Basic courtesy for the developer

WumboJumbo · 2021-10-30 21:23:06

Spoonwood wrote:

In Next Life will probably come out soon and will provide another alternative, if it won't also be superior also. It's run on an entirely different engine as I understand, as the engine that Jason made just wasn't adequate for that game's needs (which doesn't surprising).

https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … 84#p107384

Arcurus · 2021-11-02 10:31:55

Guards dogs would be nice to have. Dogs for protecting sheeps would also be nice, just let the wolfs come out of the mountain sometimes to attack the sheeps and dogs can protect.

Spoonwood · 2021-11-03 01:08:55

jasonrohrer wrote:

Making garlic bread in the game, or breeding/evolving specific types of dogs from wild wolves? Well, dog breeding is in the game, but people almost never do it.
You can say, "But the way dogs work isn't that interesting." Yeah, of course. If you're going to have 10,000 objects, most of the stuff is going to be somewhat simple. 10 different kinds of sushi, and that kind of thing. You can play fetch with your dog! And your dog follows you around! And you can have a guard dog. What else do you want it to do? Herd sheep or something? But sheep don't really need herding, right?

There's another problem with dogs, which I forgot about. It's best observed by experience. Have you actually tried feeding a wolf in game? If you did, did you live?

I've made dogs on low pop. And lost my Eve spawn when feeding the wolf! Alright, I easily found my way back. Admittedly, last time I did a dog, I didn't get bite when feeding the wolf. SOMEHOW! I distinctly remembering feeding the wolf other times before and then getting bite. I might have even gotten bite before feeding the wolf with mutton in my hand. And I don't know how to consistently not get bite by the wolf while feeding it. And I think I've done dogs three times. I guess one has to stand behind the wolf, put the mutton on it, then run away fast *and hope* that when you feed it, it doesn't "decide" to move towards you.

I don't have a similar problem with making a sheep. I don't have a similar problem with making a cow. I don't have a similar problem with making a boar, since I can run away from the domestic boar and stand farther away from it than it can move. But, with a wolf I have *to hope* that it doesn't run towards me. Making a pregnant wolf is not reliable and I don't see how it could be.

Now, I'm not arguing that there shouldn't exist a risk for making a dog. But, what's the reward for making a dog? Making does doesn't enhance individual survival prospects for me or for anyone else. It doesn't change anything about parenting. It doesn't affect anything with regard to "civilization building" so far as I can tell, though I could have missed something on this one I suppose. Dogs have been detrimental to families. Pitbulls are anti-survival, anti-genetic score, since they inevitably turn into the deadly type one way or another, and onetech isn't easy to read on such, and there's no information about them in the game itself.

Why would anyone risk their life for a toy? Heck, why would anyone risk their life for something that could easily get transmuted into something that could harm their relatives?

Sure, you might say "well, find someone else to heal you if necessary, or ask them to do it."

Asking them though involves the same issue, risking their life for something at best a toy and at worst toxic. Why would any rational person ask their friend, family member, or even a stranger to risk their life for a toy? And I mean, mean pitbulls kill people in game, thus I think it fair to call making dogs toxic at worst, when I really think about it. If I cooperated with someone else in making dogs, they would also have to trust that I would heal them. AND I would have to wait around to heal them or keep an eye on them. That wouldn't be a short amount of time within the scope of OHOL... probably years of one's life. There's other, better things to do than to wait around, in my opinion, and clearly many easily more beneficial projects to others.

Oh, and if one is a mother in game and tries to get the process of making a dog, and dies, one won't see one's children in old age. And a baby could pop out when for a woman when she is bleeding out to die. Why take that sort of risk?

Last edited by Spoonwood (2021-11-03 01:09:15)

Spoonwood · 2021-11-19 03:49:47

jasonrohrer wrote:

Making garlic bread in the game, or breeding/evolving specific types of dogs from wild wolves? Well, dog breeding is in the game, but people almost never do it.
You can say, "But the way dogs work isn't that interesting." Yeah, of course. If you're going to have 10,000 objects, most of the stuff is going to be somewhat simple. 10 different kinds of sushi, and that kind of thing. You can play fetch with your dog! And your dog follows you around! And you can have a guard dog. What else do you want it to do? Herd sheep or something? But sheep don't really need herding, right?

Alright, so after encountering a player making dogs in a town, and experiencing how quickly I tried to grab a bow and arrow as a kid, and then later moving the puppies away from the nursing mothers *on bigserver2*, I've made a github issue on this: https://github.com/jasonrohrer/OneLife/issues/769

Dog breeding not only takes up another yum food, when there's almost surely more hungry to do, but pitbulls inevitably turn deadly, as people can observe for their own self by reading onetech: https://onetech.info/1659-Pit-Bull (see the part where it says 'last'? and there's a pitbull in terms of what follows?). They are anti-survival. Any smart player trying to play so that other players have a greater probability or greater ease in living to old age will either get rid of dogs rather quickly or try to convince others to do so.

