Can you defend yourself yet?

[Mr. Vulcanator]

I lost interest in the game a while ago because apart from a stun gun I never aquired and the crappy knife there isn't a way to defend yourself from predators with lethal force. Has this changed?

[kwong20287]

Yeah! You can ram stuff now with your sub with lethal kinetic force!

[Nyota Mwuaji]

do you not listen to the PDA, it tells you there are no other weapons. yes you can get torpedos for the seamoth and the prawn but they dont really do much. one just launches stuff into the distance, the other just irritates ♥♥♥♥.

[Mr. Vulcanator]

Originally posted by kwong20287:

Yeah! You can ram stuff now with your sub with lethal kinetic force!

Progress!

[Zemecon]

Sometimes I love kwong20287's sense of irony.

[Malachai]

Outside of torpedos, you can just use the PRAWN's mining arm. That typically kills most things about your character's size. But generally, no, you're not likely to find any lethal weapons in the sense of a gun. There are lore reasons as to why you cannot make those, which you'll likely hear or read as you play. This game isn't really designed to be a shooter anyway, so I'm not overly upset about it. Sure it'd be nice, but meh.

[mirabiletemporis]

I have managed to kill some creatures with the Seamoth's perimeter defense system.

It's not really an effective method though, in terms of resources or time and was more done in fits of "Okay, this is me having had enough of you, you overgrown guppy with delusions of grandeur. Wasted powercells be damned, you're going down...or up...whatever, diiiiiiiiie, ahahahaaaa".

A more useful and sane way is the wielding of the pro/re-pulsion cannons.

[Wylie28]

You have always been able to defend yourself. But no lethal force. Thats a design decision that wont be changing. There is not yet.

[Nyello]

I’m so glad I’ve held onto this quote. This quote was taken from an extensive thread on this subject.

Originally posted by Originally posted by Squeal Like a Pig, Developer:

This thread has certainly deviated from the original question the OP asked (which I believe has been pretty thoroughly answered both by other posters and by in game lore text).

However, to acknowledge the "why can't the player craft a spear" questions:

--A spear is boring (in our opinion) and featured in so many other survival games. It's low tech, and not consistent and appropriate with the rest of the high tech, sci fi player items which can be fabricated. Propulsion cannons, stasis rifles, gravspheres, etc. seemed far more interesting to us then adding a basic spear.

--We wanted to make a game that does not emphasize violence. We didn't want to give the player weapons whose sole purpose is to kill, because that just sends the message that the game intends for them to go out and shoot and stab stuff as the main mechanic. Sure, a spear is not as extreme as a fully automatic assault rifle, but it's a slippery slope if you start to add stuff like that.

--The blueprints which are provided to the player make sense in the context of the story. They are multi purpose tools, whose primary use would be for space and terrestrial construction and exploration.

--You CAN load a knife in the propulsion cannon and fire it.

Anyway, I'm sure people will take each of my points and write up lengthy rebuttals, which is perfectly fine. I'm sure we will continue to be called "leftist liberals" like it's a slur (and we've certainly been called worse by people over our non violent stance). But, we will not be adding guns, or spears to the game, and that is final.

[mirabiletemporis]

What would anyone want a spear _for_?
So the huge beast that just ate you while you tried to poke it will have a toothpick readily available? XD

[Mr. Vulcanator]

Originally posted by mirabiletemporis:

What would anyone want a spear _for_?
So the huge beast that just ate you while you tried to poke it will have a toothpick readily available? XD

It would work on the sand sharks and those aggressive longsnouted fish that live among the long green plants.

[mirabiletemporis]

Originally posted by Mr. Vulcanator:

It would work on the sand sharks and those aggressive longsnouted fish that live among the long green plants.

It's _possible_ I guess, but I reeeaaally wouldn't try it.

One the one hand you have gadgets of industrial strength that can fling objects and violently repulse dangers from a distance, on the other hand you have a sharp length that requires close combat skills and is likely to get stuck in the creature your fighting or break even. And then you have an injured, really angry creature on you and no weapon. Spear fighting is mad hard, add to that being underwater with the resistance and the creature being way faster etc.

I mean, I know which option I'd chose. =/

[T-Bone Biggins]

Originally posted by Lucki:

I’m so glad I’ve held onto this quote. This quote was taken from an extensive thread on this subject.

