One Hour One Life Forums

Hi Spoonwood.

I'm just one woman, so take this for what it's worth, but I'll attempt to give you an answer.

I have not played the game in over a year I think. I come to the forums from time to time to see what's new, but I haven't been inspired to play again yet.

There wasn't really one specific reason why I quit playing, at least not one that I recall. I just moved on to other games and had more fun with them. I found a multiplayer game where I can build relations with other characters, and I've played many single player games since, like Stardew Valley which keeps producing new updates I want to test.

There are varied reasons why I'm not inspired to try OHOL again. In part it's the memory of griefers and seeing threads here that indicate they're still about. Reading it just makes other games more alluring to me. Then it's the memory of all the berries I picked, soiled and watered. I don't want to pick another bowl of berries. (At least not now.) From what I can tell there's still no technology that makes berry picking not necessary. (I remember I tried building animal pens near big patches of wild berry bushes to try to make less farming necessary.) And finally, it seems there's still no way for a mother to carry her baby in a baby sling. It's a technology I strongly longed for when I played.

(I mean, what woman doesn't dream of the ability to take her baby to work? But seriously, I think it would have many social benefits.)

I still consider OHOL one of the most innovative games I've ever played though, so I keep coming back for news. I'll probably try it out again sometime in the future, but right now other games are more interesting.

Now to your more specific points:

Fatherhood: Fatherhood could be fun if implemented, but I don't mind the world working as is in this aspect. I think it's a perfectly fine design choice that in this world, somehow females can create babies on their own. In Minecraft, if you have two cows, they can make a baby, but are they male or female? Who knows? Games do strange things. They don't have to reflect real life to still be enjoyable and expand our horizon. Also, I have roleplayed having fathers for my babies in OHOL, it worked just fine. My main problem with the lack of fatherhood had more to do with the lack of contraceptives (you can say I'm pro choice ) but from what I can tell there are ways now for women not to have babies. I consider that a move in the right direction, but of course I don't talk from experience.

As for the technology: I never learned the most advanced tech when I played. I did spend a fair amount of time playing by myself trying to build up a city and make the different items, focusing on water tech. I thought it a little sad that you had to play a multiplayer game alone in order to learn everything you needed in the game. But I understand it's a difficult balance to make right, and it's not what made me stop playing.

And finally: "Isn't that sort of thinking a rather hyper-inflated view of what women can do?"

No. Spoonwood. The women in game aren't necessarily like women in real life. They can make babies without men! Who knows how their genes differ from earth women's. So that's the in game explanation, if you need one.

As for the out of game explanation: Women are quite capable, my friend. <3

Have fun playing!

Yes, also see Jason's update post here:

https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=4778

Jason sometimes replies that "it's the future, not the past" when someone suggests that there ought to be more levels between stone age tech and present day tech. But I haven't been able to find his replies.

How about making it easier/quicker to get flat rocks so that more roads can be built?

Yeah, cause there's nothing childish about quotes like this at all.

OHOL should be a game for everyone. People who are triggered by people who want it to be a game for everyone should take a good look in the mirror.

I'm in favor of closing this thread.

I think he meant a metaphor for private property.

Even if a woodchuck could chuck wood and even if a woodchuck would chuck wood, should a woodchuck chuck wood?

People will fight to become kings and queens, but not to become god apparently.

Fun for who though?
If I were a spectator watching people interact, sure, seeing drama when people misbehave on purpose or strive to regulate others would probably be more interesting than watching a society where each individual did what was best for society because it inherently was best for the individual.

But depending on the player, there are other aspects of the game they will think of as fun, and this particular aspect - having to guard the pies to prevent others from causing a famine - to many might not be interesting at all.

I also prefer the elements that seem most "natural" or "realistic."
For example,
- I'm not a fan of player initiated apocalypses, because the "magic" doesn't seem to fit in
- I'm not a fan of nature where the resources don't regrow, it feels unnatural
- I'm not a fan of not being able to make baby slings or other baby carry devices, it seems like an artificial rule for otherwise clever people

And I realize that it is the part of me who enjoys simulation games who would prefer, and even enjoy, other choices for the game.

But for that same reason, I wouldn't be fond of a system where a person could eat all the food they would ever need before they turned five - or twenty - and never eat again for the rest of their lives.

Yeah, well, many online communities hire moderators.
We're supposed to self police.
How do you suggest we do that?

Arkajalka:
All you're doing is proving that the forum ought to be moderated.
Edit: It is. I reported your post.

I love this

Toxolotl, the maths behind genetic scores changed:

https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … 934#p77934

I agree with Kaveh.

The problem is that even though the swastika may hold no significance to the people drawing it in the game, unfortunately it does hold significance to certain extreme right wing groups, people who should not feel they find a safe haven in OHOL.

From the article: https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-confusin … a-45063547

"In the German version of the popular video game Wolfenstein II, swastikas have been replaced by triangular symbols and the fictional, mustacheless dictator Herr Heiler stands in for the English version's Adolf Hitler, angering many gamers. Until recently, the Entertainment Software Self-Regulation Body (USK) had not permitted Nazi symbols — including Hitler's face — anywhere in video games in Germany. Last week, the USK lifted its blanket ban, though symbols still must be approved.

Displaying Nazi emblems in Germany is, naturally, complicated, even without the USK's guidelines for age ratings and game content. "Most countries don't penalize the display of Nazi symbols," the lawyer Christian Solmecke told DW.

In Germany, the law considers swastikas and SS sig runes the "symbols of anti-constitutional organizations." Displaying them publicly or selling goods that sport them is illegal. The Nazi salute and statements such as "Heil Hitler" are also banned in public.

"There are similar bans — for example, in Austria — but those are a lot less tough," Solmecke said."

(Article from 2018. I don't know what the rules are now.)

I still think it might be a good idea if people could teach each other tools, and teaching increased the number of skill slots.
So if you don't have any teachers, you're able to learn less in one lifetime. If you have teachers, you learn more.
The teaching itself might be a moment of bonding with your fellow villagers.

New idea:
What if you could get extra tool slots if someone teaches a tool to you?