[Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

Goateelord · 2018-03-08 16:26:06

Since the game is excellent at portraying the luck factor in life, whether good or bad, I think it would be a brilliant idea to add birth defects and other chronic diseases.

A couple simple examples;

- Missing Limbs

You're born to a poor family, and to make matters worse, you have no legs. You depend on your tribe/parents/siblings to be carried around and cared for.

- Poor Eye Sight

Your retina isn't the best. Other than your HUD, your screen is disoriented and/or blurry. (not to the stage where you can't see at all, just makes daily tasks much more difficult)

- Allergies

As the title says. You have allergies to a certain food. This can be carrots, berries, pies, etc.

- Asthma

You walk slower maybe?

You get the main idea. Of course, these defects should be made so that they only happen one in every 500 births, for example.

Implementing this sort of thing would make for a very interesting gameplay and interactions with others. Will you be the burden of your tribe and be left to starve or will you be cared for regardless of your disability?

Do let me know what you guys think!

xoomorg · 2018-03-08 16:31:55

Not to make this too political, but I was thinking along similar lines with regards to biological sex... like, there's a not-insignificant portion of the population that is intersex. Perpetuating gender binaries is not only politically incorrect, but biologically incorrect. Maybe a simple game mechanic in which a player's "actual" gender does not match their image? So they look like a male, but can spawn babies (though maybe not nurse) or they look like a female but are sterile? Not sure how to make that clear to players what's going on, but it would add an interesting twist to things...

dongriffen · 2018-03-08 16:45:46

xoomorg wrote:

Not to make this too political, but I was thinking along similar lines with regards to biological sex... like, there's a not-insignificant portion of the population that is intersex. Perpetuating gender binaries is not only politically incorrect, but biologically incorrect. Maybe a simple game mechanic in which a player's "actual" gender does not match their image? So they look like a male, but can spawn babies (though maybe not nurse) or they look like a female but are sterile? Not sure how to make that clear to players what's going on, but it would add an interesting twist to things...

Certainly it would add a twist. A twist that is quite useless and does nothing to further the gameplay of the game. I understand your political view, and I'm not even totally against it, I just don't think a pre-alpha video game is the type of place to campaign for gender understanding.

ned · 2018-03-08 16:48:56

I'd leave them to starve. Little room for disabilities right now.

In terms of gender binaries, people are still born physically male or female. Obviously there are exceptions where humans with both genitalia are born, or times when physical sex does not match genetic sex (such as Swyer, XX male, and hell lets add mosaicism, too). However, most of the time, genitalia matches secondary sex characteristics, while gender identity may not.

In the game, if you really want to get into this, say whatever gender your character identifies as. Perhaps shears could allow us to cut hair in the style of our identified gender like in ARK. Unfortunately, there wasn't much else for intersex people to do about it back then, especially when you have a dangling penis or milk-filled breasts.

Goateelord · 2018-03-08 16:52:48

ned wrote:

I'd leave them to starve. Little room for disabilities right now.
In terms of gender binaries, people are still born physically male or female. Obviously there are exceptions where humans with both genitalia are born, or times when physical sex does not match genetic sex (such as Swyer, XX male, and hell lets add mosaicism, too). However, most of the time, genitalia matches secondary sex characteristics, while gender identity may not.
In the game, if you really want to get into this, say whatever gender your character identifies as. Perhaps shears could allow us to cut hair in the style of our identified gender like in ARK. Unfortunately, there wasn't much else for intersex people to do about it back then, especially when you have a dangling penis or milk-filled breasts.

