times in this thread, even at the dev's comment.
It amazes me that people can't seem to distinguish between 'guns' and 'weapons' (hint:one is a subset of the other). Spears (as in spear fishing) are not guns, and not having them in the fabricator because they might lead to a massacre is ludicrous. (It is hard to picture a *survival* situation, where a *lifeboat* fabricator leads to a *massacre*, but you get points for being creative at least.)
I accept that the Devs don't want guns in their game, nor do they want guns to be the primary focus of the game - but any tool can be used AS a weapon. So either draw a line and say you won't add any GUNS to the game (but you might add other less lethal options like a spear for spear fishing) or simply accept that your game universe makes no sense at all, and never will.
In Subnautica, there is no cultural reason for not having weapons (or tools that double as weapons), and no logical reason why a survivor couldn't fashion something like a spear. It makes a measure of sense that the fabricator might not have the blueprints for chemical propellant slugthrowers (guns), but it makes no sense at all that there wouldn't be blueprints for things like tools that have always doubled as weapons - axes for example. Only the most useful tool since the knife, when it comes to building a shelter on ANY planet *except* a water world (so why isn't it in the fabricator inventory for a life pod?) Likewise, the spear is something so simple, and so effective, and so useful, that every culture on Earth has developed them at one point or another - and our survivor is too stupid to lash a knife on the end of a pipe and build one.
No, adding a data entry about why there are no firearms in the fabricator inventory certainly hasn't 'put an end to the weapon discussion', nor has the dev's comment. It's only reinforced something we already knew, that there was a conscious decision to avoid having GUNS in the game. Unless the dev's would like to expand on that point and say they plan to remove all existing lethal game mechanics, and will never add any tools that can be used to kill?
Apparently, in the future, people are dumb as hell and condem themselves to being torn apart by the unending armys of creatures with no goal other than to kill all living things that cross their paths. I am SO sick of this "no weapons" thing. The ONLY argument against them is "oh, the devs hate guns". All it is is the dev's bringing politics into the game. There is no logical story argument.
We are not "bringing" politics into the game. The game was conceived and designed from the very beginning to be about avoiding the use of lethal weapons as a way of solving problems. If that frustrates you, I'm sorry, but it's not going to change.
But you need to understand that we're not forcing an agenda or pushing politics into a place where it doesn't belong, because of course it belongs here. Every single creative work has a political component to its message, even if it's no more complex than "I am comfortable with the status quo and therefore have nothing I wish to say about it". We've chosen to make a game without lethal weapons because we are interested in exploring those ideas, and because some of us, myself included, weren't very keen on making another game focused on guns and combat.
It's not politically neutral to make a game where your primary mode of interacting with the world is through a weapon; even less so in the case of games like Call of Duty which are largely about solving geopolitical issues through the use of weapons. I'm not saying you can't like that or support that, but I am saying that it's disingenuous to suggest we're forcing politics into a politics-free zone. We're just taking a stance you happen to disagree with, possibly even questioning something you took for granted.
I don't think many people are interested in swimming around shooting everything with an underwater Kalashnikov.
I think, and the views of other players seem to reflect this sentiment, that defensive items meant to scare away, stun, or temporarily blind an aggressive predator that is attempting to gnaw your face off would not be out of place in your design.
You are right. Defensive measures/item(s) would not be totally out of place. That being said... the method of suggestion. Tone of suggestive commentary. Outright hostility in some cases. These things are totally out of place. Our Devs are going to just jump at the ideas when they are presented in said fashion. I think not.
Who knows maybe the entire premise of this game is based upon a strictly peaceable approach to being stranded.
I like it simply because it makes me find other ways to get along. Makes me be patient while I wait for unfriendly creatures to move aside.
We are not "bringing" politics into the game. The game was conceived and designed from the very beginning to be about avoiding the use of lethal weapons as a way of solving problems. If that frustrates you, I'm sorry, but it's not going to change.
Wait, you mean I'm not supposed to be launching acid mushrooms into everything? Or using the stasis rifle as a free-stabbing exploit? Or shoving monsters into volcanic vents? Or electrocuting the crap out of things with my Seamoth for jollies? Or using the Cyclops as a battering ram?
And all this time I just thought you were teaching me to be creative with my aquatic genocide. Shucks.