Seriously, why were dogs ever introduced into the game in the *necessarily* counterproductive state that they were? Why were pitbulls made such that their only function was to kill players in a game which is supposed to be about getting yourself and others to survive to old age?

Troll dev, who never was serious about the words he said that the game was about. Seriously, how could one not know that dogs were counter-productive to survival after they were designed with them taking up player food and with pitbulls as deadly? I wish I could say otherwise, but that's all I can conclude here, or at least until something is changed.

Last edited by Spoonwood (2021-11-20 01:56:58)

jinbaili83 · 2021-11-19 09:01:25

Dogs are for fun only, just like in real life most dogs are absolute waste of resources. However some sources claim they can lower your stress levels and blood pressure, so that is a plus.

I also made pit-bull farm yesterday and didn't see any casualties in family tree from dog attack.

JasonZ · 2021-11-19 11:37:04

jinbaili83 wrote:

Dogs are for fun only, just like in real life most dogs are absolute waste of resources. However some sources claim they can lower your stress levels and blood pressure, so that is a plus.
I also made pit-bull farm yesterday and didn't see any casualties in family tree from dog attack.

I wouldn't call them a waste of resources in real life, People should have fun. The problem is that doesn't really apply to this game, which in itself is just supposed to be "for fun but an absolute waste of resources".

In a way I think ohol is pretty accurate to life. You are born, You contribute to society or not and you eventually die. Anything you do is ultimately serves to help pass the time.

Last edited by JasonZ (2021-11-19 11:39:45)

Spoonwood · 2021-11-19 12:39:01

jinbaili83 wrote:

Dogs are for fun only, just like in real life most dogs are absolute waste of resources. However some sources claim they can lower your stress levels and blood pressure, so that is a plus.

Lowering blood pressure and stress levels might extend one's lifespan. In contrast, in OHOL, dogs are a genetic score negative or at least never genetic score positive.

Eve Troll · 2021-11-19 16:28:05

Dogs of modern times may not appear to serve much of a purpose beyond companionship or fun. In the past they served many purposes. Guard dogs, sheperds, hunting dogs, pest control, and more. Many dogs serve as hunting dos and sheperds till this day. These animals were trained and bred to work and serve specific funtions for centuties. To the point their genetics were refined down to what we know of today.

Anatolian shepards literally protect goats from cheetas in africa.

Dogs serve vital roles in todays landscape and even more so in the past. They were the first animals we domesticated and helped us grow as a species. Brushing them off as if their only purpose is to make us happy or have fun is very narrow minded. Especially since dogs were a major factor in our survival. Especially in times mirrored in ohol. From what I understand, Jasons hate for dogs was due to his wife being attacked by a dog. People kept demanding dogs and Jason passive aggressively added them into the game to be useless and violent. Since thats his perspective on them I imagine.

LonelyNeptune · 2021-11-19 19:05:44

Another thread derailed by the pineapple of logic.

Eve Troll · 2021-11-19 19:42:44

LonelyNeptune wrote:

Another thread derailed by the pineapple of logic.

Not really. If anything the thread was derailed by jason trying to justify his decisions and make us out to be dumb and unaware of what the game needs or even what we want as players. Everything following his post has been a response to his statements.

Dogs are a prime example of him making us out to be stupid and not know what we want. People begged for dogs over and over. Then jason adds dogs in a really poor and dysfunctional state. Then he can turn around and be like

"people dont even like dogs, they complain about dogs, they never even breed dogs... players really dont know what they want"

LonelyNeptune · 2021-11-19 20:00:28

Just because you don't like the developer's response doesn't mean that it's off topic. The thread was literally about him. Then Spoon decided to fixate on a few words Jason said and write a novel as if any of it justifies his behavior.

Go away, troll.

jinbaili83 · 2021-11-19 20:01:53

Given the limitations of this game engine i'm not sure what else people did expect from dogs. Sure, dogs ware broken like most of updates but that got fixed.

Eve Troll · 2021-11-19 20:59:36

Isnt the point of these forums to ramble about stuff and get off topic? Not sure ive ever seen a thread not get off topic one way or another on here. Ive never found these forums to be very strict or felt a strong pressure to stay on subject in regards to the initial post. Conversations should be able to flow naturally. Even if they get off subject. If theres something interesting to be said, or someone feels passionate about something I think its worth hearing. Even/especially if we disagree. We arnt the rulers of these forums and we dont get to choose how people conduct themselves on here. Obviously if you break rules like being blatantly offensive or attacking others, not taking warnings from mods seriously, etc you may get a temporary ban. Perminent bans and rare and even then they are easy to get around by making a new account.