Care to elaborate what you mean by no room for disabilities? As in you think it won't make it into the dev list or it won't add any gameplay value?

xoomorg · 2018-03-08 17:01:58

ned, Goateelord, I'm not talking about transgender people. I'm talking about intersex. By some estimates, that's about 1.7% of the population. I don't think that warrants largescale changes to the game, but given that roughly 1 in 60 births IRL are for individuals who are NOT biologically male or female, it's probably on par with wanting to represent disabilities or birth defects in the game. In the real world, there ARE people who (in most regards) appear to be male, but who have a fully functional uterus and vagina (sometimes with a penis as well, sometimes they just appear male in terms of secondary characteristics.) That could easily be represented in the game by a male avatar who nonetheless spawns babies. Similarly, XXY females (or other kinds of intersex) may appear female but are generally sterile.

It may not ADD much to the game, but it also shouldn't really DETRACT much either. And wouldn't involve massive changes. I don't actually feel that strongly about this issue personally, but I know people who do and am just mentioning the issue.

ned · 2018-03-08 17:02:35

Goateelord wrote:

Care to elaborate what you mean by no room for disabilities? As in you think it won't make it into the dev list or it won't add any gameplay value?

Oh, sure. I mean it in the worst possible way, just to be glib. It would definitely add gameplay value for certain people, but I'd end up leaving any disabled kids to starve because I wouldn't have the experience, time, or knowledge to provide the care necessary for them. Imagine if a kid can't walk. The only way this kid will move effectively is either me carrying it, or when it gets too big, a wheelbarrow/cart. I don't have those resources, nor that time, and if I'm part of a village, taking away a cart to raise someone who adds little due to a disability will surely be destructive.

I like the allergies idea, though.

In general, I could see disabilities working as a normally-distributed sliding scale value of attributes. Different people could have slightly different max hunger bars, walking speeds, basal body temperatures, etc.

ned · 2018-03-08 17:13:21

xoomorg wrote:

ned, Goateelord, I'm not talking about transgender people. I'm talking about intersex. By some estimates, that's about 1.7% of the population.

Ah, I see what you mean. Though to be fair, that estimate ranges from 0.05% to 1.17%, and some syndromes, like Klinefelter's, make up the majority of those diseases. Reproductively speaking, this mostly manifests as infertility. Maybe two changes could be made like a small proportion of males having breasts or some females being infertile, but that would probably confuse players more than educate them about the conditions.

xoomorg · 2018-03-08 17:19:20

Yeah, I think maybe sterile females would be the easiest and least-confusing the add to the game (since sterile Eves may wonder why they never have babies, but it at least isn't "breaking" game mechanics in any way) and fertile males might be funny in the context of the game, but could be too confusing. I don't think special avatars would be worth the trouble or confusion, and would probably just provoke trolls to be childish. (Actually, I'm surprised I haven't encountered more racism, given that for some reason we have two different color avatars even though that seems to add nothing to game mechanics.)

Goateelord · 2018-03-08 17:22:54

ned wrote:

Oh, sure. I mean it in the worst possible way, just to be glib. It would definitely add gameplay value for certain people, but I'd end up leaving any disabled kids to starve because I wouldn't have the experience, time, or knowledge to provide the care necessary for them. Imagine if a kid can't walk. The only way this kid will move effectively is either me carrying it, or when it gets too big, a wheelbarrow/cart. I don't have those resources, nor that time, and if I'm part of a village, taking away a cart to raise someone who adds little due to a disability will surely be destructive.

I strongly disagree. You didn't have the experience, time or knowledge to feed your babies in your first games either. That means you would let all your babies starve, which is not a bad thing or a wrong way to play the game, but you still do feed them. Why? Well, because you either want to continue your generation or you want to extend your colony and be more productive.

Also, let's assume you're the last living adult female of your generation, and your last child to be born was disabled. For those who want to continue their line, it would be very vital to take care of your disabled baby, who could in the future become an adult and have regular kids of her own (provided she's a female)

So, in short, I think there are many reasons as to why you wouldn't want to straight up leave them.

xoomorg · 2018-03-08 17:27:52

Goateelord, I agree with your "every life can potentially add to the village" philosophy in general, but given the flood of newbies in the game, it really seems to me that every new baby is (on average) more a drain than a benefit. To survive, we need to optimize. Letting a disabled baby starve just means that player will respawn anyway -- hopefully as an able-bodied female (or perhaps just as some other village's problem.)