Using a tool to kill doesn't make it a weapon
By definition a weapon is anything used for inflicting damage.
A shovel is a weapon if you hit someone over the head with it.
Ahh, but its something designed to do that. A very important distinction.
Also, mocking the devs? Not cool.
Ahh now you are shifting the goalposts, First you implied that tools are not weapons now you claim that it has to be designed to be a weapon.
All that matters is lethality, IMO the most lethal weapon in the game is the seamoth.
And FYI I'm not mocking him, I'm making fun of his completely ridiculous argument. That is seriously the worst I have ever heard.
I actually support the Devs not adding guns to the game but that whole "games are political" line made me laugh
The Devs are adults and don't need you to defend their internet honor BTW, they can handle someone disagreeing with them
Actually, I'm quoting the direct dictionary definition of a weapon, which is: a thing designed for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage. I'm not shifting anything. You're misreading. Also, a lot of games have political messages. Skyrim goes into a lot of racist stuff, Deus Ex has even more stuff about discrimination, Spec Ops: The Line gets into mental issues and PTSD, the list goes on and on. Not all games have political stuff, but a lot of them do.
OH BOY breaking out the dictionary! Well you seemed to have missed that a weapon is anything designed OR CAPABLE OF being used for bodily damage. Cars, pencils, guitars, all are deadly weapons if used to attack someone.
When last I checked video games were about having fun, not making political statements. I buy video games to have fun. If you buy video games for political messages there is something wrong with the fun center of your brain.
This thread needs some calming influences brought upon it.
Of course a tool can be a weapon. (It's important to know that in legal terms "assault with a deadly weapon" can include pretty much anything, a frying pan, your car, whatever.)
Of course games can have a political message. (Bioshock anyone?)
Of course it's the devs choice what they include, because you know, it's their game, and they are crafting it to give us a certain experience.
If they give us the ability to slaughter everything I won't be doing that anyway, I'll role play a pacifist coward (shudder) because it would be more challenging.
Just because they give you guns and ammo in Fallout it's much more rewarding to find other ways around problems. (Fallout 4 you suck.)
And besides, if you want to be a real bad ass, then you should be using your knife to slaughter everything.
Devs please give us multiplayer so we can form a shield wall using scrap and pipes for spears so 10 of us can take on a leviathan.
Perhaps there is a real explanation for what the hell is wrong with our "survivor". Has anyone here seen the firefly movie? Turn that gas or whatever down to like 70% of what it was and we get people that won't quite just lay down and die, but are too weak and sheep-like to fight even if their life depended on it (which in this situation, it often does).
We are not "bringing" politics into the game. The game was conceived and designed from the very beginning to be about avoiding the use of lethal weapons as a way of solving problems. If that frustrates you, I'm sorry, but it's not going to change.
Wait, you mean I'm not supposed to be launching acid mushrooms into everything? Or using the stasis rifle as a free-stabbing exploit? Or shoving monsters into volcanic vents? Or electrocuting the crap out of things with my Seamoth for jollies? Or using the Cyclops as a battering ram?
And all this time I just thought you were teaching me to be creative with my aquatic genocide. Shucks.
Using a tool to kill doesn't make it a weapon
By definition a weapon is anything used for inflicting damage.
A shovel is a weapon if you hit someone over the head with it.
Ahh, but its something designed to do that. A very important distinction.
Also, mocking the devs? Not cool.
Ahh now you are shifting the goalposts, First you implied that tools are not weapons now you claim that it has to be designed to be a weapon.
All that matters is lethality, IMO the most lethal weapon in the game is the seamoth.
And FYI I'm not mocking him, I'm making fun of his completely ridiculous argument. That is seriously the worst I have ever heard.
I actually support the Devs not adding guns to the game but that whole "games are political" line made me laugh
The Devs are adults and don't need you to defend their internet honor BTW, they can handle someone disagreeing with them
Actually, I'm quoting the direct dictionary definition of a weapon, which is: a thing designed for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage. I'm not shifting anything. You're misreading. Also, a lot of games have political messages. Skyrim goes into a lot of racist stuff, Deus Ex has even more stuff about discrimination, Spec Ops: The Line gets into mental issues and PTSD, the list goes on and on. Not all games have political stuff, but a lot of them do.
