Stellaris Dev Diary #95: Humanoids Species Pack

[Ur-Quan Lord 13]

And despite that no creature on earth has redundancy eyes, eyes which more or less are just there in case you lose an original one. Now I'm not saying it's impossible that a creature may have more eyes I'm just saying 4+ eyes is a little over represented in the stellaris portraits. Especially avians for some reason.

Edit: I guess 4 eyes could serve the purpose of giving both 360 vision (like prey animals usually have) and depth vision (like predetorial animals usually have), but again I don't think there is any creature of earth with this combo, possibly because eyes are so fragile to begin with. Or possibly because two of everything is such a a basic thing in our genetic structure.

Lots of animals have different types of eyes. Ones that are more sensitive to uv, or can detect light polarity, etc. Easiest explanation of 4 eyes: this species evolved one set of eyes that sees in IR and green, and another that sees blue and UV, and it wants binocular vision in both spectra. No evolutionary reason for those eyes to combine, as long as the 4-eye solution is working.

No, they are not, the explanation to alien lifeforms having similarities to Earth life forms is evolutive convergence.
Evolutive convergence can easily create humanoid form, but create a alien exactly equal a small bearded human with a large nose is much more implausible that the majority of the other portraits.

There is no comparison between evolutive convergence creating aliens with analogue structures to feathers and beaks and evolutive convergence creating creatures exactly equal to medieval fantasy dwarves.
The second is much more implausible.

Well, on earth we have, say:
1. Hedgehogs, echidnas and tenrecs look as similar as these portraits.
2. The thylacine, a marsupial that looks like a small tiger, and whose skull is literally almost identical to a wolf's. But could go on for paragraphs about marsupials, let's get outside of mammals.
3. Marine mammals developed a bunch of the same fins fish already had. And dolphins look just like scaleless ichthyosaurs.
4. Dinosaurs and mammals both got duck bills.
I'm ignoring similarities within class, and only looking for aesthetic similarity, and I'm still tired of reading about all of them. So I'll just say: arthropods, where there are too many unrelated-yet-easily-confused animals to even think about.

The point is, if we think that something resembling "mammal" is a likely thing to come into existence on other planets, then "human-looking-thing with odd-shaped head or scales or horns or gills" doesn't seem so unlikely.

Or, in more boring terms, we may find some crazy extraterrestrial life out there, OR we may find that all other life, including sapient, is about as different from earth life, as Australia's mammals are from the rest of Earth. If the planet's terrain is similar to some terrain we have on Earth, why assume you know that convergent evolution wouldn't take the planet's life to forms similar to Earth's? Or, at least assume the same doesn't apply to the evolution of sapience?

And when we meet "short squat almost-human with more facial hair-equivalent" we'll all say "wtf are we in space middle Earth??"

 

[TheDungen]

No evolutionary reason for those eyes to combine, as long as the 4-eye solution is working.

Except eyes are weak spots they are easily damaged and also entry points for parasites and other diseases. Not saying it couldn't happen but there are an awful lot of portraits with four eyes.

 

[Sloakz]

This looks very interesting, The new ship designs and Space Goats look good

 

[Ur-Quan Lord 13]

Except eyes are weak spots they are easily damaged and also entry points for parasites and other diseases. Not saying it couldn't happen but there are an awful lot of portraits with four eyes.

Sure.

But, for example, chordate eyes all have a blind spot. It's how they developed. It would be better if they didn't. But, for that to change, we'd have to go through a phase where our eyes just don't really work anymore. And unless we live in eternal darkness, that won't happen, because it would make us quite bad at reproducing in the interim, and that's not how evolution works.

Combining 4 eyes to 2 seems a little easier (at least with the example I gave) since the 2 eyes could gain new receptor cells and grow bigger (to maintain overall sensitivity), while the other 2 still work. But, what it comes down to is, evolution doesn't have a goal and doesn't result in "the best". Just the best of what's available at the time.

 

[Misguidedworm7]

Also, one could argue the pit viper family of snakes on earth has 4 "eyes".
The reason they are called "pit" vipers is because they have two photo-receptive pits beneath and in front of their eyes, these let them see very precise infra-red light, and are no different from the early eye structures that became what we use now.

And these can't become parts of their main eyes, as the fluid that fills a normal eye is opaque to infra-red, and thus it is impossible for them to see it in the way the snakes require, necessitating an entirely different type of eye

 

[TheDungen]

Sure.

But, for example, chordate eyes all have a blind spot. It's how they developed. It would be better if they didn't. But, for that to change, we'd have to go through a phase where our eyes just don't really work anymore. And unless we live in eternal darkness, that won't happen, because it would make us quite bad at reproducing in the interim, and that's not how evolution works.

Combining 4 eyes to 2 seems a little easier (at least with the example I gave) since the 2 eyes could gain new receptor cells and grow bigger (to maintain overall sensitivity), while the other 2 still work. But, what it comes down to is, evolution doesn't have a goal and doesn't result in "the best". Just the best of what's available at the time.

More likely the eyes would grow closer and closer to each other to render the vulnerable area smaller and smaller, until they eventually merged. Essentially you'd have four eyes but only two eye sockets. It's would make them sort of a simpler version of insect eyes.

