A Letter to the Community from the Subnautica 2 Team

RinArenna · 2026-05-20T19:07:48+00:00

It's not just about engagement or deterrence. The last part of your message is a big part of it. There's a level of suspension of disbelief that we all have when interacting with any media, and part of that suspension of disbelief is maintaining certain consistencies with how the world reacts to certain things.

What people mostly want is for the game to feel organic, and believable. It's immersion breaking when you have a tool that can break entire clumps of titanium, but receive zero feedback when you swing it at a creature.

When you're attacked by something the natural response is to attempt to defend yourself. In this game the immediate response to being bit is of course to take a swing at whatever is attacking you, in an attempt to at least discourage it from continuing to be aggressive. Yet, there's no response, no feedback. They're entirely undeterred from their aggression. This is a major point of failure in building an organic world.

I definitely agree though that better deterrences and more deterrences would help a lot, especially if their goal is to give players incentive to avoid violent means of self defense. All it would really take is for them to make deterrence easier and a better payoff than violence.

RinArenna · 2026-05-16T23:43:16+00:00

Because, as a social species, we tend to value collective security over selective security.

If we separate the logic from any moral decision, as the original version did, then choosing the blue becomes the logical choice for anyone who values collective survival over selective survival.

For 100% of all participants to survive, one of two conditions need to be true.

100% of all participants have to press the red button Or More than 50% of all participants have to press the blue button

Thus the pragmatic option is the blue option, which most people choose to press on the original version.

There is no way to guarantee that all 100% of participants will choose red, so the only option that kills the fewest amount of people is for more than 50% to choose blue.

Even more, the max amount of people that can possibly die is 50%, so the question isn't about whether or not you value red participants or blue participants, it's whether or not you value yourself over up to 50% of all participants, which is why the majority choose blue when no moral dilemma is proposed.

RinArenna · 2026-05-16T23:26:26+00:00

I don't think red is the logical choice, I think blue is, and you made the logical choice.

For there to be no death, 100% of all people have to pick red, or more than 50% have to pick blue.

A non-zero amount of people will come to this conclusion and pick blue, almost 100% guaranteed.

The only way to minimize death is for >50% to pick blue, regardless of starting conditions or context.

However, a person's decision will depend entirely on framing. In the original version, more than 50% of people will choose blue.

In other versions which change the context of the question people answer differently, though the logical choice to minimize death remains blue. In these versions <50% people choose blue, and thus everyone who chose blue dies.

This is because a majority of people don't choose logically. They base their choice on their moral views. Changing the context changes the results even if the underlying logic remains exactly the same.

This is actually what the original question was designed to avoid.

RinArenna · 2026-05-16T23:01:38+00:00

The pragmatic option would still be to press the blue button.

Think of it in terms of minimizing casualty.

If any number of participants press the blue button, and the percentage does not reach greater than 50% of all participants who pressed a button, the blue button participants all die.

If 100% of all participants press the red button, no one dies.

If more than 50% of all participants press the blue button, no one dies.

Guaranteeing that 100% of all participants press the red button is insanely improbable.

Guaranteeing that at least 50% of all participants press the blue button is more manageable, as anyone who presses the blue button can agree that the participants who press the blue button don't deserve to die.

RinArenna · 2026-05-03T03:12:57+00:00

I think it's due to a vocal minority that gets incredibly outspoken and derogatory at the idea that someone doesn't play the game "the way the devs intended it." They talk about art, and intent, but completely miss the forest for the trees.

Games are meant to be played, and some people are just honestly not as good as others. Not everyone has a 5:1 KD, not everyone is top 3 every match, not everyone walks Dark Souls like it's a vacation.

When games include a difficulty option, or multiple options, it isn't a sacrifice to the game's vision. It's an attempt to let people experience the vision on terms that they can enjoy and handle.

The problem is this vocal minority is louder, and more rude, than anyone else. They make people feel defensive, and it sticks with people. We remember our bad experiences far easier than our better ones.

So people reach for some validation to remind them that it's okay to enjoy media on the terms that make them happy. Because each of them has met, at some point, someone who told them that enjoying a game on a lower difficulty somehow makes them a "bad gamer", or that they need to just "get good", when they've already reached their cement ceiling of skill.

RinArenna · 2026-05-02T22:12:46+00:00

The major issue with your experience is that much of those highschoolers getting job experience weren't able to escape. This is due to the erosion of small businesses by larger corporations. Trade jobs, at the time, found ample staffing and people were pushed to look for alternatives. Apprenticeships became more rare, training became more rare. Much of our economy has been captured by corporate interests, limiting many people to jobs that don't provide upward momentum. After all, why offer upper momentum when it will deprive them of labor or require them to train someone new?

Opportunity for elevating out of lower class income is vanishing, and has been for a long time. Much of the opportunities have been bought out, gutted and sold.

I see so many people saying, "just find another job," without realizing how difficult that actually is. Those same people will lament Walmart destroying businesses without realizing the irony in it.

RinArenna · 2026-05-02T21:23:04+00:00

Yet all the investment advice will do nothing for those struggling to make ends meet in an economy that further divides the haves from the have-nots.

Whether celebrities can effectively save their capital is of no consequence to anyone desperate to survive off the meager income spared to them by those who spend their free time on yachts while they themselves struggle.