OH BOY breaking out the dictionary! Well you seemed to have missed that a weapon is anything designed OR CAPABLE OF being used for bodily damage. Cars, pencils, guitars, all are deadly weapons if used to attack someone.
When last I checked video games were about having fun, not making political statements. I buy video games to have fun. If you buy video games for political messages there is something wrong with the fun center of your brain.
You do realize you're arguing semantics here, right? It was pretty clear what the devs meant by the term "weapon". They meant things designed for the express purpose of killing. And yet again you're misinterpreting. I never once said that I bought games specifically FOR THE POLITICS. I just said that there are underlying political points in a lot of games.
I laughed out loud several times in this thread, even at the dev's comment.
It amazes me that people can't seem to distinguish between 'guns' and 'weapons' (hint:one is a subset of the other). Spears (as in spear fishing) are not guns, and not having them in the fabricator because they might lead to a massacre is ludicrous.
Um, when did they ever say GUNS caused the massacre?
I don't think anyone could carry out a massacre with spears. So it would have to have been multiple people going insane and attacking. And if such a large number of people were insane and felt the need to attack with spears, then the spears would not be the first place I would look to blame.
I don't think anyone could carry out a massacre with spears. So it would have to have been multiple people going insane and attacking. And if such a large number of people were insane and felt the need to attack with spears, then the spears would not be the first place I would look to blame.
Neither would I. But hey, society today seems to look at the weapons before the minds, so it would make sense.
I'll stick my toes into this again with a thought I've had. From some of the comments by your AI companion, it seems the culture the crash survivor comes from is very vegan-esque. A few of the PDA's about researching the wildlife from the Degasi survivors shows concern about harming the local wildlife, and while eating flash cooked fish there was some comment about 'previous generations eating wildlife, you can too!' or some effect.
I imagine whatever culture he comes from views eating creatures as something barbaric. And they likely eat synthesized foods or plants as the main staple of their diets. That all said, some of the lack of weapons or hunting tools make a bit more sense. The propulsion cannon is really the only thing you'd need to hunt wildlife. I know when I first made it, catching those peepers became hilariously easy.
As for the 'no weapons' as a gameplay standpoint, I can see their reasoning. So many games are about violent interaction. And this game at it's heart is about exploration and discovery. You don't need a space machinegun for that.
Y'know, The devs should just include a single 'gun' in what remains of the Degrassi(or one of the abandoned bases), Except it is complete crap because it wasn't designed to be used underwater, Being only effective at face-close range. Let alone the fact that most of the dangerous underwater creatures you meet have some form of armor plating or are just so fuck-huge that anything low caliber will be like pricking someone with a needle. Painful? Yes. Lethal? Hardly. not to speak of some of the creatures may just become more aggressive if attacked instead of fleeing with their tail betw ...een their.. legs? like the stalkers do.
You'd need something like a Gravity cannon that creates a controlled implosion or something to harm most of the colossus creatures.
Lasers would heat up the water near you more than they would damage anything far away (which i imagine is why the laser cutter can only be used at close range to doors), Kinetic weaponry would lose too much energy to be safely and feasibly used underwater, Though a handheld torpedo launcher might just work, But you wouldn't have access to any other torpedo types than you already do and it would also probably take up some size(might even have to be powered by a powercell instead of a battery as well).
All in all there just aren't as many options, Water is much more densely packed than air, And the deeper you go the denser it gets; The deeper you go the more energy you are required to send energy (Kinetic, Thermal, Electric, Etc.) from one place to another through it.
At some point it's just more feasible to hit something at point blank(like a punch) a few meters in front of you. You are able to impart much more destructive energy this way to titanic lifeforms anyways.
The reason why we don't just kill all creatures indiscriminately is because it most likely will just invite a much more invasive species to take hold. I'd imagine if the stalkers were removed from the kelp forests it would start to fill with bleeders as their population is no longer being controlled by stalkers killing them.
This is why we can't just exterminate the ecosystem as we want(which is dangerously easy to accidentally do with proper armaments), As the disruption we provide could mess up our stay far more than the occasional hostile creature we moved next to.
Imagine that. You've finally rid you kelp base of nearby stalker, Only to walk(swim?) straight into a large swarm of bleeders. That'd be the worst day so far i'd imagine.
Though in the end its a Nil point anyways,There simply won't be guns no matter what we say. Weapons for sure, The Repulsion cannon is great as a weapon. Not much survives being slammed into a wall or the ground at however many gees the gravity cannon imparts when launching them.
If we could use the dive reel to create electrified tripwires it would be even better. (and much, Much better if we could modify the dive reel to be used to create power cables between bases as well.)
Though i think the biggest problem we have isn't that we don't have enough weapons, but that most of the creatures is just incredibly aggressively interested in getting all up our business, Instead of being perhaps just curious or afraid.
If stalkers for example starts traveling outside the kelp forests(home) then they probably shouldn't attack you, And even try to avoid you instead. Though if you are in the kelp forests then they are just defending territories rather than being malicious.
Aaand, That's a lot of text. wow.
I guess i have a text-based digital motormouth, Heh.
The train of though certainly had a massive cargo load with it this time.
I don't think anyone could carry out a massacre with spears.
Rwanda Genocide?
Also who wants a space Machinegun? I just want some kind of flashbang like device that I can throw to get out of a sticky situation when diving you know?
All media is political inherently. Every last post is a subtle shift in one direction or the other, every game and movie a nudge to the psyche. -shrugs- Its kinda unusual for devs to be both aware of it and note it publically though, so kudos.
Just because its not in the blueprints wouldnt stop me from making a spear though... I'd just make it with my bare hands... There is more than a bit of suspension of disbelief going on though when it comes to what blueprints the things are programmed with for a 'survival' situation. I mean, no thermal blankets? (even with the warm temps being in and out of the water like you do in this game hypothermia can quickly become a major threat to your survival) Iodine? Hatchets? Flint and striker? Mosquito netting? So given that its kindof just a 'eh whatevs' kindof thing when it comes to spears to me even if it would be high on the list of things to make in the situation (or at least a walking stick to bap things that get too close with!)
Though a handheld torpedo launcher might just work, But you wouldn't have access to any other torpedo types than you already do and it would also probably take up some size(might even have to be powered by a powercell instead of a battery as well).
Great, now I want a shoulder mounted torpedo launcher. o_o
Though a handheld torpedo launcher might just work, But you wouldn't have access to any other torpedo types than you already do and it would also probably take up some size(might even have to be powered by a powercell instead of a battery as well).
Great, now I want a shoulder mounted torpedo launcher. o_o
Oh yeah, those vortex torpedos would be really useful
I don't think anyone could carry out a massacre with spears.
Rwanda Genocide?
Also who wants a space Machinegun? I just want some kind of flashbang like device that I can throw to get out of a sticky situation when diving you know?
I don't think anyone could carry out a massacre with spears.
Rwanda Genocide?
Also who wants a space Machinegun? I just want some kind of flashbang like device that I can throw to get out of a sticky situation when diving you know?
I don't think anyone could carry out a massacre with spears.
Rwanda Genocide?
Also who wants a space Machinegun? I just want some kind of flashbang like device that I can throw to get out of a sticky situation when diving you know?
That wasn't just one person though.
Who said it was?
My point was that no one person could ever carry out anything even approaching what could be called a massacre with nothing but a spear. And if a whole bunch of people are going on a spear-toting rampage, spears are probably not the problem.
Only if the population was made solely of pacifists with no arms or martial abilities whatsoever. But even then you'd probably get tired of chasing them after awhile.
To be fair, the definition of a massacre is generally how an event is portrayed... see Boston Massacre. One dude with a spear could definitely kill 5 dudes without weapons.
I don't think anyone could carry out a massacre with spears.
Rwanda Genocide?
Also who wants a space Machinegun? I just want some kind of flashbang like device that I can throw to get out of a sticky situation when diving you know?
That wasn't just one person though.
Who said it was?
My point was that no one person could ever carry out anything even approaching what could be called a massacre with nothing but a spear. And if a whole bunch of people are going on a spear-toting rampage, spears are probably not the problem.
Okay, well, imagine if after that the Rwandan government had banned all weapons after that. Not the smartest move, but hey, we've made worse decisions.
A "No Weapon" stance means we do not want to add items to the game the sole purpose of which is to kill.
We DO want to allow for player creativity, and if they find ways of using the existing tools to kill creatures, that's one thing. But dropping a machine gun into the game sends a very loud and clear message - "Use this weapon to go out and shoot fish in the face".
People argue for spears. Again, that is #1 clearly a weapon, the only use of which is to kill. And, frankly, #2 it is pretty boring in a sci fi game with tons of advanced equipment.
What we have given the player in it's place is a propulsion cannon. It does everything a spear can do, and it's way more fun. You can throw projectiles with it, and, better then a spear, you can pull small creatures to you. You can kill with it, if you put your mind to it, but that is not the sole purpose for which it exists in the game. It is handy for grabbing loot at a distance, and for moving stuff out of your path (more use for that is coming). Sure, there can be an argument made whether it's place in the tech tree fits properly into the game's progression, for players to be able to craft it when they most need it. But I just can't see this argument that spears and other WEAPONS are a necessary addition to the game.
I have never once felt the need to kill anything in this game (other than for food obviously). Anything that causes a threat is easily avoidable and doesn't really do that much damage to you (reapers excluded).
The reason why lethal guns should not be in this game because it would break gameplay. You will quickly loose sense of danger if you can just fight of any predator and the game would become boring.
Good example of this are many stealth games that quickly become boring when you realize that guards pose no real danger to you.
People argue for spears. Again, that is #1 clearly a weapon, the only use of which is to kill
Spears are used for spear fishing. You can't catch a fish with your hands you know)
Except it is complete crap because it wasn't designed to be used underwater, Being only effective at face-close range. Let alone the fact that most of the dangerous underwater creatures you meet have some form of armor plating or are just so ****-huge that anything low caliber will be like pricking someone with a needle. Painful? Yes. Lethal? Hardly. not to speak of some of the creatures may just become more aggressive if attacked instead of fleeing with their tail betw ...een their.. legs? like the stalkers do.
You are underestimating engineers. Given game technology level, they should be easily able to manufacture stuff like:
a) gamma-ray gun. at certain frequency water is transparent to it, while flesh is not;
b) vibration cannon: it is possible in principle to emit vibrations that would resonate with self-vibrations of internal organs of living beings, causing them to explode;
c) poisonous dart/suringe gun;
d) etc.
Comments
Ahh, but its something designed to do that. A very important distinction.
Also, mocking the devs? Not cool.
Ahh now you are shifting the goalposts, First you implied that tools are not weapons now you claim that it has to be designed to be a weapon.
All that matters is lethality, IMO the most lethal weapon in the game is the seamoth.
And FYI I'm not mocking him, I'm making fun of his completely ridiculous argument. That is seriously the worst I have ever heard.
I actually support the Devs not adding guns to the game but that whole "games are political" line made me laugh
The Devs are adults and don't need you to defend their internet honor BTW, they can handle someone disagreeing with them
Actually, I'm quoting the direct dictionary definition of a weapon, which is: a thing designed for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage. I'm not shifting anything. You're misreading. Also, a lot of games have political messages. Skyrim goes into a lot of racist stuff, Deus Ex has even more stuff about discrimination, Spec Ops: The Line gets into mental issues and PTSD, the list goes on and on. Not all games have political stuff, but a lot of them do.
I'm glad the devs are sticking to their "guns" (as it were). We have to adapt to the world we're on and use what we have to defend ourselves, even if that means using the equipment we have for non-intended purposes (such as my use of the Propulsion Cannon + Acid Mushrooms to defend my seabase). And I prefer to not fight through every situation if I don't have to. Avoidance, running away and evading threats lets me use less resources in the long run.
I would still say that Insane has a point. Games as a creative work can and often do carry a political message. Maybe not always and maybe not very strongly but it's usually there. Even if those political statements just mix in with the rest of the story for narrative reasons.
Or is there a good argument to say that games are by default non-political? Especially considering the examples made by dealwithitdog.
It amazes me that people can't seem to distinguish between 'guns' and 'weapons' (hint:one is a subset of the other). Spears (as in spear fishing) are not guns, and not having them in the fabricator because they might lead to a massacre is ludicrous. (It is hard to picture a *survival* situation, where a *lifeboat* fabricator leads to a *massacre*, but you get points for being creative at least.)
I accept that the Devs don't want guns in their game, nor do they want guns to be the primary focus of the game - but any tool can be used AS a weapon. So either draw a line and say you won't add any GUNS to the game (but you might add other less lethal options like a spear for spear fishing) or simply accept that your game universe makes no sense at all, and never will.
