Troodon speculation thread!

edited November 2011 in Jurassic Park
Telltale have said
A new threat emerges: an eerie, nocturnal predator stalking the group, hunting them relentlessly across the island.

jurassicpark6.jpg

They can also be seen in the trailer. (About 35 seconds in.)

At first I thought they were Compys. They're small, numerous and nocturnal (the book reveals they are nocturnal) which all fits however the way Telltale are building it up it's probably something more dangerous.

So what do people think? Any ideas? Let the speculation (and the inevitable thread derailment) commence!
«1345

Comments

  • edited February 2011
    Woodsyblue wrote: »
    Telltale have said

    jurassicpark6.jpg

    They can also be seen in the trailer. (About 35 seconds in.)

    At first I thought they were Compys. They're small, numerous and nocturnal (the book reveals they are nocturnal) which all fits however the way Telltale are building it up it's probably something more dangerous.

    So what do people think? Any ideas? Let the speculation (and the inevitable thread derailment) commence!

    Well I'm taking a stab in the Dark I'm going to say Dilophasaurus, because well we first see it at night, and secondly when mentioning it in the gameiformer article. A "Familiar Predator"
  • edited February 2011
    I believe that it's a dinosaur that we haven't seen before in the films. It does say "A new threat" after all. They also mention that we learn darker secreats about the park. I'm going to take an even further stab in the dark and say that we could be dealing with some mutated creatures here. Perhaps a new cross breed of dinosaur that was created by genetic engineering. After all, in the Lost World novel, Ian says that there must have been mutations. You don't just splice Dinosaur and Amphibian DNA together and get a full ready made dinosaur.

    But again, that's a big stab in the dark.

    Many have already suggested Troodon over at the JPL website. Which judging by the pics the eyes are around the right height. But I don't think that what it is because it would be too simular to the raptors just smaller.

    Looking closely at the one to the left of the right tree you can see a good outline of the dinosaurs face. Whatever it is, it appears to have a short snout.
  • edited February 2011
    Monkeys or Army of some sort.
  • edited February 2011
    In The Lost World book there is a part with multiple nocturnal predatory dinosaurs that can change color like a chameleon. I know that The Lost World takes place on Isla Sorna and the park is actually on Isla Nublar, but my hope is that they use that part from the book and add carnotaurus to the game. Carnotaurus was actually much larger than it is being portrayed in this pic, but it could always be a group of juveniles.
  • edited February 2011
    I bet it's Samual L Jackson, Who obviously cloned himself just before JP1, We never actually see him die and all we see is a black guys arm. The Sam Jackson army is going to stop our hero from getting the Dino fetuses.
  • edited February 2011
    In Destructoid's preview they say:
    As for the dinosaurs, expect to see all of those mentioned so far plus some others, including a species that has never been in a Jurassic Park movie.

    So we can really rule out Compys. Troodon still a possibility. It looks like whatever they are they are poisonous.
  • edited February 2011
    Jawas
  • edited February 2011
    Irishmile wrote: »
    Jawas

    Haha!
    Wait guys, so the new dino is obviously poisonous, althought that doesnt help at all because TTG can make any dino poisonous in their story, or it could be a hybrid of one of thier dilos with something else. But it looked like Nima was poisined from a bite or scratch, really hoping for Carnotaurs tho!!!! :)
  • edited February 2011
    could very well be metriacanthosaurus,they gave it a miss in the movie.
  • edited February 2011
    I still say the Dilophasaurus, because well...it makes sense to me.
  • edited February 2011
    Maybe there scary gnomes?

    Those things can be scary when you're concentration real hard on something and then they just appear out of no where. lol
  • edited February 2011
    why they have lighting eyes?
  • edited February 2011
    I think the key word here is never before "seen". There's a list of Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures that were seen or mentioned in the films. You can check out the list here for some options.
  • edited February 2011
    Icedhope wrote: »
    I still say the Dilophasaurus, because well...it makes sense to me.

    Yep, it makes sense given that we've been told multiple times it's a "new" dinosaur NOT seen in the movies! :p
  • edited February 2011
    They're actually lions. InGen thought it would be kinda cool having a pride of lions hanging around the park.
  • edited February 2011
    ...we could be dealing with some mutated creatures here. Perhaps a new cross breed of dinosaur that was created by genetic engineering.

    Cue a scene where velociraptor number 13 walks into a cloning chamber and sees the horrendous failed attempts at recreating him...
    [IMG][/img]43351819.jpg

    Uploaded with ImageShack.us
  • edited February 2011
    I was like, "What?"

    Then I remembered Alien Resurrection. lol
  • edited February 2011
    I was like, "What?"

