OpenXcom Forum
OpenXcom => Offtopic => Topic started by: kharille on September 25, 2013, 10:17:04 am
-
I'd suppose it'll evolve and there will be new versions, but aren't some of the features a little out of date? I heard they discovered element 115. Perhaps one day it'll all be mobile combat vehicles rather than soldiers. And UAVs rather than piloted craft.
-
people still play games based around other past events, like WW2 , Xcom is just based on a past event in a alternate dimension ;)
-
I believe when the real aliens land on earth and start enslaving humanity openXcom is maybe out of date ;).
-
ummmm......NEVER!
-
I heard they discovered element 115.
What? When?
Wait a sec, you talk about an element that just happened to be element 115 on the periodic table right? Not an element that has the properties of X-com 115.
-
I believe when the real aliens land on earth and start enslaving humanity openXcom is maybe out of date ;).
At that point OpenXcom will become educational, a fate worse than death for video-games!
-
Wait a sec, you talk about an element that just happened to be element 115 on the periodic table right? Not an element that has the properties of X-com 115.
That's because those dumbasses can't even make a proper Elerium crystal!
-
Bah, element, shmelement. What's good of an element if you don't have the proper isotope :)
And about the crafts - seriously, in 1994 we were comparing Interceptors to F-22s and they seemed almost within reach. Now we compare to F-35s and they seem ages ahead of our tech :)
Oh and about the robots, Japan was still kinda on it in 1994 and HWP seemed not much of a stretch. I was recently on a presentation made by the leading Polish robot producer (don't laugh, their robots are used by US and Israeli forces, so can't be that bad). Production process of a modern robot which is sorta comparable to a HWP takes several years, the thing costs millions of $$$ and it's rather unimpressive to be honest, a dirt-cheap run-of-the-mill suicide bomber is more effective :) So I think in robotics we're lagging behind X-Com even more than back then, if only because the limitations of robotics route the western civilization took became more apparent (and Japan is pretty much out of business).
-
HWP of year 2010 8)
(https://www.ilsecoloxix.it/rf/Image-lowres_Multimedia/IlSecoloXIXWEB/RIGIRI/2014/03/24/Foto/Robot%20militari%202--U150535951445O8B-132x94.jpg)
today
(https://www.finmeccanica.com/documents/10437/31303746/original_trp2_1_g.jpg)
-
I think I'll make the tanks researchable, with some prerequisites. :)
It would be cool to only have access to these real-life drones at first. (I don't think they'd be popular though.)
-
That's because those dumbasses can't even make a proper Elerium crystal!
Lulz right, dumb asses indeed. Who doesnt want infinete energy right?
Bah, element, shmelement. What's good of an element if you don't have the proper isotope :)
Thats why (short of) I asked if they discovered an element that just filled the 115 "slot" on the periodic table or if they did actually discovered something similar. When I thought about it calmly ofc I realised it is former rather than the later. If they did discover something like this, it would be the news.
-
As a game, I don't see why xcom would become obsolete. It's still one of the most complex games I know, maybe with the total war games.
I found it funny when I learned there already was a 115 element. But that doesn't really mean much. Too bad the scientist who named it wasn't an xcom fan though (or it was maybe before xcom?). Having elerium in real life would be neat.
Technology surpassing what is in the game isn't really an issue. XCom:EU is an alternative history just like any game set in the past. It just happens to be a bit more recent. The red alert games are still entertaining even though it's not the cold war.
As for robots, a cheapish crappy scout drone kinda like what we use now for bomb disposal could be nice as an early scout, to keep your rookies alive and allow them to get better. With a rifle or smoke as weapons, maybe, then HWPs after some research in alien tech for remote control or sensors.
-
I suppose I meant the technology. In this day and age its all UAV's flying everywhere. I wonder whether in the coming decades they'll do a contemporary remake.
and the 2012 doesn't seem to have much in the way of improved technology for the humans to begin with.