In reality the best thing to do on here is to have fun and express yourself. Try not to take things too seriously. Destiny is a prime example of someone who knows how to have fun on here while still bringing their rationale to the table when it matters. Its foolish to think we can actually change each other on here. I cant tell you what to do but I advice you dont waste your time trying to change or get in the way of others expressing themselves on here. Look for your way to have fun on here and express yourself. If thats to get upset and be rude to spoon or others, great. But if not I would suggest looking for where you enjoy standing in the community rather than trying to push people out of the place they enjoy standing in.

fug · 2021-11-20 00:46:15

jinbaili83 wrote:

Given the limitations of this game engine i'm not sure what else people did expect from dogs. Sure, dogs ware broken like most of updates but that got fixed.

I mean look what YaH did with them. Dogs either protect you from wild animals, dig up resources, and something else I forget without peeking. You can make dogs useful. Dogs are useless for the same reason horses run away from you when carted - Because Jason wants you to suffer.

JasonZ · 2021-11-20 09:02:33

Spoonwood wrote:

jinbaili83 wrote:
Dogs are for fun only, just like in real life most dogs are absolute waste of resources. However some sources claim they can lower your stress levels and blood pressure, so that is a plus.
Lowering blood pressure and stress levels might extend one's lifespan. In contrast, in OHOL, dogs are a genetic score negative or at least never genetic score positive.

Maybe if Jason added stress to the game, All the useless items could've had a use.

DestinyCall · 2021-11-20 15:58:35

It is rather strange to have a survival game with basically just one "stat". OHOL is all about hunger. Even temperature is just a modifier for how quickly you lose hunger. Yellow Fever is the same thing. We are either starving fast or starving slower. There is no health bar, no other needs to balance. No higher needs, like happiness. No other basic requirements, like thirst, sleep, shelter, etc. Just hunger. Everything revolves around food.

It is a core limitation of the game and a big reason why many items in the tech tree are "non-essential" and unrelated to long-term survival. If it doesn't improve your ability to stay fed, it isn't really necessary in OHOL.

...

I'm currently playing the game "Hobo: Tough Life". Good game, by the way, I recommend it. Currently 35% off on Steam. Anyways, in that game, you play as a homeless person in a fictional Central European city. The nights are cold and the streets are hard. You must balance your needs and keep yourself alive in an uncaring world with meager resources.

Your hobo has a health bar, which lowers when you take damage or neglect critical needs and a hunger bar, of course. But he also has tiredness which drains slowly over time and requires sleeping (or drinking coffee) to replenish. Like OHOL, you also have a body temperature guage which reacts to how cold the environment is, how much clothing you are wearing, if you are close to a heat source, and how wet you are. Rain or snow increases your wetness and being wet+cold is twice as bad as just being cold. Instead of affecting your hunger bar, allowing yourself to get too cold will increase your illness stat and put you at risk of freezing to death. Freezing cold damages your health directly, while allowing yourself to get sick will also slowly drain your health. Sleeping in an exposed place without protection will also drain away heat, so you must be careful to manage your tiredness while watching that you don't die of exposure. Meanwhile, in addition to these physical needs, you also have mental needs. The morale stat monitors your happiness and it will drop quickly if your basic needs are not being met, but can take a hit when you do certain actions, like stealing or picking pockets. Like physical illness, low morale will sap away your health. You can also get two other negative stats - drunkness and nausea. These stats generally go up depending on what you eat or drink and can have a variety of effects, like reducing your movement speed and discouraging people from wanting to interact with you. Lastly, there is smell and toilet needs. As you eat food, you need to relieve yourself eventually. Since this is a European city, public toilets are not free. Neglect this need too long and you could have an accident, which significantly raises your stink level. Other activities, like dumpster diving, also raise your smelliness stat. And if you are too stinky, NPCs will refuse to interact with you, which cuts you off from important services, like snack carts or bars, and sources of income, like begging.

In addition to these basic needs and negative conditions, you also have certain stats that can be modified by wearing different clothing. For example, some clothing have better cold resistance, while other clothing is better as protecting against wetness. Clothing can also increase your defense or charisma, which improves your chances when interacting with people during conversation and combat.

Long story short, this game has a TON of statistics that are interconnected in interesting ways. This creates a rich tapestry of player interactions with the game world. In Hobo, food is very important. If you don't have access to food, you will starve to death, just like in OHOL. But food is NOT the only important thing in your life. Focusing just on food acquisition will leave you vulnerable to death from depression or exposure. You must balance your body's various needs, while also exploring the city, interacting with other hobos, and accumulating important resources.

...

Jason has complained about how his player base tends to ignore anything that is not directly tied to basic survival. But he has designed OHOL so the ONLY important thing is hunger. That's the only lever he can manipulate, so everything centralizes around that one critical value. We don't even have a proper health bar so that illness can directly harm health instead of weirdly draining hunger value. In OHOL, we never get tired. We never get wet. We never get unhappy/bored/whatever. We don't really need shelter, because temperature is just hunger drain, so you can eat to fix it.