    Then I remembered Alien Resurrection. lol

    Yeah, I've got to stop assuming that people have watched the same movies as myself.
  • edited February 2011
    Alien IV is a guilty pleasure... But I suppose I just love all those movies.
  • edited February 2011
    Irishmile wrote: »
    Alien IV is a guilty pleasure... But I suppose I just love all those movies.

    It's not a bad movie but it is a terrible Alien film. The cloning chamber was by far the best part of the whole flick.
  • edited February 2011
    I enjoyed Alien IV myself. Although obviously not as good as the first two.

    The first one was a good horror movie. And it has the iconic chestbursting scene that has yet to be repeated in such a way in any of the other films.

    The second one was a good action movie. And still has special effects that hold strong even today. And the Queen is just awesome.

    The third one was only good if you watched the directors cut although I still feel it has too much cursing in it. I don't mind cursing in movies but sometimes they put so much in them that it just ruins the whole thing. Like they're trying to hard to make the movie R rated.

    And the 4th was good as a action movie as well but I mostly watch it cause Ron Perlman is a bad ass. lol And the special effects were a bit improved although that gernade scene looked weird. But you're right about the destroying the clones scene. It's probably the best scene in the movie. I'm still not really on page with the human hybrid alien but I don't blame them for trying something new.

    Alien vs Predator (yes, I'm going there. lol) was actually an entertaining film. But it was entertaining like Resident Evil was entertaining. The movies were good but they did not capture the feel of the source material they were based upon. So I enjoyed them but I couldn't help but feel that the full potential that they could have been was missed.... by a lot.

    Alien vs. Predator: Requiem
    Ugh, where do I even start? I guess I'll list what I like cause there wan't much I did like. I liked the PredAlien.... and uh.... that's it. The movie was advertised by bragging that it's rated R (unlike the previous film) but what's the point of all that blood if you can't even freaking see what's going on? The movie was way to dark. I mean, almost total blackness in most scenes. And then there was only one Predator so unlike the first there wasn't any big set pieces. At least the first AVP had some cool fights between the two. Like the fight with the Queen at the end and the first fight between the Alien and the Predator. But AVP:R had hardly anything worth noting. Just a lot of quick deaths. The whole thing was just stupid. lol

    Jeff Goldblum: "And uh... there it is."
  • edited February 2011
    Of all the alien films, I like the first, third, and Somewhat Resurection...I thought it relyed too much on the second movie, and if it didn't have ripley in it, then it would be one of the best, as much as I like ripley, I'm kind of sick of seeing her.
  • edited March 2011
    Icedhope wrote: »
    Of all the alien films, I like the first, third, and Somewhat Resurection...I thought it relyed too much on the second movie, and if it didn't have ripley in it, then it would be one of the best, as much as I like ripley, I'm kind of sick of seeing her.

    Spot on mate, I've heard far too many people say that without Ripley there can be no more Alien films. I really have to bite my lip when I hear that. It's called f**king 'Alien', not 'Ripley' people. Sheesh! Also, I'm not really a fan of the series when it goes all action based, it's supposed to be a horror about something so bizzare and scary that our minds can not comprehend what this creature is or what it thinks, not a glorified bug hunt.

    Don't get me wrong, Aliens is a classic movie but I will forever harbor a certain amount of resentment towards Cameron for opening the floodgates to a slew of dumb action riffs on the original masterpiece. A bit like the way George Lucas opened the floodgates to the sorry state hollywood cinema is in today.
  • edited March 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    A bit like the way George Lucas opened the floodgates to the sorry state hollywood cinema is in today.

    cough "Indy4" cough

    I blame George Lucas for Indy4. Movie could have been epic if he wasn't involved. Hell, I think maybe it would have been better if it hadn't happened at all.
  • edited March 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    Spot on mate, I've heard far too many people say that without Ripley there can be no more Alien films. I really have to bite my lip when I hear that. It's called f**king 'Alien', not 'Ripley' people. Sheesh! Also, I'm not really a fan of the series when it goes all action based, it's supposed to be a horror about something so bizzare and scary that our minds can not comprehend what this creature is or what it thinks, not a glorified bug hunt.

    Don't get me wrong, Aliens is a classic movie but I will forever harbor a certain amount of resentment towards Cameron for opening the floodgates to a slew of dumb action riffs on the original masterpiece. A bit like the way George Lucas opened the floodgates to the sorry state hollywood cinema is in today.