This is something where I think people will change their strategy as the mix of new/experienced players changes, over time. Also as in-game civilization progresses. At the moment, given the struggle just to survive, nobody can afford the chance of that disabled baby also being a newbie.

ned · 2018-03-08 17:35:28

xoomorg wrote:

Letting a disabled baby starve just means that player will respawn anyway -- hopefully as an able-bodied female (or perhaps just as some other village's problem.)

The real reason. Plus, how many players would rather starve and respawn as an able-bodied person than be unable to move or see or eat gooseberries?

(I hate the real-world implications of this question, by the way, and completely disavow the merits of such a strategy in real life... though I hope that goes without saying).

xoomorg · 2018-03-08 17:37:33

ned wrote:

(I hate the real-world implications of this question, by the way, and completely disavow the merits of such a strategy in real life... though I hope that goes without saying).

OMG yes. I worry that some of the things I suggest in these forums will be taken out of context, portraying me as a raging sociopath.

ned · 2018-03-08 17:38:47

xoomorg wrote:

ned wrote:
(I hate the real-world implications of this question, by the way, and completely disavow the merits of such a strategy in real life... though I hope that goes without saying).
OMG yes. I worry that some of the things I suggest in these forums will be taken out of context, portraying me as a raging sociopath.

THE STRUGGLE

ITS REAL

Goateelord · 2018-03-08 17:47:10

Xoomorg, ned, you have a valid point. Maybe this could be balanced by giving the disabled person certain perks that able-bodied people don't get.

asterlea · 2018-03-08 17:48:29

I think that theoretically adding disabilities would add interesting gameplay, as you would need to adapt your strategy for either playing or caring for these characters. I am worried that a lot of people will not want to deal with it though, especially at this phase of the game, and that players will just automatically either let these babies starve if it's a visible disability, or if you're born with one just run off and starve so you get reborn, as we already frequently see people letting babies starve based on sex, either males because they can't continue the generational line, or females because they're afraid of a population explosion that will wipe out the food supply.

From just a gameplay perspective, I'd say that's fine as people can choose if they want to participate in that particular gameplay element, but then there's a part of me that cringes thinking of a game where a popular strategy is to just kill disabled people, as that's a serious real-life issue, and disabled people actually do get murdered because their parents or caretakers don't want to or can't handle caring for them. Of course, making a simulator where disabled people simply don't exist isn't really great either. There is evidence that even ancient societies cared for those who couldn't contribute as much as others, so maybe it should be up to us as players to encourage the caring for those who need it. Maybe the current strategies of letting babies die is helpful immediately, on the small scale, but it creates patterns that will harm us in the long run, and we should focus on survival for all, and if we can't all survive together then we go down together.

The intersex idea I think would make things interesting and could also throw a wrench in the gender selection some players do. If it's possible that not all who appear female can have babies, having only one and killing the rest would be a more dangerous strategy. Likewise, even if you have children who all appear male, if it's possible that one could have babies your generational line may still be able to continue. Again, killing off all your sons with the hopes of eventually getting a daughter (who may not even be able to have kids) would be a less viable strategy because you could be inadvertently killing the child who could continue your legacy. This would most likely be relatively easy to implement as well, as it could just be a difference of appearance, and the mechanics could otherwise remain the same without having to add extra code. And of course, intersex people do exist in real life, and that's a pretty strong argument in and of itself.

Last edited by asterlea (2018-03-08 17:50:11)

asterlea · 2018-03-08 18:04:00

Goateelord wrote:

Xoomorg, ned, you have a valid point. Maybe this could be balanced by giving the disabled person certain perks that able-bodied people don't get.

