@PretzleMe wrote:
I wasn't trying to imply that you think I have to agree with you, or that you were trying to convince me, and apologize if I gave you that impression. It's just I feel like certain things are obvious enough to be assumed such as some thinking there are more important things to work on. People not needing to agree. That sort of thing.
I started a thread because I do believe it a significant issue. I explained why. Logic as well as a shortage of examples anywhere else that matches this desire to be able to not have to do everything to get everything or do less and get the same as those that get more.
So your opinion is what it is and some agree with it and others don't. Regardless, I appreciate you sharing it.
Hehe, well assume nothing on the internet 😉 And it's all good, since we can still talk to each other in a very civil manner and that's appreciated.
You say you explained why you see it as a significant issue. Well, when I read your OP, I see not explanation why. You explain that you see it as an issue and that it's wrong and should be different, but I don't really get the sense of a reason behind that. What makes it wrong?
Another person here mentioned that it's possible to gain 100% viability without doing the vault. Now that's something I can understand because that's an integral part of getting the planets back to life and even though it's not a direct part of the main story itself, it certainly goes along with it.
But I don't see the reason why anyone would think that it's problematic to have some room to play with. So for example that you can get to 120% if you do everything but don't have to do everything because that would be considered tedious by a number of people. So I see why they did it and I don't experience it as problematic at all.
However, being able to make a planet viable without doing the vault for a planet actually makes no sense in the context of the story. I would suggest doing something about that like putting viability points in reserve until the vault is actually completed, which then frees the points up.
That I can follow easily. But I am still wondering why it's a problem for you that you can get more points than you need. I suspect most people are not that completionist and the game needs to be manageable for them as well. That's why I am not opposed to this as it doesn't really hurt things.
What needs to be considered is that beyond the vault, it's the quests and teleport points that you unlock that give you viability points. The tele-points are a logistics issue and the quests are a social-political element. So viability isn't just the planet's physical viability as in clean air and water etc, but also the exploration/logistics and the social-political situation with the other inhabitants. So perhaps by going over 100% the rating should count further and have some additional beneficial effect that is not important to the main story but could unlock some extra resources or friendlier allies or whatever. In that sense we could treat this situation not as a problem but an opportunity.
Just some additional thoughts on the topic really.