Originally posted by Originally posted by Squeal Like a Pig, Developer:

**stuff*

Lol someone called them leftist liberals for the non-violence in lore? I mean yeah, any expedition into space without weaponry is a dumb as s--t idea if you know there is life out there (supposedly same storyline as Natural Selection 2) but the supposed story is this is a ship that was meant to build a warp gate, they didn't see the need for weaponry. Any expedition away from help needs weaponry because you can't get help quick, this is common sense. It's just a bad lore decision the devs went with and they stuck to their anti-violence philosophy no matter how ideologically bankrupt it is.

They wanted a game where creatures can kill you but you are not supposed to kill them and you have an inability to channel your inner caveman and kill the bad critters. So an artificial extra layer of fear and helplessness added onto odd ideas like being unable to use your human brain to say modify the cutting laser or even make a spear (seriously with a propulsion gun it shouldn't take much ingenuity to make a sort of rifle out of it) all adds up to me putting that position the devs held in the "silly" category. Not dumb, just silly and very non-sensical. I won't call them names over it.

[T-Bone Biggins]

Originally posted by mirabiletemporis:

Originally posted by Mr. Vulcanator:

It would work on the sand sharks and those aggressive longsnouted fish that live among the long green plants.

It's _possible_ I guess, but I reeeaaally wouldn't try it.

One the one hand you have gadgets of industrial strength that can fling objects and violently repulse dangers from a distance, on the other hand you have a sharp length that requires close combat skills and is likely to get stuck in the creature your fighting or break even. And then you have an injured, really angry creature on you and no weapon. Spear fighting is mad hard, add to that being underwater with the resistance and the creature being way faster etc.

I mean, I know which option I'd chose. =/

If I was stuck on a planet with those Reaper critters swimming and howling around I know damn well that a spear would barely be a start. I'd try to take that propulsion cannon and fabricate some sharp titanium bolts and maybe even a type of magazine feed system. As long as it can impale and/or lobotomize a Reaper and any other critter from a safe distance I'd feel a lot better if I was in that situation.

[Nyello]

Originally posted by T-Bone Biggins:

Originally posted by Lucki:

I’m so glad I’ve held onto this quote. This quote was taken from an extensive thread on this subject.

Lol someone called them leftist liberals for the non-violence in lore? I mean yeah, any expedition into space without weaponry is a dumb as s--t idea if you know there is life out there (supposedly same storyline as Natural Selection 2) but the supposed story is this is a ship that was meant to build a warp gate, they didn't see the need for weaponry. Any expedition away from help needs weaponry because you can't get help quick, this is common sense. It's just a bad lore decision the devs went with and they stuck to their anti-violence philosophy no matter how ideologically bankrupt it is.

They wanted a game where creatures can kill you but you are not supposed to kill them and you have an inability to channel your inner caveman and kill the bad critters. So an artificial extra layer of fear and helplessness added onto odd ideas like being unable to use your human brain to say modify the cutting laser or even make a spear (seriously with a propulsion gun it shouldn't take much ingenuity to make a sort of rifle out of it) all adds up to me putting that position the devs held in the "silly" category. Not dumb, just silly and very non-sensical. I won't call them names over it.

It’s not silly at all especially when he makes the point of saying that WITH some ingenuity you can make a weapon out of the pop cannon.

People need to be smart to survive in this game. It’s not a mindless killing spree like some want. And that’s a good thing.

[T-Bone Biggins]

Originally posted by Lucki:

It’s not silly at all especially when he makes the point of saying that WITH some ingenuity you can make a weapon out of the pop cannon.

People need to be smart to survive in this game. It’s not a mindless killing spree like some want. And that’s a good thing.

Eh, you get stuck hungry in the woods with aggressive dangerous animals around and tell me you would just lie there and let them eat you. As a scenario the idea of non-violence in a situation as extreme as what's in Subnautica is quite silly. For gameplay mechanics it just means the devs are forcing people to play the game the way they want, and that is their design choice. Many games pigeonhole playes into specific ways of playing so they can tailor the game experience the way the devs intended. I'm just tired of the non-sensical justifications for the lore behind the non-violence, anyone with half a brain can fashion explosives, overload capacitors for effect with all the high-powered sci-fi gadgets around, I can go on. I can maybe get it if they say future humanity has been mentally neutered to be non-aggressive by brain-washing, cultural indoctrination, and possibly genetic modification. Then the guy in a survival situation still taking a non-violence philosophy would make a lot more sense.