Whoa, whoa, whoa
We're treating source code as canon, now? It wasn't intended by the creators to be seen by players, and most players have never seen it. It's the source of really ugly terms like SIS (Super Integrated Starship) -- the names in it are for making *programming the game* easier, not for people to read, and the code itself *does not* count as a canonical source any more than things in a movie's original shooting script that never show up onscreen are canon. And just because the programmers found it really convenient to have a way to refer to each one of the ZFP doesn't mean that they intended us to treat that as a canonical definition of which is which, especially when so much humor arises from this having been forgotten.
- TFB may have not intended for us to know which is which, but they *did* make a concious decision here. We can't just pretend we don't know it. This is no different from TFB revealing information in direct communication. What's relevant is what TFB intended it to be. We're not restricting our information to just what is known in-game.
- As for the humour, it arises from the fact that the game characters don't know who is who.
- I agree with your comments on SIS though. That indeed seemed to be just an internal name, and it shouldn't be used to refer to it in the Ultronomicon, except for a remark in the page for "The Flagship" itself. And I'm afraid I might have originated that use in here, but that was a mistake.
- - SvdB 05:36, 14 Apr 2005 (CEST)
Edit 02:38, 2 April 2007 by Svdb
1. No, it's not an April Fools' joke.
2. The Zoq really resemble a plant AND a frog (in fact, I viewed them more as frogs the first time I met them).
2b. So at least this comment should be kept.
3. That was "Possible name origin". After all, it's possible, no?
- 1. The name "Zoq" may originate from "frog" ("q" is "g" mirrored; "f" is the 6th letter of the English alphabet, while "r" is the 18th, and 18+6=24, which is near "z" - the 26th letter). It even sounds "froggy".... you could have fooled me... or not, that is.
- 2. Not everything green is a frog (nor the other way around for that matter). What other similarities are there?
- 3. A lot of things are possible. It is possible that Talana is a smurf whose mother was addicted to growth hormones. But that's almost as far out there as your remarks, so we don't include that either.
— SvdB 17:34, 2 April 2007 (CEST)
- Come up with some less ludicrous ideas, and we'll talk. — SvdB 23:12, 2 April 2007 (CEST)
- Aha... well, at least the Pik name origin looks plausible for me.
- And while not all frogs are green, and not all green things are frogs, this doesn't mean that no frog is green, or that no green thing is a frog. I mean, the same holds true for plants, so why would you accept the Zoq's similarity with plants and not with frogs?! Valaggar 14:24, 3 April 2007 (CEST)
- You have something stem-like, and something leave-like. That's a whole lot more than you have than with your frog. — SvdB 16:04, 3 April 2007 (CEST)
- The general shape is that of a frog. Also, nobody is puzzled as to why a plant could evolve to sentience, such as with the Supox. Valaggar 16:12, 3 April 2007 (CEST)
- General shape? You mean that if you fill up the area occupied with the Zoq, to make it one green blob with eyes, *then* it looks a bit more like a frog?
- As for evolving sentience, the claim was "looks like", not "behaves like". I agree that a Zoq behaves more like a frog than like a plant, just because it can move. But don't run off changing "looks like" by "acts like" or so, because with that reasoning, the Pik acts like a frog too. — SvdB 16:30, 3 April 2007 (CEST)
- Try benting a bit the Zoq to make it a frog - you'll see that it's easy.
- Plus, it has those eye-like structures.
- You can't deny its similarities with a frog. Nor with a plant - it's a little of both. Valaggar 16:40, 3 April 2007 (CEST)