Plague Inc: The Cure DLC coming in early 2021 and free until COVID-19 is under control

While Plague Inc is certainly a fun game (and this DLC looks interesting), I now find its claims of being a "realistic simulation" especially ludicrous when nearly the entire population of China can be infected with my new disease before a single person in a single other country catches it. Sure, a lot of diseases aren't as infections as COVID-19, but if upwards of a billion people can catch it in the same country surely someone in a nearby border town's going to pick it up, right?

While Plague Inc is certainly a fun game (and this DLC looks interesting), I now find its claims of being a "realistic simulation" especially ludicrous when nearly the entire population of China can be infected with my new disease before a single person in a single other country catches it. Sure, a lot of diseases aren't as infections as COVID-19, but if upwards of a billion people can catch it in the same country surely someone in a nearby border town's going to pick it up, right?

I bet they figured in that China is (or very much was) a very isolationist country. I mean when I play the game, I choose Madagascar and they are an island, and it still spreads everywhere before that whole island is infected.

While Plague Inc is certainly a fun game (and this DLC looks interesting), I now find its claims of being a "realistic simulation" especially ludicrous when nearly the entire population of China can be infected with my new disease before a single person in a single other country catches it. Sure, a lot of diseases aren't as infections as COVID-19, but if upwards of a billion people can catch it in the same country surely someone in a nearby border town's going to pick it up, right?

I guess it also depends on methods of transmission - if you mutate the airborne transmission to transmit over planes, and respiratory symptoms, it is more likely to spread out of the country (but not a great strategy in the game); if you pick others you might instead intensify in the same region.

I'm just sad that real humanity apparently are below minimum difficulty. From what I remember easy mode was "doctors don't wash hands, sick people get hugs"; how do we call "authorities try to break quarantine and to undermine vaccination efforts"? Sandbox mode?


Last edited by eldaking on 19 December 2020 at 4:31 pm UTC

While Plague Inc is certainly a fun game (and this DLC looks interesting), I now find its claims of being a "realistic simulation" especially ludicrous when nearly the entire population of China can be infected with my new disease before a single person in a single other country catches it. Sure, a lot of diseases aren't as infections as COVID-19, but if upwards of a billion people can catch it in the same country surely someone in a nearby border town's going to pick it up, right?

I guess it also depends on methods of transmission - if you mutate the airborne transmission to transmit over planes, and respiratory symptoms, it is more likely to spread out of the country (but not a great strategy in the game); if you pick others you might instead intensify in the same region.

I'm just sad that real humanity apparently are below minimum difficulty. From what I remember easy mode was "doctors don't wash hands, sick people get hugs"; how do we call "authorities try to break quarantine and to undermine vaccination efforts"? Sandbox mode?

My usual strategy is get the virus to not be deadly and have it spread as fast as possible, then to crank up the deadliness once it gets clise to 100% infection. But then the game cheats and RNAs their way out of it by coming up with a cure and being able to ship it world wide MUCH faster than reality would allow.

While Plague Inc is certainly a fun game (and this DLC looks interesting), I now find its claims of being a "realistic simulation" especially ludicrous when nearly the entire population of China can be infected with my new disease before a single person in a single other country catches it. Sure, a lot of diseases aren't as infections as COVID-19, but if upwards of a billion people can catch it in the same country surely someone in a nearby border town's going to pick it up, right?

I bet they figured in that China is (or very much was) a very isolationist country. I mean when I play the game, I choose Madagascar and they are an island, and it still spreads everywhere before that whole island is infected.

Well, yeah, but I think the real world provides not one, but a few pretty solid counterexamples in the present and last couple of decades. It clearly doesn't work that way.

My usual strategy is get the virus to not be deadly and have it spread as fast as possible, then to crank up the deadliness once it gets clise to 100% infection. But then the game cheats and RNAs their way out of it by coming up with a cure and being able to ship it world wide MUCH faster than reality would allow.

Yeah, that's the basis of most strategies (except weirder diseases). But when you get symptoms early, even only coughing or sneezing, it becomes much more likely to be discovered - when you start somewhere like China, it might be better to avoid that for a while to build up a significant infected population (using rats or livestock to spread, for example).

Of course, starting with high lethality pneumonia right from the start would be a rookie mistake in the game, everyone would just act to eradicate the virus as fast as possible. Which means we are getting our asses kicked by a rookie virus.

Of course, starting with high lethality pneumonia right from the start would be a rookie mistake in the game, everyone would just act to eradicate the virus as fast as possible. Which means we are getting our asses kicked by a rookie virus.

It does some things right, like waiting some days before showing symptoms, no?

"...free until COVID-19 is under control"

Let's be honest, it's not the virus that's out of control, it's our governments.


Last edited by Mountain Man on 20 December 2020 at 5:09 pm UTC

Of course, starting with high lethality pneumonia right from the start would be a rookie mistake in the game, everyone would just act to eradicate the virus as fast as possible. Which means we are getting our asses kicked by a rookie virus.

It does some things right, like waiting some days before showing symptoms, no?

Yeah, the nasty thing about covid is that for some people it is completely asymptomatic, so they are just spreaders and don't know it. Others get terrible pneumonia, but I think they still have it and are spreading by up to a week?

The real pain in the ass, and something the game doesn't really take into account is different strains, strengths seem to hit different regions.

Like everyone I know who has gotten it (family members and friends) just felt like crap for a week or so and now are fine. These are people that have what most have thought to be death sentences! U was really worried about my friend's wife who had not too long ago had cancer treatments. She also works in an assisted living place, and they think she got it from there, yet none of the old people there have died from it.

Yet clearly there are people who have their last words be that they think it is a hoax!

But hey, at this point if the pfizer method works, could be an interesting future of just having our RNA tweaked whenever a disease pops up. Like we are pushing our own evolution. Of course there are the Anti-science people out there that will be pissed about it...

"...free until COVID-19 is under control"

Let's be honest, it's not the virus that's out of control, it's our governments.

Yeah, why not making fun of 1.5 million dead people?

"...free until COVID-19 is under control"

Let's be honest, it's not the virus that's out of control, it's our governments.

Yeah, why not making fun of 1.5 million dead people?

I wasn't making fun of anything, just pointing out that the damage being done to us is not because of some virus that's out of control but because of how our governments' have responded. The fact is, someone in the world dies from something every single second of every single day, and government totalitarianism can't stop that.

Yeah, why not making fun of 1.5 million dead people?

Even if it was ten times, one hundred times that number it wouldn't justify the reaction. The consequences of the so-called lockdowns will be Biblical. Soon nobody will worry about the virus because they'll be too busy searching for food.

"...free until COVID-19 is under control"

Let's be honest, it's not the virus that's out of control, it's our governments.

Yeah, why not making fun of 1.5 million dead people?

I wasn't making fun of anything, just pointing out that the damage being done to us is not because of some virus that's out of control but because of how our governments' have responded. The fact is, someone in the world dies from something every single second of every single day, and government totalitarianism can't stop that.

Countries that are actually doing something about it have suffered less unnecessary death and misery, at the expense of some inconvenience. And will come out of this with a stronger economy and a healthier populace than those nations who did nothing.

You'll get your freedumbs back as soon as we get this under control. Or at least people living in properly democratic countries will. No government is perfect, but at least in my part of the world we don't have to actually be afraid of ours.

The world would most likely be in a much better situation already if people had properly followed the advice of medical experts from the beginning instead of acting like selfish brats.

"...free until COVID-19 is under control"

Let's be honest, it's not the virus that's out of control, it's our governments.

Yeah, why not making fun of 1.5 million dead people?

I wasn't making fun of anything, just pointing out that the damage being done to us is not because of some virus that's out of control but because of how our governments' have responded. The fact is, someone in the world dies from something every single second of every single day, and government totalitarianism can't stop that.

