My own little rant.

[Sedodes]

<< as there would be a pinnacle evolutionary point at which no environmental alteration would even remotely affect the species, regardless of what it is. >> Thats not really true. If you drop a species in to a new environment then of course it will change.

Again, there is a pinnacle point at which a species will have experienced and adapted to every possible environment they will ever encounter.

<< It's actually been shown to happen in simple organisms >> Yeah ok, but its like saying mutations can happen and then making the leap to the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Possible but not probable.

Actually my example is both possible _AND_ probable.  This happens in roughly 98% of amoebiotic life forms subjected to such tests.  The part that makes it so spectacular was that it was done in an entire species., showing just how advanced the precursors were.

<< Not introducing any new elements? >> Yes, just base the game around a war or new colonizing efforts or something like that. I realize that they did what they did so they wouldnt have to use copy written material though.

A war or a new colonizing effort would be a new element unless it was still focused on the Doctrinal Conflict.  Not introducing new elements = copy, not sequal.

You listed a whole bunch of proof of concept items and I will conceded that if you are willing to stretch far enough you can make just about anything sound possible.

You mean like alien races having an all-out throwdown in the future and humans actually being advanced enough to participate alongside aliens millions of years older?  It's a video game.  Lighten up.  I just wanted to point out that the things you said are impossible aren't.

It still is not plausible though. You can almost believe some stories but can you almost believe Ninja Turtles, Digimon, Spider Man, or SC3?

I believe any of those things as much as I believe SC1 and 2.  I've accepted that they're only fantasy, and while sometimes based a bit more or less on science, they're no more real for it.  So, all in all, SC3 and your favorite example of "Ninja Turtles" are in the exact same reality category as SC2 -- Not One Bit.

[Eth]

Again, there is a pinnacle point at which a species will have experienced and adapted to every possible environment they will ever encounter.

 No there isn't.  That's absurd.  Give me ONE example of a species that is adapted to survive in ANY environment.  When a species adapts to a new environment, it becomes less able to survive in other environments.  There are only so many useless adaptations that an organism can aquire before it becomes inefficient to the point of failure to compete.  

[Fear]

"So, all in all, SC3 and your favorite example of "Ninja Turtles" are in the exact same reality category as SC2 -- Not One Bit."

Oh Come On, you have to admit that art and entertainment can exist in different levels of the imaginary. If what you say is true and all imaginary items were contained with in the same class then artists would not use the terms realism and impressionism. There ARE varying degrees of fantasy and SC3 is more on the impressionist side than the realistic side. It's just basic common sense; you can't say (with any logic) that one thing can't be a closer approximation of the truth than another.

[Rider]

I've read the thread, and I think both of you (Fear & a_stupid_box) should lighten up, and ease down.

SC3 isn't a bad game, it's a bad Star-control game.

It's that easy. It's pretty much comparable to MGS (Metal Gear Solid) The first part was really good. And the second wasn't a whole lot better, so people got disapointed. I think that the REAL SC3 (wich is yet to be created) shouldn't tie all things up. The great part about SC2 was that you wanted a sequel to explain the things you don't understand. AND THAT'S THE SUCCESS IN A STORY-BASED GAME.

Let's take another example. Half-life. Whoever played it (to the end) have probably wanted a sequel. That's because there's a GIANT open space at the end.

Now about the realism. The game is Science-fiction. Wich means that most things are technically possible (Warp engine for example - Star-trek). And some are plain fantasy, while other things are already realised. It's that mix that makes it Science fiction. And if you want to debate what CAN and CANNOT happen, please do so in a different topic.

This one was about the REAL SC3, not about the realism of the existing one.

[Viropher]

To be honest, I stopped reading this thread a few lines after my post; I was gone from home for a few days, and am too tired/lazy to read it. The only thing I'm going to mention is someone hesitantly defending SC3's plot as being vaguely based on science...

As far as I can remember, the intro starts with an explosion SO BIG IT - RIPPED - A - HOLE - IN - TIME!

And I wasn't really angry before - I thought I seemed pretty clearly sardonic, what with the "I say" and whatnot. Bah.

[Fear]

Oh never mind, it just seemed to me that SC2 turned the series in one direction and SC3 twisted it in to another. Not that I can't appreciate both directions; it's just unnerving when an epic story turns in to an episode of Sponge Bob Square Pants.

[Sedodes]

I think I have to agree with Viropher here.  Too much topic drift, and I got caught up in it.  I've said my peace regarding the original topic so I'm considering this thread closed -- unless by some miracle it goes back to the original point and there's actually something worth commenting on.

Viropher -- I caught your sarcasm, and it was appreciated.  I just didn't want to take liberties and possibly insult you by playing on it (some people have very thin skin, and most of them end up modding at one point or another).