In Subnautica, there is no cultural reason for not having weapons (or tools that double as weapons), and no logical reason why a survivor couldn't fashion something like a spear. It makes a measure of sense that the fabricator might not have the blueprints for chemical propellant slugthrowers (guns), but it makes no sense at all that there wouldn't be blueprints for things like tools that have always doubled as weapons - axes for example. Only the most useful tool since the knife, when it comes to building a shelter on ANY planet *except* a water world (so why isn't it in the fabricator inventory for a life pod?) Likewise, the spear is something so simple, and so effective, and so useful, that every culture on Earth has developed them at one point or another - and our survivor is too stupid to lash a knife on the end of a pipe and build one.
No, adding a data entry about why there are no firearms in the fabricator inventory certainly hasn't 'put an end to the weapon discussion', nor has the dev's comment. It's only reinforced something we already knew, that there was a conscious decision to avoid having GUNS in the game. Unless the dev's would like to expand on that point and say they plan to remove all existing lethal game mechanics, and will never add any tools that can be used to kill?
You are right. Defensive measures/item(s) would not be totally out of place. That being said... the method of suggestion. Tone of suggestive commentary. Outright hostility in some cases. These things are totally out of place. Our Devs are going to just jump at the ideas when they are presented in said fashion. I think not.
Who knows maybe the entire premise of this game is based upon a strictly peaceable approach to being stranded.
I like it simply because it makes me find other ways to get along. Makes me be patient while I wait for unfriendly creatures to move aside.
OH BOY breaking out the dictionary! Well you seemed to have missed that a weapon is anything designed OR CAPABLE OF being used for bodily damage. Cars, pencils, guitars, all are deadly weapons if used to attack someone.
When last I checked video games were about having fun, not making political statements. I buy video games to have fun. If you buy video games for political messages there is something wrong with the fun center of your brain.
Of course a tool can be a weapon. (It's important to know that in legal terms "assault with a deadly weapon" can include pretty much anything, a frying pan, your car, whatever.)
Of course games can have a political message. (Bioshock anyone?)
Of course it's the devs choice what they include, because you know, it's their game, and they are crafting it to give us a certain experience.
If they give us the ability to slaughter everything I won't be doing that anyway, I'll role play a pacifist coward (shudder) because it would be more challenging.
Just because they give you guns and ammo in Fallout it's much more rewarding to find other ways around problems. (Fallout 4 you suck.)
And besides, if you want to be a real bad ass, then you should be using your knife to slaughter everything.
Devs please give us multiplayer so we can form a shield wall using scrap and pipes for spears so 10 of us can take on a leviathan.
You do realize you're arguing semantics here, right? It was pretty clear what the devs meant by the term "weapon". They meant things designed for the express purpose of killing. And yet again you're misinterpreting. I never once said that I bought games specifically FOR THE POLITICS. I just said that there are underlying political points in a lot of games.
Um, when did they ever say GUNS caused the massacre?
Neither would I. But hey, society today seems to look at the weapons before the minds, so it would make sense.
I imagine whatever culture he comes from views eating creatures as something barbaric. And they likely eat synthesized foods or plants as the main staple of their diets. That all said, some of the lack of weapons or hunting tools make a bit more sense. The propulsion cannon is really the only thing you'd need to hunt wildlife. I know when I first made it, catching those peepers became hilariously easy.
As for the 'no weapons' as a gameplay standpoint, I can see their reasoning. So many games are about violent interaction. And this game at it's heart is about exploration and discovery. You don't need a space machinegun for that.
You'd need something like a Gravity cannon that creates a controlled implosion or something to harm most of the colossus creatures.
Lasers would heat up the water near you more than they would damage anything far away (which i imagine is why the laser cutter can only be used at close range to doors), Kinetic weaponry would lose too much energy to be safely and feasibly used underwater, Though a handheld torpedo launcher might just work, But you wouldn't have access to any other torpedo types than you already do and it would also probably take up some size(might even have to be powered by a powercell instead of a battery as well).
All in all there just aren't as many options, Water is much more densely packed than air, And the deeper you go the denser it gets; The deeper you go the more energy you are required to send energy (Kinetic, Thermal, Electric, Etc.) from one place to another through it.
At some point it's just more feasible to hit something at point blank(like a punch) a few meters in front of you. You are able to impart much more destructive energy this way to titanic lifeforms anyways.