    I know what you mean, I guess that's why I like Alien 3 more than Aliens...because it presented itself with the same formula the first movie had, and the fact that...There are no weapons, there is no escape..The directors cut is phenomenal, I just kind of wished they would have stuck with the monastery idea.
  • edited March 2011
    Icedhope wrote: »
    I know what you mean, I guess that's why I like Alien 3 more than Aliens...because it presented itself with the same formula the first movie had, and the fact that...There are no weapons, there is no escape..The directors cut is phenomenal, I just kind of wished they would have stuck with the monastery idea.

    Oh, absolutely. It's worth noting that it's not the director's cut but the assembly cut since David Fincher has washed his hands of the film (sorry to be pedantic). Anyway, I've always felt that Alien3 (assembly cut) is the true sequel to Alien. Aliens is like a very well made diversion.

    cough "Indy4" cough

    I blame George Lucas for Indy4. Movie could have been epic if he wasn't involved. Hell, I think maybe it would have been better if it hadn't happened at all.

    Yes, George Lucas' grubby mitts are all over it, what with the repeated use of CGI gophers and monkeys. I think Spielberg was on auto pilot throughout the whole thing. Such a shame.
  • edited March 2011
    I know what they are


    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTCbQk_G2p9Vw8NjrTu6Je7iiTf1xwVItEfRnEgMu1ErglZV6dQMQ&t=1

    Theyre that guy :eek:
  • edited March 2011
    Icedhope wrote: »
    I know what you mean, I guess that's why I like Alien 3 more than Aliens...because it presented itself with the same formula the first movie had, and the fact that...There are no weapons, there is no escape..The directors cut is phenomenal, I just kind of wished they would have stuck with the monastery idea.

    Quoted for truth! Absolutely agree.

    Especially now the Blu-ray has fixed the audio issues.

    My only gripe is that
    the Queen doesn't burst out of her at the end anymore
    as I felt that was a fantastic moment in the original cut....
  • edited March 2011
    Personally, I think it's a group of Dilophosaurs and the team involved in making the trailer wanted to have that typical "eyes in the dark" scene. Look at the area and what had just happened like...maybe an hour beforehand, probably less? A better question is: If Harding is trying to get to the ship before it leaves, why isn't it raining still? Remember back to the film when Nedry was on his way there and it was pouring...and that continued through the Rex encounter and probably lasted at least an hour before letting up.
  • edited March 2011
    Personally, I think it's a group of Dilophosaurs and the team involved in making the trailer wanted to have that typical "eyes in the dark" scene. Look at the area and what had just happened like...maybe an hour beforehand, probably less? A better question is: If Harding is trying to get to the ship before it leaves, why isn't it raining still? Remember back to the film when Nedry was on his way there and it was pouring...and that continued through the Rex encounter and probably lasted at least an hour before letting up.

    I hope that those aren't Dilophosaurs...if they are, then TellTale's ignoring the fact that the one that attacked Nedry was a juvenile.
  • edited March 2011
    It's not the dilophosaurs because they said that it was a NEW dinosaurs with their own NEW back story.

    http://www.gametrailers.com/video/return-to-jurassic-park/710985
  • edited March 2011
    I'm really curious about that new dino. It can't be dilophosaurus, they are too small, and an adult one if a very big dino.
    Carnotaurus, they are nocturnal, but again it's a very big and powerfull beast.
    Troodon? It's like a little raptor. So really I have no idea and can't wait to know ;-)
  • edited March 2011
    Apparently it's sinister. It's supposed to have a darker history. I have no idea what it could be. I suspect it's either as intelligent or more intelligent than the raptors, but less deadly for some reason. Is that weird?
  • edited March 2011
    I have heard ... and I trust my source, that it is in fact a Snorkasaurus.... sinister indeed.
  • edited March 2011
    Giu3232 wrote: »
    I'm really curious about that new dino. It can't be dilophosaurus, they are too small, and an adult one if a very big dino.
    Carnotaurus, they are nocturnal, but again it's a very big and powerfull beast.
    Troodon? It's like a little raptor. So really I have no idea and can't wait to know ;-)

    And it also can't be Dilophosaurus, because as has been said 8 billion times before, it's a new dinosaur not seen in the films. Si habla ingles? :cool:
  • edited March 2011
    Irishmile wrote: »
    I have heard ... and I trust my source, that it is in fact a Snorkasaurus.... sinister indeed.

    They've been known to lock people out of their houses.....a VERY sinister act.
  • edited March 2011
    I KNOW..... Its gonna be all "press X NOW!" and if you dont... wham... you're on your back getting licked in the face.
  • edited March 2011
    ...but their saliva is acidic!
  • edited March 2011
    FPug wrote: »
    ...but their saliva is acidic!

    So is Jeff Goldblum's, by the way.
  • edited March 2011
    robotpo wrote: »
    So is Jeff Goldblum's, by the way.

    Really? I thought it was Laura Dern.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.