I don't think OHOL needs to have same level of complexity as Hobo: Tough Life. It is a different kind of game and a "simpler" game, over all. But I do think it would be significantly improved AS A GAME if health, temperature, and hunger were discreet needs, rather than one mega stat. And adding a "stress" or "happiness" stat to the mix would also be highly useful way to make a variety of useless high tier items (like ice cream and race cars) into something that has real value.

This would require Jason to provide us with an actual health bar that operates independently from the hunger bar. If that were true, you could suffer non-lethal injuries from a variety of things, as well as suffering health damage if you allowed your hunger bar to fall too low. For temperature, there could be a "comfortable" zone and a freezing/over-heating zone that causes you to suffer from hypothermia or heatstroke, respectively. These concepts are already in the game, due to race restrictions. Just having them impact players when they are very cold or very hot, instead of when they walk on to the wrong tile. These conditions could directly damage health or drain hunger or both. Having a comfortable shelter to keep you safe would be more important, because staying the right temperature would have real benefits while letting yourself get too cold/hot would be more visibly bad. Right now, it is way too easy to just ignore temperature completely and live outside your whole life.

moonsetter · 2021-11-21 05:42:41

jasonrohrer wrote:

Adding a bunch more characters is also probably a waste of time. There are "enough" in the game currently, most of the time, to recognize each other and get a kick out of how different/cute they look. I could "squeeze out" a bunch more characters, but they probably wouldn't be as iconic as the current ones, because there are only so many "very unique" character designs.

Logged in just for this. New character models have always been one of my most favorite updates. I used to daydream about character model design contests and things like that. Genuinely begging you not to give up on the character models.

Spoonwood · 2021-11-22 23:55:11

Found this today on the discord: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/ … 772/no.PNG

JonySky · 2021-11-23 21:16:09

DestinyCall wrote:

It is rather strange to have a survival game with basically just one "stat".

This is due to improvised and poorly planned development

Since the beginning of development, ohol has only been an impromptu experiment with no end goal.
For this reason, no more survival "values" have been created.

I should also add that possibly the motor engine is not capable of supporting values such as sleep, mood or basic needs ...
Also remember that the temperature in OHOL is a joke (it has never worked correctly) and the closest thing to a disease that we have in OHOL are mosquitoes (which curiously also affect hunger, because nothing has been wanted or could not be developed better than that)

DestinyCall wrote:

Jason has complained about how his player base tends to ignore anything that is not directly tied to basic survival. But he has designed OHOL so the ONLY important thing is hunger. That's the only lever he can manipulate, so everything centralizes around that one critical value.

I have talked for a long time that OHOL is a lot of contradictory mechanics ... this is one more contradiction

Now think about this: In a game based exclusively on hunger ... why do you need cars, trucks, planes, radios, cameras, dogs, trains ...?

Not even much of the clothing is of any use
it is simply decoration without any use

Interestingly in the description of the game, it does not say anything about hunger:
a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building

Last edited by JonySky (2021-11-23 21:30:42)

pein · 2022-03-13 06:59:40

jasonrohrer wrote:

"Goals" are different than "promises," of course. Early on, my goal for this game was to have 10,000 craftable objects There are currently over 3000.
I also had an unstated goal of 100 playable characters. There are currently 22.
....

I agree on this, you can add together items, but it won't be sustainable. It has to be a combination of smaller parts. Even if you got 1000 items that are combined in a well balanced manner, can be more content than 10000 items total.
The characters are good example. If the hairs and eyes could be mixed it could be easily many more unique looking ones.

The dead content is a problem, if something has no logical reason to exist, or provides any fun element, then it's not needed. But also people need some content, something new, something fun. There was an NFT game that was super successful last year, until it wasn't. It ran on placebo, was in a bubble, as long as it was hyped, it was going up, and people hyped it even more. It was running on hopium. When things went south the game went south and they tried to make people be more patient, but no news, no results and the community became more and more toxic. It can still be good, it might be, but everyone who experienced the downfall will be wary of investing time or money in it.

It's not just the dead content, it's the lack of balance, OHOL was always a weird game. I remember how stressful it was learning it, it lost more than half of the people there. Then there were changes. And some parts of the game became super easy while other parts are annoyingly complex. It lacks a proper balancing. Even basic philosophy. what is the base minimum players should do? who is a good player? what is the end goal? I mean the punishment and rewarding part is important. it's a survival game so people should survive on their own or with some help but they should want to survive at any cost. they shouldn't question their own existence or other players. more players should be considered good at any time (okay maybe in some really extreme cases not). One thing I really don't like is when people just rely on others completely. The game should somewhat force people to do something. It shouldn't be hard or impossible, left foot right foot, do something, get something. That's why I don't like the resource system. Some people want to do things but they can't. No water, no soil, no food, then you will die. How can you help? by doing the most complicated recipe. Can they? they can't. Then who will teach them? Nobody because others become stressed to keep them alive so they can't check what they are doing.