-
I'd suppose it'll evolve and there will be new versions, but aren't some of the features a little out of date? I heard they discovered element 115. Perhaps one day it'll all be mobile combat vehicles rather than soldiers. And UAVs rather than piloted craft.
Is H.G. Wells 'The War of the Worlds' out of date? I mean, now everyone knows that there aren't any Martians but the book is still considered a classic even if it takes place on the beginning of the 20th century. To me that's how XCom goes :)
-
Is H.G. Wells 'The War of the Worlds' out of date? I mean, now everyone knows that there aren't any Martians but the book is still considered a classic even if it takes place on the beginning of the 20th century. To me that's how XCom goes :)
So true. And curiously it also proves that "modernized" remakes are often far worse than the original (shame on you, Steven Spielberg, you could've done much better than that).
-
Hm.. well I wonder what non alien technology exists in the 2012 version that didn't exist in 94'. Nanite medical kits? I know, when the aliens arrive you get access to all this amazing new technology. But it seems they didn't have night vision goggles in the 2012 version. In fact, they didn't even have the darkness mechanic in the 94' version.
Talk about a step back....
Wonder if we can compare the 94' and 12' native human technologies further... hm... looks like they don't have elevators in the 12' version... heh.....
-
Is H.G. Wells 'The War of the Worlds' out of date? I mean, now everyone knows that there aren't any Martians but the book is still considered a classic even if it takes place on the beginning of the 20th century. To me that's how XCom goes :)
That book will never be out of date for one reason: It was the only sci-fi work that had a realistic take on our gretest defender (and our greatest offender if we ever make it into other planets), the enviroment. In everything else that you read aliens and humans simply walk into the new planet who admitedly has parameters to support their life fuctions, casually.
-
You're much exaggerating in saying that it was the 'only' sci-fi work that took environmental issues of space exploration into consideration. Actually I've seen nothing special in it, being raised on hard sci-fi where the biological problem was as natural as gravity or radiation; and produced challenges which had many creative solutions. However, hard sci-fi is in a perpetual decline since about early 1970s...
-
That book will never be out of date for one reason: It was the only sci-fi work that had a realistic take on our gretest defender (and our greatest offender if we ever make it into other planets), the enviroment. In everything else that you read aliens and humans simply walk into the new planet who admitedly has parameters to support their life fuctions, casually.
What you consider a literary strength (environment killing invaders) I actually consider a plot weakness: you're invading an alien planet and you don't consider the effect that local life can have on your body? How did their civilization manage to survive martian diseases in the first place? Unless you're willing to believe that Mars in War of the Worlds can host intelligent life but not microscopic life, which sounds even more bizarre, considering that microbes on Earth are spread everywhere and can live in lava tunnels, extreme cold, or even suborbital space.
I could also point quite a few sci-fi books where the authors/characters have considered the effect that microbes (or other life) have on the invaders/colonizers/explorers.
However, hard sci-fi is in a perpetual decline since about early 1970s...
Hmm, I could mention quite a few recent works like Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy that are hard sci-fi.
-
Hmm, I could mention quite a few recent works like Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy that are hard sci-fi.
Yeah or Stephen Baxter, damn that guy is good. Such books exist, they're just far less numerous that they once were, I think. And back in the day, everyone at least tried to aspire to be hard sci-fi (see Frank Herbert - he really tried, despite his scientific shortcomings, and it shows; I daresay a Dune-like book written today would have none of that sci-fi). Now most of what I seem to see are steampunk/bizarro curiosities, political fantasies with little integrity like Honor Harrington books, straight sci-fi war porn or no-sci-fi at all, there's more fantasy/horror than ever before.
Perhaps I am exaggerating but I've recently rewatched the full Stargate series. From quite ingenious (if oftentimes showing lack of actual knowledge) show that wasn't afraid to ask the right questions, to explore, to aspire to find some truth - to the disgrace which is Atlantis, all in the span of 10+ years, and it kinda left me with bad aftertaste.
Robinson is actually pretty good from the scientific point of view, but he sadly fails hard as a psychologist, and even harder as sociologist, making the books pretty much unreadable. Even Arthur C. Clarke's infamously crude characters were way better, by the simple virtue of acting, speaking and thinking like actual humans.
