I always wished we could get an art style like this ("Door Kickers"), especially for the pawns. It's probably the coolest top down sort of art style out there, well animated too.

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: skinicism on July 27, 2016, 11:40:36 PM
Due to the natural age gap between stated age and actual
age of each colonist you have to wonder whether they
were from colonies that even trained them to urinate/defecate
(since one has to assume that they've been frozen and become
dependent on implants to do everything for them- many of them
being devices that may allow them to extract moisture from blood
or from the air).
Quote from: keylocke on July 27, 2016, 05:16:35 AM
i think i said this before in another similar thread, but the only reason i can think of why prep carefully isn't integrated is coz of the kickstarter backers who paid for custom characters, since adding prep carefully the way EDB made it would essentially be like letting players create their own custom characters for free.
----
as a compromise, instead of custom stats, i'd be content if tynan just adds the feature to customize how each character would look. (ie : change face shape, change skin color, change hair type, change hair color. but not body type, since it's connected to background traits) passions, traits (but not background traits, since background traits are part of the custom characters bought by some kickstarter backers)
^ i think those changes are doable since iirc, those things aren't included in the custom characters created by kickstarter backers. so these changes should not affect their purchase.
---
of course, the randomize button should still be there and should ALWAYS be there for people who prefers totally random.
Quote from: gmillar on July 21, 2016, 05:31:35 AM
People don't go berserk when they're forced to turn to cannibalism, there's plenty of historical evidence of that. Actually, people don't really go berserk. It's incredibly rare. The vast majority of humans do not have it in them in any way. It's a 1 in 10 million kind of thing.
Quote from: Ramsis on July 21, 2016, 09:05:39 AM
HEY VAGABOND
Can you stop calling things deviant for literally no reason? If you're trying to play the "well it's not normal" card I'd like you to look at history and how plenty of people handle it before saying it's past the norm.
"Sexual deviance, and what is defined as sexually deviant, is culturally and historically specific. This concept refers to behaviors that involve individuals seeking erotic gratification through means that are considered odd, different, or unacceptable to either most or influential persons in one's community."
There is no deviancy at this point. The Romans were notorious for bending each other over from time to time and loving up some butt, historically lesbians have been supported through multiple religions as well as the general understanding that men have always been pervs and love to watch meaning that stigma normally goes out the window. We're here talking about same sex interactions, which in this day and age are pretty commonplace/norm; now you want to argue on the forums about why you're watching a colonist make love to the colony dog, or why he's jackin' it in the corner dressed like a hotdog then we'll talk but you're slinging words at this point and it seems rather dumb to just let you do it without making sure you understand what you're actually saying.
Quote from: PocketNerd on July 20, 2016, 07:01:47 PMQuote from: Vagabond on July 20, 2016, 05:20:33 PMFirst part is true. However, with those cultures that devolved (advanced, and perhaps devolved again), do you think something as simple as the need to procreate was left out? Only two technology levels, from what I can tell, seem capable of maintaining their population in the face of overwhelming numbers of sexually deviant individuals.
"Sexually deviant individuals"?
"Overwhelming numbers"?Quote from: Vagabond on July 20, 2016, 05:20:33 PMPrimitive tribes of hunter gatherers wouldn't be able to sustain themselves with large populations of deviant characters as they are, in general, of smaller numbers. The gene pool requires additional contribution to prevent defects.Quote from: Vagabond on July 20, 2016, 05:20:33 PMI'm convinced now, that removing sexuality from traits may very well be the best thing. Instead just making it another, separate statistic. However, I also believe that the numbers reflect whatever is required (based on technology level) for the continuance of humans through procreation. The only issue I see, when it comes to higher tech levels increasing the amount of deviants, is that the technology actually makes up for the lack of standard procreation. What this means is that deviant couples could still be fertilized artificially and deviancy loses it's usefulness as a form of population control.
You're arguing from a false premise, i.e. that a society would fail if a non-trivial fraction did not reproduce every generation. While that would certainly be true if NOBODY reproduced, historically the hard caps on population size and growth haven't come from how many people are having heterosexual sex or how often. It's also worth noting raising children takes a lot of time and effort, and the role of kin selection in our species is significant — e.g. even if you never have children, but help raise your niece and nephew, you're still contributing to the survival of your own genes. (Interestingly, this may be a contributor to why humans survive so long past breeding age when most animals don't — if grandma and grandpa help take care of all their grandchildren, even though they can't have any more children of their own, they're still contributing to the success of their specific bloodlines and also the tribe overall, most of whom are also likely to be relatives.)
Also, would you mind not calling gay, bi, and trans people "deviants"? Thanks.
Quote from: DariusWolfe on July 19, 2016, 06:00:54 PM
Not a bad first post, Gladeflower.
Mostly I opened the post window to address the claim that we're dealing with people from all eras of humanity, because it's massively false. I mean, I get what you meant to say: we've got primitives, transhumanism and every spectrum in between, but it's all one era; Post-Earth diaspora.
Humanity developed on Earth well past our current era, and developed cryptosleep and semi-reliable interstellar travel. It's conceivable that we managed to stomp out homophobia along the way.
It's also possible that we didn't, or the far-flung seeds of humanity devolved to less enlightened views.
But honestly, that's nether here, not there. We're not talking about futuristic attitudes toward homosexuality, bisexuality, etc. We're talking about how they exist within the playable portion of the game, and how that portrayal impactspurplepeople playing that game in the here and now.
Quote from: Kashipoi on July 20, 2016, 03:01:26 PM
Pawns are definitely not all white, and given how far in the future rimworld is and the strange way humanity is spreading it's possible that almost no one seen in game actively has any traces of old earth cultural races to begin with.