The game should be easy if players show the minimum willingness to try. Get water and soil, produce food. Easy enough. It should be possible to hang on forever, but not to thrive. Players would need to want to become better, to do other things, to risk for something. SO your dead content starts with the water system. When you made the most basic resource the most important at the same time. It affects each other. Why has to be so depressing? Why everything needs to run out? How will someone understand that the town has no water because the town has no oil, because the people can't find somebody in 1000 tile radius that has the ability to help? they will just think you are rude or you make up these stories. 'Wat do?' they ask, you should always be able to answer that. The game should have goals.
So what if people just farm and talk? nothing, it's fine. If they don't change, nothing changes.

The punishment is instant. So they won't learn. Initially you starved right away. You didn't know what happened, because you starved, if you remember to check your food bar you don't starve. I really liked that changed that it wasn't instant. It's dramatic, you understand you got time but you got to get your shit together, and do something. Or someone help you. If you don't know what killed you, is it really a punishment? if you don't know that the town has no water, is it really your fault? I had so many moments seeing barely any food and people having tons of babies, and I was thinking 'whatever you do we can't support that' but if you tell them you are rude. So this situation should not occur, there should be a way out. There was a football game that over time reacted to your style, the more you did something the higher was the chance to adapt and counter it, so you had to invent new ways of doing things, do a variety of things, and don't be easily readable. It should be the players that control the system, the system should give enough information that players understand what to do and if they are wiling to do it it's rewarding, if not they know it's their fault they didn't succeed. So in a way the world should adapt to players too. I don't know, for example each player has a separate view on the food they can get. It should be enough wild food for them to survive if they do the right pathing. Others can't interfere, or not with everything, some wild food could be shared, and all player made food if the people who make it, decide it so. People would already feel more motivated to do things instead of blaming others, the game or give up.

You need to make them want to survive, to advance, to do things. Destruction should never be the goal, 'everything runs out' is a plain bad concept. people play games to get away from reality, to experience a different world, have fun. it should be a positive message, 'everything can be fixed' or 'most things can be fixed if you try hard enough'. The new should be better than the old. Sure it could be ruined, hard to fix, so they could decide to move further and further. for example if they farm the same spot, it could become dry. Then there would be limited spots to use, and too much work to fix it. So the players would know it is not sustainable. communication is very basic, the tribe should be able to talk with a chat. unrealistic? well it's a game. there are plenty of things that were more unrealistic, posses, leadership, curses.

When you had the question 'why people don't make higher level wells?'. My answer was that the game doesn't force them to, it doesn't reward them enough for doing so. There should be enough difference to upgrade. There should be a limit where and how many they can do (I called water deposit, so you moved wells into ponds). It also should have a requirement to upgrade, but a reward that allows new things (bucket). The whole bucket and description of a well wasn't my idea, but the concept was. It worked, it made the game more fun. The bucket allowed the cows, the painting, the faster transport of water. It's a change that makes new things possible. Probably painting wasn't that popular, but cows were. Also the watering can still would be And probably the sprinkling system could be easier.

It worked, people upgraded wells, instead of making more, and used the new item, it was clearly an upgrade, a higher tech, a more valuable item. It doesn't have to be complex to make it. It's not the point. They can't get to a content without it, so they have to make it. They don't feel like it's forced, it's natural that you want easier life and more things so the things you do for it don't feel forced.

That time wells were the most advanced thing and made longer towns possible. The iron system upgrade came after and it was also a good one. But the next upgrades were not that much.
Making engines is super complex, dealing with tiny items, too long to do it, it's rewarding, yes, but it's also not the most fun thing. Limiting resources is also not fun. It created paradoxes that were hard to fix. You need iron to make iron, you don't have iron so you can't get iron. Same goes for the dependency of water. You need water to make food, but without food nobody has time to make food. it is frustrating and unsolvable problem. Or it requires heavy dedication. People might do it a few times but it's not fun. Nobody will thank it because they don't understand how to do it or why is important. Simple change would be to be able to upgrade, slowly, you would know what you need where you need from just gotta do the grind. They invented tin cans before can openers. Really all it needs to build upon each other, making one or the other more common or less common, so it's not always the same problem, you would have excess of something and need something else.

Same goes for my idea of 'family soup'. My idea was a complex and work intensive food that requires a combination of items but in exchange it rewards with more calories than it would normally. My 'static' part of the idea was just so it can't be moved as a portable food, so it's troublesome, but since people spend a lot of time with it, they don't have a reason to take it far, so there is some downside. The idea of static foods was born and we then got a bunch of new foods as there was a place for them. Small static, big static, medium static, etc. I don't care whose idea, people had similar ideas. It's just extracting the essence. Stew was a good update and people liked it. Why you underestimate simple things? Do you think new players want to feel useless? Other than the clutter, I was happy if people made stew, they weren't griefing, they provided food for themselves (not for others because they placed all in same spot) and they were occupied. same deal, if a toddler could make a tea out of water that is free, and leafs, and it provides 1 pip of food, he is not entirely useless. There could be more optimal ways to spend his time, but we need things that don't depend on resources, depend on time and activity and have a reward that is worth it.

