Easter Eggs and such in Gal Civ

PQ 10 - THIS IS CETI ALPHA FIVE!!

Helps if you imagine Ricardo Montalbun saying it...

Man, that's great! I've been playing this game and each time, I think of Ceti Alpha 5... don't ask why, I have no idea, but I love that line!

As a point: there are other "easter eggs". The League of Non-Aligned Worlds is Babylon 5. Reruns of Deep Space Nine... well, speak for itself, and the book that says the answer to life, the universe and everything was 42 is a reference to Douglas Adams' Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (and series). I've found others, but now that I am on the spot, I cannot think of them!

I've seen other LOTR references. Bilbo, Gandalf, Saruman, just to name a few. Major kudos goes to whoever did it. And kudos to Nazgul the Gator for reading The Simarrion (sp?).

The Simarillion i think is how its spelled.

this isnt really a easter egg, but i like that one tech thats almost at the end of the tree, that makes fun of britney spears

the restaurant at the end of time or universe. i forget what its called in the game.

My favorite so far has been the line in the tech summary for Cultural Trade, which says that you have created the "Kuperman Hadderach, the universe's super sales being".

That's a pun on the Kwisatz Haderach super being from the Dune chronicles by Frank Herbert. LOL

Ahhhhh, Dune and Lord of the Rings. The greatest Sci-Fi and the greatest Fantasy of all time.

I've noticed a lot also, but off the top of my head:

Hoth - Icey location of Rebel Base in Empire Strikes Back
Severus - I assume of Severus Snape from Harry Potter
Algore - Please god, tell me I'm wrong!
Fivel - The talking mouse?

More LOTR - Gamgee

Plus there are a ton of mythological ones (Greek, Norse, and probably others) - Artemis, Zues, Midgard, Aegeus, Achilles

If I can think of any more, I'll add them. This is a fun post!

-Dave


~SDC~

Imagine how much better fantasy fiction would be if so many people didn't believe that?

(not saying Lord of the Rings is bad, but the best?)

~SDC~

Betelgeuse is also the star system where Ford Prefect was born. This is of course another reference to The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

I really love it that Brad was influenced by about the same fiction as myself! Star Trek, Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, Dune, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy & Starship Titanic...

Makes playing the game feel like coming home!!! LOL LOL LOL

~SDC~

It's good that Brad does not try to hide his geek roots.

~SDC~

Algore - Please god, tell me I'm wrong!

well, since the game is a major experiment in online distribution, it makes sense to honor the inventor of the Internet

LotR - Definetely one of the best, and practically defined Fantasy as a genre. It gets bonus points for not following cliches (just an adaptation of folk tales, not a rehash of previous successful novels like 95% of all "elves and dwarves" drivel, even the ones which are well written). There are, nevertheless, fantasy books which are original AND good. The examples I can give:

Pretty much bloody anything by Guy Gavriel Kay. Tigana still makes me cry on the 5th read, and I'm man enough to admit it.

A Song of Ice and Fire is shaping up to be a damn fine series. Hopefully George RR Martin avoid Jordanizing his work.

A Wheel of Time. Not really, but in an alternate universe where Robert Jordan did NOT become an old greedy boring bastard after the fourth novel, this series ROCKED.

Assassin's series (by Something Cobb) pretty good, pretty original, damn fine writing.

Astro

Wait a moment.... Altairians.... That was also somewhere in The Guide..... Altairian dollars or something....

~SDC~

Astromarine:

I point to this bit of your post:

"LotR - Definetely one of the best, and practically defined Fantasy as a genre. It gets bonus points for not following cliches (just an adaptation of folk tales, not a rehash of previous successful novels like 95% of all "elves and dwarves" drivel, even the ones which are well written)."

The reason it's not following cliches is because it *invented* the cliches. Which isn't really a criticism of Lord of the Rings, but as can be seen in other books, these are not particularly good cliches in most cases.