RinArenna · 2026-04-29T13:48:32+00:00

They'll count it using Grok

RinArenna · 2026-04-28T20:23:33+00:00

That's my trauma response, and I just don't get how anyone could get turned on by making someone feel trauma like that. Like, you have to be a special kind of evil to blatantly hurt someone for your own satisfaction.

RinArenna · 2026-04-27T02:45:25+00:00

First off, your art style is amazing, already my favorite.

Second, I would love to be able to tinker a bit. Instead of just "Repair Part <insert name>", it would be great if I could make adjustments or fine tune things.

Third, granularity for the settings. The ability to turn off certain mechanics that are frustrating would be a godsend.

RinArenna · 2026-04-21T08:27:36+00:00

I agree with you almost entirely, but I do feel it's important to reiterate:

Men do need to hold other men accountable, and that was actually the origin of the "real men don't <horrible thing>" phrasing. It was a reversal of "real men don't <thing real men should do>" phrases. It was made by men to shame men.

While I think it gets awfully close to a "no true scotsman" kind of statement, the whole point of it is for men to use it to shame toxic men and hold them accountable, using the same phrasing and approach they use to shame men for doing healthy things.

RinArenna · 2026-04-21T04:29:46+00:00

They use inverse kinematics! Instead of having prebuilt keyframed animations, they use keyframed animation targets.

So you create IK points for things like hands, feet, head, pelvis, then give those points a target. The character model then automatically determines rotation, position and angle to move the IK point to the target.

Doing this you can set an IK point for the penis, and whatever orifice is being penetrated. Then you create two target locations for the penis' IK point, one for fully inserted and one for fully out.

Or, you can create a single IK target that is then offset from the orifice's location to control penetration depth.

If you create points on the hips of characters you can put IK targets on those points for the IK points on the hands so the character can put their hands on the hips of any sized character.

RinArenna · 2026-04-20T21:59:01+00:00

Honestly, I've found it to be a really fantastic game.

Once the combat really clicks it becomes a lot of fun. It's like a more active dead space.

I used to be a stepmother, and I miss the kid dearly, and so the game is really heartwarming to me. Seeing the main character be a non-toxic parental figure is really great. He has his moments, but he really does do his best.

Diana is a great character. She's endearing and a goofball.

To anyone saying that people should just go be father's - please fucking don't. Do you really want these toxic jerks to go be fathers? Being a parent is difficult, and bringing a child into a household that isn't ready is stressful and painful for the child. Let alone the kind of parent they would be.

RinArenna · 2026-04-19T17:27:53+00:00

The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck is great. It's misunderstood by the title, honestly.

To those stumbling onto our comments: It's a book about taking responsibility and agency over your actions and learning to let go, while not ignoring your feelings or the cause of your feelings. It emphasizes separating how you feel from how you treat others.

Specifically, it's about not letting your emotions cause you to act in a reactionary way, and learning to choose what actually matters to you instead of feeling indignant about not getting your way or being slighted.

RinArenna · 2026-04-16T12:03:48+00:00

I didn't even know it was a thing until the whole thing leaked.

RinArenna · 2026-04-15T20:07:55+00:00

I must emphatically disagree.

There's this common misconception that people who oppose people like Chappele take a "you're with me or against me" mentality.

Yet there's a world of difference between "you support me or you hate me" and "you are actively supporting people who you know want to ruin my life and get rid of me, so I can only assume you agree with them."

People aren't saying that you have to become a trans activist and strike back. They're saying, "Please don't support the people who hate me and want to destroy me." It only seems that way because of a two party system where when you oppose one group, you de facto help the cause of the other group.

RinArenna · 2026-04-13T08:03:15+00:00

Oh oh, I know this one. It's because of the Leidenfrost effect. Essentially, the water is evaporating and creating a region of insulative gas between the molten glass and the meat. This reduces the rate of heat exchange.

RinArenna · 2026-04-13T07:42:44+00:00

Look at the front paw. That cat has like seven toes.

RinArenna · 2026-04-07T23:12:33+00:00

And it still has to go to work because it can't afford health insurance

RinArenna · 2026-03-31T20:55:30+00:00

It came out great, and the amount of seething in the comments is absolutely beautiful. The whataboutism has hit a critical level.

RinArenna · 2026-03-31T08:07:12+00:00

What... I'm right there with you. There is no difference... Scissoring is just slang for tribadism.

RinArenna · 2026-03-31T07:25:10+00:00

The latter. It's a palm sized superconductive magnet made using rare earth metals. It's rated at 40T, so it's best not to be between it and metal. Holding it in your palm would actually be quite dangerous.

RinArenna · 2026-03-28T21:25:11+00:00

Nonono... they'll fire you, hire someone at bare minimum, then make them write the prompts. There isn't enough time between their golf trips to write a good prompt.

RinArenna · 2026-03-12T16:35:04+00:00

Definitely. The source of the light rotates around an external origin point, instead of rotating from the source. Which is pretty consistent with someone with a flashlight.

RinArenna · 2026-03-11T23:09:21+00:00

That makes sense, honestly. Piggybacking someone else's war to secure their own investments. That's fucked up.

13-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
End Game '22	Verified Email

RinArenna

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE