Shadie116 Didn't Care If Others Couldn't Play the Game As Intended

Spoonwood · 2024-02-27 16:31:08

Just look at this nonsense: https://github.com/jasonrohrer/OneLife/issues/1033

"No murdering, griefing, taking over towns, chaos, pandemonium, grief groups, starving and boxing of towns, covering up wells."

So basically, it sounds like Shadie116 never had fun playing the game as intended, if he ever tried to play the game as intended in the first place.

"Pretty much anything that was fun and put a challenge on the players."

The kid talks of challenge. But honestly, simply can't take up the challenge of playing for maximum gene score or as the game got intended. Instead shadie116 makes up his own idea of "challenge", instead of taking on some external goal that he didn't set.

"We built grand structures and took down great towns. It was some real group collaboration that was just sucked away with the changing of a variable. You ruined some really good moments."

No, locking in a town in a fence so that no one can get out is not civilization building. People who made walls in the real world made it so that their people inside could go out if they wanted to. They didn't build a wall and then mass commit suicide or starve their self.

"now things like this are hardly even possible, you've walled this game."

This is plain wrong. There were far more walls during The Rift, including the barrier and fenced in towns (with gates) as a regular sort of thing.

"Another thing I'd like to iterate is that it is through conflict that advancements were made in society."

No, making of engines, radios, glass bottles, etc. is not made through conflict. That holds for both real ones and those objects in OHOL also.

"They were learning and pushing, we we're getting better at setting up the apocalypse..."

No apocalypse has happened on bigserver2 since April of 2022. If people were getting better at such, why didn't any happen after April 2022 that year or in 2023?

"you made restricting any free thinking or anything that would change the way the game was played and it is that I find troubling"

Free thinking did not get restricted as evidenced by the above statement. Griefing didn't change the way that people played such that people ended up engaging more in parenting or civilization building. They did those things *less* because of griefing, because they had to spend time countering people like Shadie116 or quit.

"Its what made the game not fun and what made it generic and what causes it to spike during Christmas and other holidays where people are celebrating ..."

No, griefing did not lead to that player influx. There was a video by CHRBRG, which as of now, has over 400,000 views: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNu4E3-_HtQ&t=98s It was also holiday break.

"Most people just get bored and go afk you've rerouted the best aspect of life ..."

It is inconsistent to say that conflict comes as part of the best aspect of life, but to block people who disagree with you. And also to spend time writing instead of say engaging in competitive wrestling or some combative sport.

"You forgot the real collaboration involved in all this is bounded by a problem, when you got guides to every problem on a website this game is just a building simulator."

It says "a ... game of ... civilization building" above. The game is intended as a building simulator. So, this comment implies that things have improved and ended up more inline with how it has gotten advertised.

"Or you could be on the other side planning on how to raid a city ..."

That isn't part of civilization building, nor parenting. Nor is it trying to maximize survival time for all players.

"So what you have done is sucked the concept of SURVIVAL,"

Survival involves continuing to exist. Genetic score, from what I can tell from seeing the top leaderboard numbers, ends up higher on average than it was before the curse and bear changes. Consequently, the concept of survival ends up enhanced, because people survive longer. What has gotten sucked out of the game comes as anti-survival people like Shadie116.

"And LARGE SCALE COLLABORATION out of this game it looks like that girl is really trying to survive those threating bears"

Luring bears isn't trying to engage in multiplayer survival. It's trying to kill people who aren't trying to harm others, and consequently is against multiplayer survival.

"SO IN THE END I AM SAYING YOU HAVE RUINED THE MOTIVATIONS FOR ANYBODY TO DO ANYTHING BUT FARM, CHAT, AND BUILD. "

No, there's still parenting. But, it's not supposed to involve killing people just for the sake of killing. Multiplayer survival involves trying to get everyone to survive as much as possible. Anyone trying to kill others who aren't harmful, isn't playing for the sake of multiplayer survival. They aren't trying to build civilization also.

Shadie116, if you're reading this, your post in fact indicates that the changes made the game more in line, or in other words consistent, with how it comes as intended. You indicate that people aren't trying to get rid of griefers as much as before. That means that players have MORE time and thus MORE ability to survive, parent, or civilization build. As I said before, the Github is for bugs, issues, or inconsistencies. What you put on the Github has no place there, since it instead shows that the game works *better* and more inline with how it's intended to work. So, it should get closed.

Now, will you actually learn from this and close your issue? That's where knowledge would lead you. Or will you, again, show that you lack the courage to do things inline with any external standard?

Shady100bands · 2024-03-07 06:16:24

nobody asked

Shady100bands · 2024-03-07 06:18:16

Go solve your own argument I don't feel like explaining to you the values upholded by the group whatever c.o.p YADAYDADAYDYAYDYAYYDA I hope this helped your social credit. Also I'm banned from the forums, what makes you think I'd see this in time. You're traveling through the desert to deliver a message me no care, sunglasses on, vrmmm bye

QuirkySmirkyIan · 2024-03-20 01:52:14

Spoonwood wrote:

"Or you could be on the other side planning on how to raid a city ..."
That isn't part of civilization building, nor parenting. Nor is it trying to maximize survival time for all players.
"So what you have done is sucked the concept of SURVIVAL,"

Where is it intended behavior to maximize survival for all. From what the Steam page says it seems like your family is the most important. It seems like it would be intentional design to forcefully conquer other families especially if they refuse to give you needed resources to progress the tech tree? Killing and conflict can be justified with how we build up our towns. I mean technically it would be better for a family to survive by forcefully taking a different family to a town close by so trade is easier.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2024-02-27 16:31:08

Shadie116 Didn't Care If Others Couldn't Play the Game As Intended

#2 2024-03-07 06:16:24

Re: Shadie116 Didn't Care If Others Couldn't Play the Game As Intended

#3 2024-03-07 06:18:16

Re: Shadie116 Didn't Care If Others Couldn't Play the Game As Intended

#4 2024-03-20 01:52:14

Re: Shadie116 Didn't Care If Others Couldn't Play the Game As Intended

Board footer