Instead of a system where something relies on the same category, should be interchanging systems. To upgrade water you need iron, to upgrade iron you need clay for example, to upgrade clay you need water. That wouldn't be enough, but already a step forward. even mobile games got 4-6 resources. They don't ask you to not eat to save food. Wood upgrades farms, food upgrades army, etc.
The very base resources could be free. Water and soil, you should always be able to get them, players should always be an asset. They should always be able to make a profit. Others should always be happy that more people joined so they can help. Make a fire, make some tea, some leaf panties? something very basic. New players still would see it as an accomplishment, old players would see as a basic necessity (and also could pretend they are happy if they get one).

A basic income of resources would be better than a fixed resource system. If you get 10 water an hour, you would still be able to collect some. If you would get 1 iron per hour, still can make a tool. Upgrading them with other resources would create a system where the value of things is not absolute. When you got fixed water and oil, and iron, each of them can be calculated in water, in time, so more or less how long it gonna last. It's not a bad thing to optimize resources, people lie when they say they enjoy having a lot of things. They might enjoy getting it, but it kills the joy of play when it's easy to do so. SO that's why it would be better to have resource sinks. If you get tons of excess iron, you would upgrade the water system. iron gone, resources gone, you are not rich anymore, but you got better future. if ponds are level 0, and wells level 1, advanced wells lvl 2, Newcomen 3, then charcoal 4, oil 5 then there is a tech tree.
But that's the thing, if all runs out, it's not limited, it's impossible. it could be a basic income per player, so people would want their friends to join so the city gets some resources. Sure, it was too much with the ponds, although I would argue that anyone ever walked more than 30 tiles to collect water. Before the rift we had some income so cities could be fixed. After that, they were meant to die, with the engine stealing and the full removals.

That's what you don't get. By content, people mean higher level items. It doesn't have to be complex like a car or engine. It has to have more value and limit doing other things, and have a reward that it's worth it. If you could make a table and put together with another table to make a bigger table, then 2 more for an ever bigger one, holding more items, that would be worth it, rewarding. The small table can allow putting a small machine on it, the medium a medium one, a big a big one. Each of them has it's purpose, it's a limit, it's a reward, it's interconnected. If you want to do x then you need y. It's a puzzle. x and y changes, the puzzle is the same. upgrade a flat rock into a cooking pan. can cook 2 eggs same time. redundant? maybe, it's parallel content but it's an upgrade. if it can be placed on a stove which is the same as fire and flat rock but lasts longer, it makes 2 redundant things become both useful. new function, new accessories, new content. there was a game, similar to ohol, only single player, Crashlands. it was like 12 times the same things with a slight change, different skins for items, made out of different materials. It was still fun making them over and over as you needed them for further things and you killed other animals for them.

Sports cars? I mean, in one hand you want all cities to die, on other you want something that can't be made in 2-3 hours by average players? People get bored of doing things over and over. Cities had no variety, the same things over and over.

One game that I play currently did an update where the cultures got 'ethos' and 'pillars'. Basically the main focus of advancement then 2-3-4-5-6-7 different focuses that change the game with small bonuses. In the perfect combination they can be really interesting edge cases. It's still not many things, 7 then like 162, but probably millions of combinations to do with all those. The replay ability and unique combos are off the charts.

Basically the way you split the content with races was bad. Instead of each race/tribe/family having it's cut of things, there should be a base way to do things. The races could be better or worse at some things, then the families could choose bonuses. For example one could melt snow to get water, the other could get water from a bottle tree in the desert. But they could both get it from a pond just slower. The issue with cutting content is that it makes limitations that can't be overcome. You born with a white skin? how is it your fault? there shouldn't be punishments that can't be overcome. it's like a puzzle that can't be solved. It doesn't incentivize trade or teamwork, it is hard capped by it. It's a really frustrating mechanic. While having additional ways to do things would provide variety. Sure it's parallel content, but people wouldn't complain about not being able to melt the snow if they can get it from a pond, sure it sucks, but it's not the same as not being to step into a tile to grab a leaf that is the only way to make yellow paint which is part of the base upgrades toward the infrastructure.

