To my mind, it would create an inconsistency with other types of Hazeron technology, none of which is named after individuals. This is presumably to avoid imposing a spurious shared history on cultures which developed in isolation. For example, refineries create fertilizer "from atmosphere" rather than "by the Haber process", since, I assume, Haber was not a psionic crab-man with an area-of-effect weapon mounted in his head.
You could, of course, have us obtain the Epstein drive not by research but by a quest-line, using the story engine. If Epstein were one of those strange archetypical characters like Targoss or Dr Xian who haunt the dreams of the whole universe, a shadowy source of old secrets, that could be pretty exciting. Otherwise, it would feel odd. I don't know anything about intellectual property law in the US, but you could always call it he Hepsworth Drive of the Eberhard Drive or something like that.
I also really like The Expanse: I'm glad you enjoyed it. But I do feel, as rich and persuasive as its worldbuilding is, and despite its uncommonly good pacing, it has a slight narrative flaw. As you make the world more wicked and hopeless, you need to increase the moral grandeur of your protagonists. Not necessarily their goodness, but their grandeur - Euripides' Medea was hardly a virtuous person, but her motivations were tragic and lofty. The Expanse too often makes its main characters petty, which is the one thing you can't do. Then, instead of a breathtaking chiaroscuro, you just feel as if the camera lens is a bit dirty. Fringe was exceptional in this area, I thought, since its protagonists were, if anything, darker and more flawed than the world they lived in - but always nobly flawed. They often made you gasp or cry, but they never made you groan or shout "just grow up already!"* I felt The Expanse improved this over time, especially in the second season, but they probably lost a number of viewers in the first few episodes, when it was just too difficult to care about anyone. Haven't reached season 3 yet.
Is it normal that, in The Expanse, the idea of a World State scares me more than the actual protomolecule?
*Ok, maybe Peter sometimes.
You could, of course, have us obtain the Epstein drive not by research but by a quest-line, using the story engine. If Epstein were one of those strange archetypical characters like Targoss or Dr Xian who haunt the dreams of the whole universe, a shadowy source of old secrets, that could be pretty exciting. Otherwise, it would feel odd. I don't know anything about intellectual property law in the US, but you could always call it he Hepsworth Drive of the Eberhard Drive or something like that.
I also really like The Expanse: I'm glad you enjoyed it. But I do feel, as rich and persuasive as its worldbuilding is, and despite its uncommonly good pacing, it has a slight narrative flaw. As you make the world more wicked and hopeless, you need to increase the moral grandeur of your protagonists. Not necessarily their goodness, but their grandeur - Euripides' Medea was hardly a virtuous person, but her motivations were tragic and lofty. The Expanse too often makes its main characters petty, which is the one thing you can't do. Then, instead of a breathtaking chiaroscuro, you just feel as if the camera lens is a bit dirty. Fringe was exceptional in this area, I thought, since its protagonists were, if anything, darker and more flawed than the world they lived in - but always nobly flawed. They often made you gasp or cry, but they never made you groan or shout "just grow up already!"* I felt The Expanse improved this over time, especially in the second season, but they probably lost a number of viewers in the first few episodes, when it was just too difficult to care about anyone. Haven't reached season 3 yet.
Is it normal that, in The Expanse, the idea of a World State scares me more than the actual protomolecule?
*Ok, maybe Peter sometimes.