So the "elves and dwarves drivel" you talk about are actually direct descendants, in terms of thematic elements, of the Lord of the Rings. Nothing wrong with that, although, as I said, "imagine how much better fantasy fiction would be if people weren't trying to imitate Tolkien all the damned time?" (okay, paraphrased a bit).

(as for originality, well... I think you're confusing "original" with "interesting." A Song of Ice and Fire has very few original elements, but is a very good story. It benefits from not trying to be the next Lord of the Rings.)

~SDC~

Silmarillion.

~SDC~

Ok, I admit it, I'm a simple man, Jordan's Wheel of Time series has driven me almost bonkers with its plot twists and… well, happenings. Yet I was hooked and can't give it up. I have made the determination that I will not buy any more of the series until I hear that either he croaks or finishes it. THEN I'll go back, buy all the books and read through them, again.

I heartily recommend Elizabeth Moon’s ‘Deed of Paksenarrion’ series, good stuff.

A thought though, a book (or game?) doesn’t have to foreswear all previous devices to be a damn good book. Clichés become clichés because they so often ring true.

IAF is quite original in one respect, though (and the one that, for me, defines the series): the writing style. RR is writing it as "historical fiction", focussing a lot more on the interplay of houses and political plays than the love interests or hero stories of the characters. Except for the bastard son, all the other Starks are (so far) only being focussed on for their influence in politics (the danger of exposing the twins, the King in the North, being a hostage to various groups, being a puppet "princess". It all feels a LOT grander than the usual "party quest", and there's very few whiffs of predetermination (WoT cycles, endless books' prophecies, etc).

But I grant you this: how about we merge our concept of "original" and "interesting" and reach the middle term "fresh"?

As for LotR yes, I meant it didn't follow cliches because it invented them. But really, how cheesy would the elves and dwarves thing be if *all* you ever read in fantasy was the LotR? They're pretty interesting concepts, but overdone (and in a bad way. post-LotR elves do not have the same reason for existing as the LotR ones, which is to show a magical world decaying and giving room to a "physical" world, the Fourth Age. They're just forest-dwellers with pointy ears) I *know* the EaDD is based on JRRT, and it's only drivel because it's derivate and easy, not because it's bad in itself.

Summing up: LotR was original, well written, and had interesting, deep plots (everything had a reason for being there). Further EaDD is not original, may be well written or not, and ONLY includes EaD to exploit a market and fit into a genre.
I am excluding from this novels that use EaD *for* something in the story. Those stand on their own merits.

Astro

"Fresh" is probably a better definition, I think. I dislike the use of "original" because its value and occurrence are both heavily overstated. I mean, I wouldn't say that any particular element in GalCiv is really "original" (in terms of game plot, background, mechanics, etc) but I would definitely say it's a fresh approach - and I think the AI approach is fairly original.

Lord of the Rings wasn't very original - it draws from folk tales, mythology, and the like to create a rather vivid setting. None of the elements are "new," but they're interesting.

Well written? I'll grant that Tolkien understood the English language - if maybe a bit *too* well. He often spends six pages describing what could be covered in two paragraphs. This isn't always true, and some things that could take six pages or more of description end up taking up a paragraph or two (Gandalf's fight with the Balrog when it happens in Moria, not Gandalf's later elaboration). The Two Towers just dragged in places and suffered from being the middle of the trilogy.

As for your comments that elves and dwarves in books are there solely to exploit a genre in some cases - I really disagree. Most of the places it appears is in D&D fiction (Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Scarred Lands, etc.) or things that were created to draw directly upon this material (like Warcraft or Warhammer, or, for that matter, D&D). Part of the reason they're so indispensable in so much fantasy fiction is because Tolkien planted the genre with his books. Admittedly, you don't really see it become dominant until The Sword of Shannara, but once it does, it's pretty tenacious.

Anyway, I don't think I tried to imply that Tolkien's work is cliché because he invented most of them for the modern fantasy genre. Rather, I don't think his work is the best ever whether or not he invented them.