There could be another way to increase content without actually doing crazy amounts of hand crafted items.
This could be a new game mode since it's different. Mainly for veterans.
random recipes: each x time there would be a server wipe. like 2 months or so. each new wipe the recipes would be randomized. there would be need for some graphics that can be randomized. a tree with random leafs, branches, size, and item on it. each tool randomized too. a veteran with 1000 hours still should learn again that he needs a hatcherator with a flare stone and a branch of bazinga tree to make a fire. you could use the language system to encode names. it would be funny. it could use the same setup, lvl 0 items that can be found in nature 2-4 put together to make a random tool. the randomizer could put them on each other in a way that makes some sense. then the lvl 1 items that are processed would look different too and different names, different paths to make them. and the animals could be random too, the cute hamster would bite you and the crazy looking hellefino would be peaceful. part of the charm was learning the game and explaining to others. if some of the wild plants would be poisonous and some would be edible, people would have to learn each of them again and again.
if that doesn't work, then people could submit random looking things and their function would be custom and the build order custom so we create puzzles for each other.

Ofc there are other factors. many ideas don't work because the game engine has limitations.

Game engine problems:
-no communication
-no stamina or health bad limits possibilities of food effects, combat or interactions
-no team jobs
-no way to convert big units to small units like directly watering fields from a can or feeding potted plants
-no transport methods
-no layers possible like caves, hills, or even piping or electricity lines

If you still think that new people will come, they won't. It's an MMO then you need returning customers. And even if you don't want to provide content that can last forever, some people will want to play forever. And those people can convince others better than you could. If the main players are happy, the newbies will get a positive message, the competition heats up then others will come. Veterans still stick around because they still see the potential. it just needs some flexibility on your part to question some design/balance choices. Who cares you were wrong or right? the game should change and be fun, change it until it's better, until it clicks.

btw I agree people don't know what they want. because they don't think in terms of balance. or they know what they want but they shouldn't get it the way they want it. but there were 2 examples above that a simple realization of a problem can be simply fixed, by talking about it, working on it until is perfect or close to perfect. baby slings? okay but you will move super slow. has an upside, has a downside, has a function, makes everyone happy, in that case it's really just to shut them up. other things would need an item required by it, a reward, so it fits into a puzzle and activates a branch of content. dead content is dead ends, nothing needs it, nothing needed for it, no reason to have it other than making it.

To make the most positive change short term, some things should be changed, I think most effect would be the resource system. instead of finite resources, should be more of a renewable limited system, where the focus shifts on other categories from time to time. the upgrades could be real simple going from natural to processed resources then just moving them around and upgrading other systems to have a variety of problems and puzzles, even to infinity with small steps in the reward and big steps in requirements. base resources for free but limited rewards so people can talk and do basic stuff but never advance, but keep them busy. and some individual pressure per player so they can't 100% rely on others if they don't do anything, like a system for ownership of items. things could be still shared if wanted but whoever makes it gains the option to choose. each player could have a small spot at age 3 to choose a private spot around the inner shared area, and upgrade later. maybe some social credit currency, each time you share things you gain points. natural resources would have a time limit to be placed in private zones, crafted items could be private or shared. shared items couldn't go into private locations unless both parties agree on pay. this would still allow the current communistic setups but if those dirty veterans could be filthy rich and still not letting other to take their items that they gathered and crafted so others learn their value and change their attitude. these points could be spent for upgrading their own land size or other stuff, make shops or whatever. it could be also time based to use it or lose it. on death it would become shared after a while. there could be another token that persists after lives but that would need other players to mark you as a positive player or enthusiastic mom or teacher or something (no cost to give, can't go negative, mark a player than finalize vote after you or him dies).
buildings should have functions, bonuses. I thinks that's the main direction that could work.

All in all I'm grateful that you made this game, and I got my money worth so I won't complain and nobody should. You could charge for DLCs or whatever, if the game is fun, so don't think of people like they are burnt out, they would pay again to be entertained.

I think Jason shares too much and allows for a direct talk, but then this can be abused, and he can also just become grumpy and irritable, which is not the usual game dev- players dynamics. The reactions are often legit but over exaggerated if you consider that he is trying his best. There are pro gamers too, don't underestimate the 1% of the players that can easily judge how good a game it is, it might be just as hard as making one. Both sides should just chill out and be more flexible. Funny that Jason in game gives no proper rewards so IRL he receives no compliments

pein · 2022-03-13 14:58:57

JonySky wrote:

I should also add that possibly the motor engine is not capable of supporting values such as sleep, mood or basic needs ...

Now think about this: In a game based exclusively on hunger ... why do you need cars, trucks, planes, radios, cameras, dogs, trains ...?

that's quite improbable. if you can put one bar, you can put two or three, but if I'm wrong I would like to know why
in any case, it should, you can't really make ideas if there aren't stats to manipulate. with 2 things, you can complicate how you want, it's still a graph, can be simple or complex, it's still 2d.
temperature is like a box inside a box where the neighbors are exchanging heat and blablabbla. complex and realistic.
is it fun? no
I guess it was an exploit but before that, the map was cold and hot and you could abuse heat for better towns. it didn't really affect me, quite some time fell out while I had to eat but usually the town died out when it wasn't in a desert. after that 'fix' it had no meaning, it's a bit too hot here and there so you pay attention but also I always considered running trough savannah and ice better than caring for a few extra pips. so in that case there were combinations where the map was valuable and when is not. which made it more strategic. sometimes it was also too hot and those who ignored it, died. the heat locking then running around was a clear exploit that had to be removed.
but actually the extremities are more fun. it could of been a completely parallel heat system with temporary bonuses to reward exploration and strategy like stand near a hot geyser for the duration of child care. that's the deal with buildings too, they block a lot and provide no visible benefit, so it's just worth it. combined with the short visibility range is actually really bad. not sure how it would be fun to check a thermometer in every tile anyway.