A couple ideas:

If you can't walk, you need less food because you're not burning as many calories, and your hunger bar depletes more slowly.

If you can't see well, you can type more characters sooner because you need to rely more on verbal communication.

Phate · 2018-03-08 21:13:49

It's already in the game.
Half the time a born baby will exclaim "Rheeeeeee!" and run off into the distance to die.

Freestuff · 2018-03-09 12:10:13

I just want to chip in here, and say that defects are actually more common in urban settings... see where I'm going? Sutch that, the more advanced the society is, the more likely the kids are to be disabled, so now it wouldn't be a thing, but later all Those atomic powered robots could have some side effects

Edit: also advanced society would be less concerned with surviving and more with lesuire, thus this could be some of the challenges for advanced societies, and if they don't maintain a good health system they will all end up sterile and dead

Last edited by Freestuff (2018-03-09 12:16:54)

ned · 2018-03-09 13:07:20

Freestuff wrote:

I just want to chip in here, and say that defects are actually more common in urban settings...

This is false. Disability is correlated with poverty and age.
http://www.globalization101.org/world-r … ability-3/
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl … ne.0012129

Bayo · 2018-03-09 13:32:06

Even right now people are extremely selective about which babies they keep.
Some villages only let girls live.
Some only 2 boys and 1 girl per mother and so on.
So having disabilities at this stage of the game would add nothing.
It will just starve to death because the mother cant afford to feed it.

Ichan · 2018-03-09 22:16:54

No offense, I think it's a terrible idea. I feel like this is the type of suggestion that ruins a game. People get too caught up in games that are survival and represent "realistic" scenarios, and completely forget that this is also a GAME. Adding disabilities in the game would only be a short-lived interesting/meme aspect. People would get sick of it very quick. It's also such a pointless game mechanic that it will lead to more people requesting endless silly and irrelevant features, as we have already seen with wanting intersex babies.

The game is only a 1 hour life, characters should stay relatively simple. It's the environment that should grow complex. Personally I'd delete the game if it had such a feature, because I've watched games implement irrelevant fan-base ideas before and it always leads to a snowballing effect that ruins the game.

ameliewilde · 2018-03-10 06:20:29

I really hate to have to discuss this issue in the context of this game. It sounds wrong, and it can have strong negative effects on a person who has disabilities in real life. But I will try to explain my view without upsetting anyone.

We cannot discuss this in terms of the freedom and abundance we have in the modern world. The stage we are at in this game (and probably will remain in, as Jason doesn't want players to get too comfortable) is more in line with stone and iron age, where people would not care for disabled members of the society as much as we do now. This is a world where personality or intellectual qualities don't have much value.

Where food is scarce and physical labor is your only commodity, unfortunately few people would make the effort to take care of a person which cannot give anything back to the community, because the things one can give back (which will entail carrying stuff around and moving as fast as possible) requires two hands and feet.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2018-03-08 16:26:06

[Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#2 2018-03-08 16:31:55

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#3 2018-03-08 16:45:46

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#4 2018-03-08 16:48:56

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#5 2018-03-08 16:52:48

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#6 2018-03-08 17:01:58

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#7 2018-03-08 17:02:35

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#8 2018-03-08 17:13:21

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#9 2018-03-08 17:19:20

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#10 2018-03-08 17:22:54

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#11 2018-03-08 17:27:52

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#12 2018-03-08 17:35:28

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#13 2018-03-08 17:37:33

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#14 2018-03-08 17:38:47

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#15 2018-03-08 17:47:10

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#16 2018-03-08 17:48:29

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#17 2018-03-08 18:04:00

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#18 2018-03-08 21:13:49

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#19 2018-03-09 12:10:13

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#20 2018-03-09 13:07:20

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#21 2018-03-09 13:32:06

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#22 2018-03-09 22:16:54

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

#23 2018-03-10 06:20:29

Re: [Suggestion] Birth Defects/Disability

Board footer