Actually, I think there's quite a lot of evidence that it can. Not that government regulation can make people immortal, but it can sure as hell make them die somewhat later on average, whether it's seatbelts, or not allowing poison in our food or water or air, or safety standards at workplaces, or insisting that people stop at the nice red light.

Incidentally, I read an article today that talked about some epidemic outbreaks in the post-revolution US, in the late 1700s, including one that was in the capital, and what was done about them with the US Founding Fathers making no criticism. Yeah, full quarantines, evacuations, shut down businesses and churches, the whole nine yards including some measures more draconian than anything that's been done vis-a-vis Covid. Understanding of how to deal with epidemics is not a new thing, nor is it unique to the modern "nanny state" or whatever.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 21 December 2020 at 8:17 am UTC

The fact is, someone in the world dies from something every single second of every single day, and government totalitarianism can't stop that.

This shows Covid-19 death toll in Spain - in lockdown - compared to the years before. (Source: data.europa.eu)
Can you imagine how it would have looked without lockdown?

!link


Last edited by Eike on 21 December 2020 at 9:18 am UTC

Can you imagine how it would have looked without lockdown?

Can you imagine how it would have looked if people had been treated properly (they still aren't, we've been betrayed by our doctors and nurses too).

Countries that are actually doing something about it have suffered less unnecessary death and misery, at the expense of some inconvenience

Understatement of the Century. And the first part isn't true too.

Incidentally, I read an article today

Oh! listen to Library Guy, he read an article!

Researchers

!link

People "researching" The Truth on the internet

!link

Can you imagine how it would have looked without lockdown?

Can you imagine how it would have looked if people had been treated properly (they still aren't, we've been betrayed by our doctors and nurses too).

Are they being mean and putting public safety over your feelings? Or maybe they should have asked nicely, like they did in Sweden? Spoiler: They're doing much worse than their neighbours.

Countries that are actually doing something about it have suffered less unnecessary death and misery, at the expense of some inconvenience

Understatement of the Century. And the first part isn't true too.

Having to stay home a lot for a while (and to wear a mask when I don't) are inconveniences, moreso for some, but worth it to me if it prevents a single death. Same goes for people losing jobs or money, as long as their government makes sure nobody ends up in the streets or has to go hungry. As long as you don't kill off a significant portion of the consumer base, businesses will bounce back and so will jobs.

That first part is true as well, even if you choose to ignore facts.


Last edited by tuubi on 21 December 2020 at 10:56 am UTC

Having to stay home a lot for a while (and to wear a mask when I don't) are inconveniences, moreso for some, but worth it to me if it prevents a single death. Same goes for people losing jobs or money, as long as their government makes sure nobody ends up in the streets or has to go hungry. As long as you don't kill off a significant portion of the consumer base, businesses will bounce back and so will jobs.

I'd agree though (and it's probably the only point where I agree with them) that losing your job and the like is not named appropriately with "inconveniences". It's just... that it's necessary.

Having to stay home a lot for a while (and to wear a mask when I don't) are inconveniences, moreso for some, but worth it to me if it prevents a single death. Same goes for people losing jobs or money, as long as their government makes sure nobody ends up in the streets or has to go hungry. As long as you don't kill off a significant portion of the consumer base, businesses will bounce back and so will jobs.

I'd agree though (and it's probably the only point where I agree with them) that losing your job and the like is not named appropriately with "inconveniences". It's just... that it's necessary.

That's fair. For me personally (as an introvert who is married to another introvert and whose income hasn't been affected at all) this hasn't been a huge problem. The worst I've had to do is avoid properly visiting elderly family who depend on me, which sucks. I also had to cancel my summer vacation plans, but that's definitely just an inconvenience.

Of course I sympathize with those who have bigger problems, and there'll be a bunch of financial as well as psychological trauma to solve after this, but some evils are necessary, and better than the alternative.