he said that he will not focus on other than hunger and temperature. stamina became part of the hunger which is kind of weird but okay. but having 1 hp where every injury kills you and even removing the skill based combat in favor of the 'who is more edgy and can be pissed off easier' contest and setting the best players as the highest meme score ones, which isn't really up to skill is just worse than bad. bit better than without healing but worse than right after that.

cars can't be eaten so they are bad but really, just the storage and general rewards for doing things, sometimes is so horrible that it's surprising that the first few updates actually had balancing. bunch of new things make no sense because there is no logical system behind it. I actually think in terms of value and complexity, if there wouldn't be so crazy resource based system, the complex items would be more valuable, but it still has to have a function, a goal, lock some part of the tech branching and allow an easier gameplay once unlocked. things don't have value, or no value compared to the effort you need for them. would need more expensive items, without being utterly complicated and time consuming. And probably not to let people steal or mess up others progress.
I remember when he first time ever considered fixing the 'don't do this' mechanics like burning fish and catching rabbits. It's still quite a lot of things you shouldn't do and it's not clear why for a new player. it's even hard to consider other players useful when their existence is setting others back so if they are lazy bastards then it will affect others negatively. So it's basically no rewards for a lot of activities but a punishment for everyone for not doing things the right way. I think any game should have a proper punish and reward system based on each individual, then it could be as a group but if people can agree to be a group. Players should be able to do useful things with basic resources and turning a profit just by being active. lots of time it's not the case in ohol. some activities are useless, and others are even harmful while you could consider them positive as a new player.

Laggy · 2022-03-14 10:30:59

jasonrohrer wrote:

As you are all aware, there is LOADS of so-called "dead content" in the game. Which sounds more interesting? Making garlic bread in the game, or breeding/evolving specific types of dogs from wild wolves? Well, dog breeding is in the game, but people almost never do it.

The solution to dead content is to make it viable.

Make dogs edible?

Make roadkill edible?

I think the problem is with balance.

Lets take grapes and wine as an example. It takes awhile to get together a full newcomen drill, and and roller to be able to make grapes. Then you must get a bottle, funnel and glass to be able to make wine. This is only two foods for hours of work. On the other hand, cows take only a couple minutes to get plus they supply three different foods, butter, skim and whole milk.

There seems to be no logic behind the effort vs efficiency of a food. Instead of making foods equal, lets make a craving system that has 64 different foods? Guess it makes it viable content (only once every ten generations) but I still don't understand how, or why one food costs so little while another takes ten times longer yet produces less.

I have to admit, I think the one catchiest part of ohol is the different races. I think the best content update would be adding another race. I vote Asians and they could access another biome with silk and gunpowder.

Last edited by Laggy (2022-03-14 10:34:40)

Starknight_One · 2022-03-15 11:38:50

Laggy wrote:

I have to admit, I think the one catchiest part of ohol is the different races. I think the best content update would be adding another race. I vote Asians and they could access another biome with silk and gunpowder.

Gunpowder is a compound comprised of carbon, sulfur, and potassium nitrate. A source of niter is what we'd need.

It occurs in arid regions - because the mineral is water-soluble - so it would show up in the desert most frequently.

It also occurs in caves, so a possible use for bears after all?

We could also refine it from manure... although that's pretty low-yield.

One Hour One Life Forums

#51 2021-10-30 21:23:06

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#52 2021-11-02 10:31:55

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#53 2021-11-03 01:08:55

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#54 2021-11-19 03:49:47

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#55 2021-11-19 09:01:25

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#56 2021-11-19 11:37:04

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#57 2021-11-19 12:39:01

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#58 2021-11-19 16:28:05

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#59 2021-11-19 19:05:44

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#60 2021-11-19 19:42:44

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#61 2021-11-19 20:00:28

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#62 2021-11-19 20:01:53

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#63 2021-11-19 20:59:36

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#64 2021-11-20 00:46:15

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#65 2021-11-20 09:02:33

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#66 2021-11-20 15:58:35

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#67 2021-11-21 05:42:41

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#68 2021-11-22 23:55:11

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#69 2021-11-23 21:16:09

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#70 2022-03-13 06:59:40

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#71 2022-03-13 14:58:57

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#72 2022-03-14 10:30:59

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

#73 2022-03-15 11:38:50

Re: Basic courtesy for the developer

Board footer