-
Robinson is actually pretty good from the scientific point of view, but he sadly fails hard as a psychologist, and even harder as sociologist, making the books pretty much unreadable. Even Arthur C. Clarke's infamously crude characters were way better, by the simple virtue of acting, speaking and thinking like actual humans.
I read the book and hated it so much that I really had to make this post. I've read hundreds sci-fi novels, if not thousands, and I can say with a straight face that this one is my least favourite of all. Sure, the guy read a lot, but his characters - both individuals and societies - are about as human as Dwarf Fortress characters, except DF is a sim game and not a novel. In other words, his characters aren't even badly written, they're downright inhuman, and this won't do. I kind of dislike Dune for being cheaty (the author tried hard to come off as a sage, while his concepts were mostly pretty naive), but at least it was readable, coherent and understandable, and I could relate to the characters.
Literary preferences aside, I certainly agree that the sci-fi is in the gutters as a genre, declining both in quality and quantity. I don't even want to delve into why, and I have a few theories, but... well, it's sad.
-
Literary preferences aside, I certainly agree that the sci-fi is in the gutters as a genre, declining both in quality and quantity. I don't even want to delve into why, and I have a few theories, but... well, it's sad.
My theory regarding this is that as sci-fi has become more and more accepted by the masses (and authors willing to write in the genre) it expanded its boundaries beyond the niche that it used to be. The downside of massification is that you get a lot more garbage than before, the upside is that less people don't automatically think you're a freak when you mention that you like sci-fi.
-
My theory regarding this is that as sci-fi has become more and more accepted by the masses (and authors willing to write in the genre) it expanded its boundaries beyond the niche that it used to be. The downside of massification is that you get a lot more garbage than before, the upside is that less people don't automatically think you're a freak when you mention that you like sci-fi.
But Godwin's law has applied to it for at least a century. Remember all those pulp sci-fi stories from the 30s, or movies from the 50s (which pretty much inspired X-Com)? Most of it was at sewer level, or at least not to be taken too seriously. Nevertheless, there was plenty good sci-fi literature too, because writers addressed all the niches. By contrast, today sci-fi is very much a ghetto literature which has little influence on general culture - as opposed to fantasy. And I like fantasy, don't get me wrong, but I wish sci-fi was at least as prominent as Game of Thrones or Tolkien.
Though I have to admit that sci-fi cinema is still holding up, and interesting movies are still being made.
-
You're much exaggerating in saying that it was the 'only' sci-fi work that took environmental issues of space exploration into consideration. Actually I've seen nothing special in it, being raised on hard sci-fi where the biological problem was as natural as gravity or radiation; and produced challenges which had many creative solutions. However, hard sci-fi is in a perpetual decline since about early 1970s...
Well I might be not well informed, but I havent seen the specific factor in anything I remember reading or seeing. So....
For the time the matterial was published it was waaaaaaay ahead.
What you consider a literary strength (environment killing invaders) I actually consider a plot weakness: you're invading an alien planet and you don't consider the effect that local life can have on your body? How did their civilization manage to survive martian diseases in the first place? Unless you're willing to believe that Mars in War of the Worlds can host intelligent life but not microscopic life, which sounds even more bizarre, considering that microbes on Earth are spread everywhere and can live in lava tunnels, extreme cold, or even suborbital space.
I could also point quite a few sci-fi books where the authors/characters have considered the effect that microbes (or other life) have on the invaders/colonizers/explorers.
Hmm, I could mention quite a few recent works like Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy that are hard sci-fi.
Yeh, it was a gapping plot hole, but at least someone braught it up. In most matterial people just go from planet to planet with no ill effect at all, whereas if you think about it, its not safe to visit even other certain parts of our own world (either for you or the natives). Needless to say I will find your book suggestions and read them.