 

[Riftwalker]

More likely the eyes would grow closer and closer to each other to render the vulnerable area smaller and smaller, until they eventually merged. Essentially you'd have four eyes but only two eye sockets. It's would make them sort of a simpler version of insect eyes.

no no no no

the musculature and bones would conflict more and more as they got closer. they'd likely spread out so that damage to one eye would be less likely to cause damage to another. (in reality they would space out for optimal viewing angles like on spiders)

 

[Xephos Demonslayer]

Now excuse me "I am a dwarf and I'm digging a hole..."

"... diggy diggy hole, diggy diggy hole..."

God I love that song. Props to Yogscast.

 

[TheDungen]

no no no no

the musculature and bones would conflict more and more as they got closer. they'd likely spread out so that damage to one eye would be less likely to cause damage to another. (in reality they would space out for optimal viewing angles like on spiders)

That would create a weaker skull. Also we're not talking about the risk of losing an eye here we are talking the risk of losing an eye getting an infection and dying, or something penetrating through that eye into your brain.

 

[Xephos Demonslayer]

Or non closed wall rooms for machines.

"Windows are a structural weakness."

 

[Mr Thursday]

That would create a weaker skull. Also we're not talking about the risk of losing an eye here we are talking the risk of losing an eye getting an infection and dying, or something penetrating through that eye into your brain.

The skull could be protected by a very strong hat, but such things are beyond the abilities of any race in Stellaris.

 

[TheDungen]

The skull could be protected by a very strong hat, but such things are beyond the abilities of any race in Stellaris.

During most of their evolution yes it is.

 

[Nikolai II]

That would create a weaker skull. Also we're not talking about the risk of losing an eye here we are talking the risk of losing an eye getting an infection and dying, or something penetrating through that eye into your brain.

Although if you are talking about eye loss, having redundancy is actually a benefit. And keeping your brain in your skull is also not mandatory.

 

[TheDungen]

Although if you are talking about eye loss, having redundancy is actually a benefit. And keeping your brain in your skull is also not mandatory.

True but I imagine you will generally do that to reduce response time.

 

[Nikolai II]

True but I imagine you will generally do that to reduce response time.

I suspect the same - although I can also suspect a distributed functionality where you have several centers managing functions, like dinosaurs but also somewhat for humans (the digestive tract runs on its own brain - our main brain is quite possibly just a piece of digestive brain that got lost and then made itself useful).

Anyway, I think you are over-reading the "weakness in skull" bit. It might be that quad vision is such an advantage that the extra weaknesses are irrelevant. Some of them might also have some or all eyes placed externally in relation to the skull. Or have a cartilege build or otherwise weaker structure that extra holes don't make much of a difference in comparison to the physical damages that may occur.

But if the artists got a hookup on four eyes I can agree that is silly. Not that they should have any major preference for two eyes either, three would seem like a pretty good number as well.

 

[Adventurer32]

If you could also add Ships for Synthetic Empires (aka Synthetic Dawn), I would be really happy. I mean, new ship types for Humanoids are great an all, but why add them in a species pack, but not a story pack thats adding a new playable species, and costs us much more?

If they add it in this pack they can justify raising the price, while if they added it in an already released pack if they tried raising the price there there would be an uproar.

 

[Adventurer32]

In our X.Y.Z format, Z is for hot-fixes, which this update is not.

what is Y for?

 

[TheDungen]

I suspect the same - although I can also suspect a distributed functionality where you have several centers managing functions, like dinosaurs but also somewhat for humans (the digestive tract runs on its own brain - our main brain is quite possibly just a piece of digestive brain that got lost and then made itself useful).

Anyway, I think you are over-reading the "weakness in skull" bit. It might be that quad vision is such an advantage that the extra weaknesses are irrelevant. Some of them might also have some or all eyes placed externally in relation to the skull. Or have a cartilege build or otherwise weaker structure that extra holes don't make much of a difference in comparison to the physical damages that may occur.

But if the artists got a hookup on four eyes I can agree that is silly. Not that they should have any major preference for two eyes either, three would seem like a pretty good number as well.

It sort of depends A being with two arms and two legs would likely also be constructed in two halves like we are and thus also have an even number of eyes.

 

[Riftwalker]

That would create a weaker skull. Also we're not talking about the risk of losing an eye here we are talking the risk of losing an eye getting an infection and dying, or something penetrating through that eye into your brain.

assuming the creature has a skull.

FYI, skulls being very sturdy aren't a strong evolutionary force(they just need to be 'good enough' for the most part) for the exact reason you mention. infection. most combat in the wild results in death to infection, not outright killing something. (except for getting torn apart by a predator after you've been captured, but oh well) a Skull being better able to take damage is only really relevant to a species that uses it's head a lot in combat, like a Ram.

so, more eyes is probably > than a sturdy skull. if the eyes are being used properly anyway. a mutation adding more eyes but these eyes not being used by the visual cortex is not beneficial. this is why we really only see new eyes showing up in vertebrates in pit vipers. there's not much chance to add an eye on out complex bodies. non-vertabrates though? holy shit, what do you mean sea-spiders have eyes on their knees!? seriously eyes keep popping up and evolving away all over the place.

also if a species was going to go from 4 to 2 eyes, it would probably be from an eye going vestigial and then just not being grown eventually.

It sort of depends A being with two arms and two legs would likely also be constructed in two halves like we are and thus also have an even number of eyes.

and an even number of hearts and livers and GI tracts... oh wait. no but seriously, you can get away with odd external stuff, it just tends to be secretly a dual thing underneathm but it can also just be something breaking format.

 

[Riftwalker]

what is Y for?

patches, X is updates.