Admittedly, I don't agree that elves always need the same reason for existence (to highlight Middle Earth's decay and loss of magic), nor, for that matter, do I think that everything that appears in a work of fiction needs to highlight or symbolize *anything*. I'm not sure how Tolkien would react to your assessment, although given his comments about symbolic writing, it may not have been very polite.

As for A Song of Ice and Fire - much of it is politics, although I think you'll see Arya getting away from that (and already she's having adventures of her own - putting her closer to Jon and further from the others). Stepping away from the Starks, you have Danaerys, who's not exactly in the middle of politics either - she's having as much adventure as Jon is. Perhaps more.

As for the political games in ASoIaF, in many places, they remind me strongly of Dune. Also, re: predestination; prophecy is *all over the place*.

Brian: A friend of mine often says "Clichés become clichés because they're true." This doesn't mean some aren't bad clichés, or overused.

~SDC~

brian, I HEAVILY recommend getting the Song of Ice and Fire while you wait for Jordan to finish. There's 3 out, one almost, and 2 more till the end of the series. Same epic scope as Jordan, and it does the same job of blurring the lines of good and bad guys. Heh, even though Ice does this by making bad guys have a reason for being so, and most characters are generally likeable and believable, while Jordan makes me want to slap ALL of his characters, good and bad alike

Astro

Very true.

I can't say there are many books I've read that have as many sympathetic villains. Even Sandor Clegane comes across as "not too bad" and he never gets PoV chapters.

I like Jaime's explanations to Brienne about why he's the Kingslayer. He's presented as a really horrible person by others, but he had very good reasons for what he did (not for everything he did, but).

Tyrion's one of my favorite characters, but I considered Catelyn more a villain.

~SDC~

Ack! Only my first couple of posts here and already I've participated in the commandeering of a thread!

Although come to think of it Pheadyme, it does seem like a disproportionate amount of books use Elves, Dwarves, Aliens etc. in the 'waning years' or their respective races.

/wrestles with conscience over thread movement
/looses

Astro, I will look for SoFaI next time I am in the PX but I doubt they will have it. I'll check for e-book pricing/availability. Everything out in town is written in Kangi.

Phae: I know The Big Tolk's view on symbolism, and I wasn't saying the elves are "symbolic". They, quite literally, have the function of both showing a "legendary" world, and giving a sadness undercurrent to the happy tale of the destruction of the Enemy, which means the downfall of that world. Tolkien's prose is a bit wasteful, granted, but that's style. His *world*, though, has very little extraneous or useless features.

Hmm, I think this is my main issue, really. My favorite Worlds of fiction have two characteristics:

1) Realistic. This is essential. I do not mean "earth-like", I mean they have a fully working dynamic, and everything in them can be explained and makes logical sense as long as you are willing to concede their existence.

2) Each have a "thesis". This is secondary, but nice. While the first category implies fully-working societies, this one implies a twist on those societies. The best example I can give is Nightfall (SF by Asimov and Silverberg). Take a normal society. Now put it in a planet with 6 suns. What follows? No other stars. No darkness. No need for lights. Immutability. Now say that those six suns, once every 10000 years, fall below the horizon at the same time. What happens to that society?
Another example is LotR. Given you accept the creation myth and the physics, everything else flows naturally and beautifully. The fourth age happens because it was the most logical progression of what came before. Nothing is Deus Ex, nothing is done that breaks your assumptions. One bad example is the Krondor Riftwar series. All was well until the very end, when the Lifedrain jewel breaks. The "salvation" that happens makes no sense given everything else in the previous 2000 pages, even though I like the series.

Erm, let's stop this, since some people want easter eggs here. Besides, we're not arguing at this point, just discussing. Make a new thread if you like to talk fantasy and SF

Astro

Brian:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/series/-/4/mass_market/ref=ref=pd_sim_series/102-4193288-1248148

erm, open the link in a new window, and paste the text following it after

One very obvious yet very cool easter egg: The tech ascension movie. That's inspired by the final scene of the final 4th season episode of Babylon 5, if I recall Brad's post correctly. He also described the humans as "Vorlons without encounter suits."



~SDC~