The reason why we don't just kill all creatures indiscriminately is because it most likely will just invite a much more invasive species to take hold. I'd imagine if the stalkers were removed from the kelp forests it would start to fill with bleeders as their population is no longer being controlled by stalkers killing them.
This is why we can't just exterminate the ecosystem as we want(which is dangerously easy to accidentally do with proper armaments), As the disruption we provide could mess up our stay far more than the occasional hostile creature we moved next to.
Imagine that. You've finally rid you kelp base of nearby stalker, Only to walk(swim?) straight into a large swarm of bleeders. That'd be the worst day so far i'd imagine.
Though in the end its a Nil point anyways,There simply won't be guns no matter what we say. Weapons for sure, The Repulsion cannon is great as a weapon. Not much survives being slammed into a wall or the ground at however many gees the gravity cannon imparts when launching them.
If we could use the dive reel to create electrified tripwires it would be even better. (and much, Much better if we could modify the dive reel to be used to create power cables between bases as well.)
Though i think the biggest problem we have isn't that we don't have enough weapons, but that most of the creatures is just incredibly aggressively interested in getting all up our business, Instead of being perhaps just curious or afraid.
If stalkers for example starts traveling outside the kelp forests(home) then they probably shouldn't attack you, And even try to avoid you instead. Though if you are in the kelp forests then they are just defending territories rather than being malicious.
Aaand, That's a lot of text. wow.
I guess i have a text-based digital motormouth, Heh.
The train of though certainly had a massive cargo load with it this time.
Rwanda Genocide?
Also who wants a space Machinegun? I just want some kind of flashbang like device that I can throw to get out of a sticky situation when diving you know?
Just because its not in the blueprints wouldnt stop me from making a spear though... I'd just make it with my bare hands... There is more than a bit of suspension of disbelief going on though when it comes to what blueprints the things are programmed with for a 'survival' situation. I mean, no thermal blankets? (even with the warm temps being in and out of the water like you do in this game hypothermia can quickly become a major threat to your survival) Iodine? Hatchets? Flint and striker? Mosquito netting? So given that its kindof just a 'eh whatevs' kindof thing when it comes to spears to me even if it would be high on the list of things to make in the situation (or at least a walking stick to bap things that get too close with!)
Great, now I want a shoulder mounted torpedo launcher. o_o
Oh yeah, those vortex torpedos would be really useful
That wasn't just one person though.
Who said it was?
My point was that no one person could ever carry out anything even approaching what could be called a massacre with nothing but a spear. And if a whole bunch of people are going on a spear-toting rampage, spears are probably not the problem.
To be fair, the definition of a massacre is generally how an event is portrayed... see Boston Massacre. One dude with a spear could definitely kill 5 dudes without weapons.
Okay, well, imagine if after that the Rwandan government had banned all weapons after that. Not the smartest move, but hey, we've made worse decisions.
We DO want to allow for player creativity, and if they find ways of using the existing tools to kill creatures, that's one thing. But dropping a machine gun into the game sends a very loud and clear message - "Use this weapon to go out and shoot fish in the face".
People argue for spears. Again, that is #1 clearly a weapon, the only use of which is to kill. And, frankly, #2 it is pretty boring in a sci fi game with tons of advanced equipment.
What we have given the player in it's place is a propulsion cannon. It does everything a spear can do, and it's way more fun. You can throw projectiles with it, and, better then a spear, you can pull small creatures to you. You can kill with it, if you put your mind to it, but that is not the sole purpose for which it exists in the game. It is handy for grabbing loot at a distance, and for moving stuff out of your path (more use for that is coming). Sure, there can be an argument made whether it's place in the tech tree fits properly into the game's progression, for players to be able to craft it when they most need it. But I just can't see this argument that spears and other WEAPONS are a necessary addition to the game.
LoL
Good example of this are many stealth games that quickly become boring when you realize that guards pose no real danger to you.
Spears are used for spear fishing. You can't catch a fish with your hands you know)
You are underestimating engineers. Given game technology level, they should be easily able to manufacture stuff like:
a) gamma-ray gun. at certain frequency water is transparent to it, while flesh is not;
b) vibration cannon: it is possible in principle to emit vibrations that would resonate with self-vibrations of internal organs of living beings, causing them to explode;
c) poisonous dart/suringe gun;
d) etc.