Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ApolloZani

UOO-1 Fan Report

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Alienkiller said:

Scifi/Fantasy is in some cases not that anymore. Some of that could realised in the last 60 Years.

Yeah that is definitely true. Scifi authors spend their days imagining what lies next in technological advancement, so they are almost always going to beat the scientists and engineers who strive to bring those ideas into reality.

I think my complaint is that there are weak applications of future technologies. Like the way that the first Xenonauts game uses fusion in grenades. Maybe I'm wrong, but to me that sounds like that is not only impractical in terms of technology, but also implausible in terms of the science. So, whilst I am happy to have imaginary fusion technology, it doesn't feel right when that fusion technology is applied to handheld grenades. The problem is that you are asked to believe in miniaturised fusion technology ... ok, not too hard ... but all you get out of it is a slightly bigger boom ... not very satisfying, especially given that grenades tend to work using chemical explosives.

On the other hand, I'm not a physicist, so I don't even know for sure if fusion grenades are silly. And I don't think all scifi has to obey some rules of realism. It can just be for fun. As @ApolloZani said, the original xcom had pink mutons in green suits, thumping thrones in a pretty cheesy 80's fashion. A lot of the best scifi (think Ursula K Le Guin) doesn't even try and dig in to the rules of what is possible and plausible. But I think that when these games include research reports that give a science explainer, well, is it too much to ask for that explainer not to revolve around mumbo jumbo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everything will be practicable in the next 100 Years. There we all convinced about that. There I don´t disagree with the Scientists etc.

But we need SciFi Games, Movies and Series today. If we don´t have them and the others with Visions (Books etc.) we all were still not there were we are now.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎30‎/‎2020 at 2:58 AM, ApolloZani said:

@TrashMan

That's kinda the point? XCOM stuff is all science fantasy.

Not an argument. It's not a binary 0 or 1. It's a scale. And you can choose where you are on that scale.

There's a big difference between science-fiction and fantasy, in that one tries to keep things believable/within certain bound. Not necessarily real, but also not outright breaking every scientific law 100 times over.

I mean, if "it's fantasy" is justification, then ANYTHING can be justified. Literally everything. Humans could fart lighting. 2+2 = fish. You can become thin by eating more. Aliens could be literal space wizzard complete with pointy hats and beards and magic chanting.

 

Even in something like 40K (which is hillariously a thousand times more grounded than Marvel or DC), there's clear limitations. Space marines cross large distances by leaping bounds, because moving your legs faster in heavy armor just doesn't (and wouldn't) cut it. Super-heavy armor (Terminator) feels sluggish, not because it's slow (a space marine can run in it faster than a human can run), but because momentum due to it's sheer size and weight makes changing direction/turning rather difficult. A Repulsor (hover) tank crushes thing it flies over like it had tracks, because it's kept afloat by repulsing itself of the ground, not magically hovering.

 

But even when you write aliens doing incredible things, you can write them in a way that breaks less physical laws for the exact same effect. For example, the alien ship jumps out (hyperspace/subspace/wormhole instead of super-duper acceleration). Tough, to be fair, insane acceleration could be possible if you could generate a field that uniformely applies the acceleration to everything. Maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎30‎/‎2020 at 6:42 PM, Ninothree said:

Yeah that is definitely true. Scifi authors spend their days imagining what lies next in technological advancement, so they are almost always going to beat the scientists and engineers who strive to bring those ideas into reality.

I think my complaint is that there are weak applications of future technologies. Like the way that the first Xenonauts game uses fusion in grenades. Maybe I'm wrong, but to me that sounds like that is not only impractical in terms of technology, but also implausible in terms of the science. So, whilst I am happy to have imaginary fusion technology, it doesn't feel right when that fusion technology is applied to handheld grenades. The problem is that you are asked to believe in miniaturised fusion technology ... ok, not too hard ... but all you get out of it is a slightly bigger boom ... not very satisfying, especially given that grenades tend to work using chemical explosives.

On the other hand, I'm not a physicist, so I don't even know for sure if fusion grenades are silly. And I don't think all scifi has to obey some rules of realism. It can just be for fun. As @ApolloZani said, the original xcom had pink mutons in green suits, thumping thrones in a pretty cheesy 80's fashion. A lot of the best scifi (think Ursula K Le Guin) doesn't even try and dig in to the rules of what is possible and plausible. But I think that when these games include research reports that give a science explainer, well, is it too much to ask for that explainer not to revolve around mumbo jumbo?

Fusion grenades sound utterly silly. You can't throw it far enough to get outside of the nuking radius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×