Perhaps I am exaggerating but I've recently rewatched the full Stargate series. From quite ingenious (if oftentimes showing lack of actual knowledge) show that wasn't afraid to ask the right questions, to explore, to aspire to find some truth - to the disgrace which is Atlantis, all in the span of 10+ years, and it kinda left me with bad aftertaste.
Was I the only one that found the whole package shallow, repitetive and a bit cheezy?
see Frank Herbert - he really tried, despite his scientific shortcomings, and it shows; I daresay a Dune-like book written today would have none of that sci-fi).
Aspire been the keyword here, however much I loved the universe and the questions it possed, it was not even close to be considered technobable. Some of its things were outright ridiculous.
-
By contrast, today sci-fi is very much a ghetto literature which has little influence on general culture - as opposed to fantasy. And I like fantasy, don't get me wrong, but I wish sci-fi was at least as prominent as Game of Thrones or Tolkien.
Yeah, aside from a few pop cultural phenomenons like Star Wars, sci-fi often does get marginalized. I know that even in this day, science fiction of any kind struggles to get academic recognition (at least in the United States), which is a pretty big deal considering that schools establish many people's ideas about what counts as good art or worthwhile literature. Even the biggest writers in the genre aren't immune; in my AP English class in high school a few years ago, one of my classmates wanted to write an essay on War of the Worlds and found out that not a single work by H.G. Wells was on the approved reading list - even the teacher was surprised.
I think it goes back to the New Critics of the 40s and 50s; they were big on drama and the classics, usually followed the "true art is angsty" school of thought, and disliked genres like fantasy, sci-fi, and anything that looked like Romanticism feeling that these genres were "low art" and lacked artistic merit. Over the years, fantasy and Romanticism (which are often closely related) have worked their way into pop culture and academia, so people are generally exposed to them, whereas stuff like sci-fi and anime/manga are still ghettoized and associated with various geeky subcultures.
Anyway, this topic is derailing pretty badly, maybe someone should create a sci-fi literature topic.
-
Yeah, aside from a few pop cultural phenomenons like Star Wars, sci-fi often does get marginalized.
Or becomes part of the current zeitgeist. The X-Files were a major success, even though many episodes were more of horror/suspense rather than sci-fi, and when XCom was published the theme of extraterrestrials and secret organizations was well present for tv viewers.
-
Or becomes part of the current zeitgeist. The X-Files were a major success, even though many episodes were more of horror/suspense rather than sci-fi, and when XCom was published the theme of extraterrestrials and secret organizations was well present for tv viewers.
Interesting point. While not really sci-fi per say, there's also those various speculative fiction anthology shows that have aired over the years - the ones that use twist endings a lot (The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, Tales from the Darkside, etc.) The Twilight Zone especially has become imbedded in pop culture and to a much larger extent than most people realize. If you ever watch the original version with Rod Serling (which I would personally recommend; it's a great show), you'll be impressed by how many modern shows homage and/or rip it off to this day.
-
Well, I'm glad Gollop is still around to enjoy his success. Would be horrible if he went the lovecraft way. I hope he does another lasersquad game. And hope he puts in the lawnmower and coffee machine...
I can quote him, when I brought this up with him about the 2012 version he noted that they were 'not that sophisticated'...
So what can a tablet do on an xcom battlefield? What if everyone had mobile phones with built in torches and 4G telecom connections?
-
Well, I'm glad Gollop is still around to enjoy his success. Would be horrible if he went the lovecraft way. I hope he does another lasersquad game. And hope he puts in the lawnmower and coffee machine...
I asked him on an AMA on the /xcom subreddit if he ever considered going back to Rebelstar and he was quite surprised. :)
-
Or becomes part of the current zeitgeist. The X-Files were a major success, even though many episodes were more of horror/suspense rather than sci-fi, and when XCom was published the theme of extraterrestrials and secret organizations was well present for tv viewers.
X-Files lost their footing IMHO, when they dabled in many different topics without following a coherent story. I mean the whole point of the series (or the vibe it wanted to convey) were the "aliens" and the Govermental cover up. While there were episodes (and whole seasons I might add) that had quite interesting stories outside this scope, when it started to show vampires, necromancers and satan it kinda lost me there.
-
X-Files lost their footing IMHO, when they dabled in many different topics without following a coherent story. I mean the whole point of the series (or the vibe it wanted to convey) were the "aliens" and the Govermental cover up. While there were episodes (and whole seasons I might add) that had quite interesting stories outside this scope, when it started to show vampires, necromancers and satan it kinda lost me there.
Yeah, I tend to agree. Well, you could make it a more supernatural series, but I don't think you can have both. But I think the biggest fault of the series was that nothing ever got resolved - no solid proof of aliens, Mulder's sister was never found, and so on.
Quality issues aside, it was at least a solid concept and actual sci-fi, and the urban fantasy episodes didn't change it. The only series I could compare with it was Dark Skies, which I remember as being more coherent and on topic (basically alien conspiracy around the time of Kennedy's assassination).
-
Yeah, I tend to agree. Well, you could make it a more supernatural series, but I don't think you can have both. But I think the biggest fault of the series was that nothing ever got resolved - no solid proof of aliens, Mulder's sister was never found, and so on.
Quality issues aside, it was at least a solid concept and actual sci-fi, and the urban fantasy episodes didn't change it. The only series I could compare with it was Dark Skies, which I remember as being more coherent and on topic (basically alien conspiracy around the time of Kennedy's assassination).
When I saw certain episodes pretty far in and then the movie, my cheesometer started ringing so I dropped the series. A friend of mine told me that in the end, there were no aliens and that all was a Govermental cover up, but IDK if that is true. That one has a weird way of interpreting things so I cannot be sure, not that I bothered to look that is.
-
I spent 100 US on the chaos reborn kickstarter, and I think I've only put 15 minutes into it. Which is the amount of time I spent on Elite Dangerous figuring out how to dock with the space station.
Hm.. He did so many squad based tactics, don't know why he would stop. I enjoyed Magic & Mayhem, chaos with a storyline and better graphics. Wish he continued the Lords of Chaos/Magic & Mayhem style game...
But squad level tactics... I played rebel star raiders, rebelstar 2, lasersquad, xcom, apoc, laser squad nemesis... The guy should not quit...
-
That book will never be out of date for one reason: It was the only sci-fi work that had a realistic take on our gretest defender (and our greatest offender if we ever make it into other planets), the enviroment. In everything else that you read aliens and humans simply walk into the new planet who admitedly has parameters to support their life fuctions, casually.
Environmentalism was/is the fashionable thing to be into now, so I'm not surprised this interpretation comes up. When I read it the first time, the popular one was anti-colonialism.
Either way, it's a timeless book to be enjoys straight or through reading it's themes.
-
I spent 100 US on the chaos reborn kickstarter, and I think I've only put 15 minutes into it. Which is the amount of time I spent on Elite Dangerous figuring out how to dock with the space station.
Hm.. He did so many squad based tactics, don't know why he would stop. I enjoyed Magic & Mayhem, chaos with a storyline and better graphics. Wish he continued the Lords of Chaos/Magic & Mayhem style game...
But squad level tactics... I played rebel star raiders, rebelstar 2, lasersquad, xcom, apoc, laser squad nemesis... The guy should not quit...
Don't forget Rebelstar Tactical Command on the GBA. That's got a pretty good combat-engine to it. Can't believe it's sequel was stopped.
-
Tactical command? Must be good but I can't be bothered moving beyond my pc.
I feel, somehow disillusioned, somehow cheated that people are running around playing useless android games and walking around like zombies, meanwhile there are excellent games ... Julian Gollop games that hasn't yet become the national sport of every nation....
Maybe its the lack of multiplayer in some of those oldergames. I suppose multiplayer openxcom might be ... a bit slow...
-
Maybe its the lack of multiplayer in some of those oldergames. I suppose multiplayer openxcom might be ... a bit slow...
Call me an oldie/senille w.e. but I believe those games were better (IMO) because there was no multiplayer first mentality back there. The games were designed with immersion and a story to tell in mind. In a multiplayer those considerations are secondary at best if at all.
-
Well, with the technology available, two player stuff like hidden movement involved asking your brother to turn around whilst you move in lasersquad for example.
I have a similar perception of certain authors who made masterpieces but were crowded out by more successful and popular but not necessarily good gamebooks.
I really enjoyed Lords of Chaos and magic & mayhem. However they didn't seem to take off, and magic & mayhem 2 was painful. The new chaos reborn... its just like the original... I'm sure its fun back in the 80s when you had nothing better to do but in this age a nice storyline element would be good.
I think laser squad nemesis introduced single player towards the end. that's the only time I got into it, couldn't be bothered figuring out multiplayer.
-
Call me an oldie/senille w.e. but I believe those games were better (IMO) because there was no multiplayer first mentality back there. The games were designed with immersion and a story to tell in mind. In a multiplayer those considerations are secondary at best if at all.
Well said but let's not forget that the first Laser Squad had built-in multiplayer, and wasn't any worse because of this :)
-
Well said but let's not forget that the first Laser Squad had built-in multiplayer, and wasn't any worse because of this :)
Still was the exception rather than the rule.
I havent played that back in the day, and I dont want to to be honest. Not because I wont like it but because Ill feel sad.
-
X-COM will only become obsolete when we stop talking about it and if we're not passing it on to our offspring. In that time *poof*, X-COM is forgotten, and replaced by something else. Probably by something stupid seeing how degrading society is turning. I tell you Tella-tubbies were way ahead of its time. If that show came out for the first time today, people would embrace it.
-
X-COM will only become obsolete when we stop talking about it and if we're not passing it on to our offspring. In that time *poof*, X-COM is forgotten, and replaced by something else. Probably by something stupid seeing how degrading society is turning. I tell you Tella-tubbies were way ahead of its time. If that show came out for the first time today, people would embrace it.
It cannot go down on forever, as it would be terminal. The trend will revert at some point, I believe... And this is another echo of War of the Worlds. The whole ending of the book never struck me as very important (yeah so they got killed by microbes - means anyone can be if they ignore the nature). No. The most striking, perhaps, were the people who lived in the tunnels. "They will never find us... Underground". The final act of degradation of the humanity - tunnel rats. The pastor was asking, what is good of the Spirit of Man? He didn't know, but Wells provides the answer - the Spirit of Man doesn't protect us from dying, but it does protect against a far worse fate - the fate of becoming tunnel rats. Cue Metro 2033 book series of the recent years. Over a 100 years passed and - especially in Metro's derivatives - I'll risk saying that people no longer think that becoming tunnel rats is so bad, as they fantasize about such a world... I tend to think of Game of Thrones in a similar way - a fallen civilization with no future, a circus of backstabbing nobles who live at the expense of everyone else and STILL live in shitty poverty. But people watch it for sex and blood (which is understandable), without getting repulsed by how the characters are OK with how hopeless their world is (which is strange).
-
Game of thrones is fancy mix of the Western Roman empires most degrading aspects turned into a middle ages context and slapped in with that middle ages mentality to boot. Add in high fantasy. That said, history is full of moments like that (particularly in Europe) sans the fantasy elements (dragons and stuff). People are familiar with this already and its not that most of the things happening in there are not happening in real life either. So its easier to not be repulsed.
In regards to the metro series, I wouldnt call it "fantasizing" about becoming tunnel rats. Presenting a dystopian world usually is a means to raise questions about the morality of those living in the current world (ours or the writters time frame) the steps that led to the presented world and ultimately usually acts as a warning.
I doubt anyone would like to live inside a shit hole of his own voilition.
-
Game of thrones is fancy mix of the Western Roman empires most degrading aspects turned into a middle ages context and slapped in with that middle ages mentality to boot. Add in high fantasy. That said, history is full of moments like that (particularly in Europe) sans the fantasy elements (dragons and stuff). People are familiar with this already and its not that most of the things happening in there are not happening in real life either. So its easier to not be repulsed.
They are happening, indeed. That is what worries me. But maybe I am overblowing the whole thing. The masses were always suckers for flesh and blood. To cut this side topic short, as it happens, I know a thing or two about the real Middle Ages. Game of Thrones' destitution and misery, and the death of chivalry, was in our world brought about, amongst other factors, by the rise of Merchant States like Venice or Genua, and the heavy economical drain they've put onto the old feudal system through their superior communications and insatiable greed... giving us Renaissance in exchange, though... So the Game of Thrones brings about the the worst aspects of late Middle Ages mentality and economy, without any Renaissance in sight, in my opinion.
In regards to the metro series, I wouldnt call it "fantasizing" about becoming tunnel rats. Presenting a dystopian world usually is a means to raise questions about the morality of those living in the current world (ours or the writters time frame) the steps that led to the presented world and ultimately usually acts as a warning.
I doubt anyone would like to live inside a shit hole of his own voilition.
Very true. Nobody would like to live there if there was a choice... unless the choice was between two evils? How many would choose the tunnels if the alternative was a seemingly hopeless fight? What if the fight was not hopeless, only dangerous? What if the tunnels are just conveniently perceived as the "lesser evil"? I agree that such visions serve as a warning... but I think Wells gave us a deeper warning, a more profound warning. Anything is better than the tunnels... even the seemingly hopeless fight with the Martians. You shouldn't choose the lesser evil because it's very difficult to measure evil, unless in hindsight. Yes the book ends well, with hope, as when the Martians die, most of the humanity is not defeated, not reduced to rat-like state.
No compromises, even in the face of Armageddon, said Rorschach in The Watchers. But he was crazy, wasn't he...? But the message seems to be still there; better to risk everything than to lose human dignity and civilization. This was another warning against lesser-evilism. I'm not saying it is good to embrace such a fanatical take on this thing as Rorschach did; but he has shown the direction, like Wells, away from the tunnels and towards... uncertain tomorrow, without easy choices? One thing the Tunnels lack is that uncertanity; as it was, it will be, we will be forever safe under the watchful eye of Most Wise Tunnel Overlords...
Maybe it was easier for Wells to write about the Spirit of Man in 1895; after all, the book appeared in what was, in many ways, the most optimistic era of humanity. The wars were believed to be dwindling down, ushering an era of general peace; the Spring of Nations of 1848 gave a beginning to a new society, away with the absolute hell of the early XIXth century, onwards into the era of empowerment, allowed by the Industrial Revolution. By the turn of the century, the paradise seemed to be within grasp; the immense fruits of Industrial Revolution (an order-of-magnitude increase of energy available for every human for the same amount of work) were either given to the workers as high wages, to create free society and middle-class based economy (USA), or taken forcibly by the masses, formenting Communism. In both cases, industry and technology, in time, uplifted the human existence to a new level. Nevermind one of the authors of this new world, Henry Ford, saying: the future is National Socialism... :)
And here, back to Dune, incidentally... the book was written in, what I believe, was the heyday of human civilization (and incidentally, also the Golden Age of SF). Logic and reason seem to go hand in hand with human empowerment that reached its height by the early 1970s... and has been since squandered. With bleak times, reason seems to recede; and when the reason sleeps, demons are born. Is Metro a warning? Or is it a fantasy? What is the lesser evil, the Tunnels and Mutants, or the uncertainty of job, housing, family so many face today? Where is the Spirit of Man in this equation? Were the nukes even launched? In how many ways Metro reminds the world of TFTD? Just food for thought, I don't claim to know the answers.
-
Though (no insult meant here) I dont recognise the so called 'intellectualls) of the last 3-4 centuries as such there is a quote of Benjamin Franklin: “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” Its not spot on but it is sort of an anwer to the questions you pose.
Personally I have lived "the tunnel rats life" philosophy for around 4-5 years in a sense and I can tell that it is better not to do it. Any alternative is better but thats just me. Your mileage may vary as they say.