General > Discussion
The Necromancy
DanielOR:
As one of the people who did the aforementioned lecturing, I would somewhat disagree that it "does not help anyone" - some folks might actually enjoy it and, in fact, have posted to that extent. The science content both in the game and in the forum can be easily ignored, I think. Having well-explained concepts in the game helps the "immersion", makes the game world more belieavable. And if it does make someone curious - hey, why not?
sirg:
I agree with you that it might be interesting to read some pop-science on the forum or in game, however this isn't the issue - people are concerned about gameplay issues and items which could affect the gameplay and fun factor in a way or the other. Anyway, you can't sustain everything in a game with science, otherwise it will become a PhD thesis.
The fact that the game world is plausible is OK, but there are alot of tones of grey here, because having something "wild" doesn't make the game absurd. I think there is a trap here, wanting to back up everything with pop-science bits - not everyone will agree that a certain theory or deviation from fact is valid from the current scientific point of view, and so you have people with PhDs comming and arguing about the game's scientific story (which is somehow silly). However, if you emphasize less on theory and science, and you say it's SF, then none can say anything. To me threads where people debate if some weapon technology is realistic or not are somewhat useless, because I don't care that much about how some SF weapon really works. I.e. lightsabers from Star Wars are totally unrealistic and silly, but as a concept are an awsome idea and the vast majority of people like them alot, even though many realize that such a device can't exist.
To me it's important to see cool things in the game, weapons that make me want them and use them, fun and good gameplay concepts, that sort of thing. When you are creating something in a SF setting, it's really not difficult to tie something "wild" to the story. That's creativity.
TrashMan:
Well said Sirg.
fun >>>>>> realism
cool >>>>> possible
But one shouldn't overdo it. A healthy dose of fun and a healthy dose of realism are the best mix.*
*not saying that realism can't be fun, but it most often isn't.
DanielOR:
Sirg,
Not sure if "pop-science" is a compliment here... I can only speak confidently for Babunito and myself... I assure you that both of us (we are, in fact, PhD's in physics) are meticulous about not BS-ing and we do provide disclaimers if we might BS.
Honestly, there is no conflict at all between having science content and beautiful, fun flight of fancy. Yes, of course the premise is fiction and the game does not intend to be a scientific journal. But what makes a difference between good science fiction and drivel? Among other things, homework and details. The world, while fictional, should net offend common sense. I call it "being internally consistant".
You brought up light sabers - thank you, great example. Surely, there are several things "wrong" with the design. And yet, why does the idea not offend? For one, light sabers have limitations. They do not cut through material (like blast doors) instantly. The blades have finite range. How much fun would that world be if the light saber could extend into space and cut a star destroyer in two right in orbit? Well, that, somehow, would be even *more* rediculous than the concept of a light saber itself. I'll bet you that there were a few physicists and egineers working as consultants on all six movies.
Which is why several people (and not just us eggheads) enjoy the science of sci-fi. Not to mention that in a few years me may actually get to same technology, or something close, in daily life.
The science content really does seem to bother you. Well, the concept of a forum is that there is room even for those who want to see more science stuff. I can only remind you that you should feel free not to read it.
DanielOR:
TrashMan,
I suppose the definition of "healthy" may vary.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version