Your first grief?

DestinyCall · 2020-11-26 08:22:22

Yeah, you are probably right. Have a good Thanksgiving.

jord1990 · 2020-11-26 16:21:10

I was sleeping, theyre banned now. The reason this thread is still open is that the thread itself isn't inherently bad. Sure you might disagree with the content of the OP but thats not close worthy.

I'd rather teach people that ignoring a thread you fully disagree with is an option. Otherwise I'm going to be closing threads and banning people everytime someone shares their "controversial" view.

So again please, don't waste your life arguing with strangers on the Internet. Thanks in advance.

PeaGirl · 2020-11-26 21:51:10

This isn't technically first time someone doesn't agree with me.
I do understand that this thread itself doesn't do bad,
but I didn't consider that some people are overly sensitive over this game to the point that this thread turned into a salt festival.
I did say once that if this could be locked, since I don't want people to get upset,
although I see no reason to be upset for example 1 year old grief from God knows which family.
If possible, lock this thread, I never come back to this forum since seems my topics are that bad.

Eve Troll · 2020-11-26 22:09:40

Griefing in general is probably the most explosive topic surrounding the game. Any thread promoting its discussion will likely end up like this. Though personally i dont think your intent with the thread was bad. This subject will always attract folks on the far end of both viewpoints to clash.

Tea · 2020-11-26 22:45:51

Spoonwood wrote:

The game was NOT better in the old days, because player killing was easier. In terms of interpersonal relations it was worse, because one had to be more suspicious of someone wanting to use a tool like a knife or a bow and arrow. If your son asked you for a knife in the old days that you carried in your backpack, you'd sure as heck be smart to feel suspicious and ask them why they wanted the knife. These days, if one would carry a knife and one's son asked for a knife, or a bow and arrow, sure they might abuse it. But, there would be some warning of their intentions if you kept an eye on him. Additionally, he might try to use the knife to kill someone and cause no more than annoyance which can get ignored, and if he's a lone wolf playing stabby-stabby, he may well get ignored. And those tools have good uses, of course, like cutting bread, killing wolves, and killing bears, etc. So much the better.
It ends up incorrect to say the old days were better in respect of interpersonal relations because of the ease of player killing, because of the concepts suggested by say the top of the page "a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building". Or the steam advertisement:
"A multiplayer survival game of parenting and civilization building. Get born to another player as your mother. Live an entire life in one hour. Have babies of your own in the form of other players. Leave a legacy for the next generation as you help to rebuild civilization from scratch. Updated weekly."
When player killing wasn't as hard, the game worked out as further from what that implies than how things are now.
If you still want to claim the old days 'better', because player killing was easier, then you would do best to state the grounds for why you think such better.

Spoonwood, I disagree with you at some points.

Let me offer you my point of view on why the "old days" were in some ways better and more fun. You see, when I first played this game, people died instantly when bitten by a snake, boar or bear or even killed by a knife. We were paranoid going behind trees because the chances of there being a snake behind it was pretty high. When killed by a knife or arrow, there wasn't even a pile of bones in a pool of blood, you just drop dead.
When your mom gave you a name, you had to try and remember it because names and family names didn't even exist yet. Baskets were decaying and carrots that were stored in them, were thrown on empty tiles as soon as they did. It was the wild west back then.

After the death delay and pads being added into the game, that's when the real fun happened. People were stabbed when they ran into a person who tried to put down their knife in the same tile. If your family didn't believe you that it was an accident, you were killed instantly. If I remember correctly, griefers were more like serial killers back then. You had the occasional sheep murdering and tool steeling, but most of the times people were knifed. Usually outside of town, hiding behind a tree and stabbing the first person that came in their sight. If you were lucky, the wounded was able to catch his attackers name and all men and some women went out hunting for the murderer while the younger ones made more pads. Once the serial killer was caught and killed, the town would still tell the story of how they stopped the griefer for years. They would tell the story to their kids and their grand-kids.

Tools and food were going missing ? The town became more vigilant and looked around for suspicious activities, letting others know who they suspected to be the culprit. Brothers saving their little sisters to safe the family line after a killing spree of a murderous group. You were born to a girl who survived an attack from outside of town and who was trying to keep her family line alive. Or you were born into a town that was build in a jungle or had a huge garden full of mango trees.

Compared to the life I have lived the last time I've played, those lives were more exciting and each one of them was different. Now you are restricted by your race and biomes, killing someone takes ages or is impossible if they have too many followers even if they are exiled. Families and towns don't last long enough to even leave a legacy behind.

Stealing, murdering, lying, betrayal, etc. (all things that people consider as griefing by the way) can be found in any civilization at any time. So why not in a game who's main goal is to build a civilization with other players. Why not have all the elements that surrounds a civilization.

Spoonwood wrote:

hailerm wrote:
the ppl will get bored easily just farming and cooking ...
I get bored of hearing this lie, especially from people who won't farm or cook. You're just prejudiced against those activities, and lack the creativity to make them fun. I mean, what else can one surmise when one ridiculously claims that there's nothing to do in DonkeyTown, and won't even do those things when there's hardly anyone around to get in your way from doing them.

I got bored doing the same tasks in a town over and over again. How can you possibly say that someone is lying about how they feel when playing the game. Just because you don't get bored doesn't mean that others don't too.

Spoonwood wrote:

hailerm wrote:
... so that what the "griefers" do make this game more fun for all ...
Another falsehood. And it's even worse in that it seems that you actually believe this one in spite of counter evidence. You think people have more fun when they feel stressed out and try to stop you? You went on a low pop server, and people weren't happy with your behavior. You even said to someone, or it was your friend Rey, but I'm guessing it was you, "you are boring to kill". You should have taken that as a clue that you were NOT making the game more fun for all.
Either that or you're straight up lying about why you did such. And if so, then you've failed to answer the question meaningfully.

I agree that not everyone wants to play a stressful game (like hunting down or stopping griefers) but some people, like me, do. To reiterate, there are people with bad intentions in every civilization, so why shouldn't those people play that role in this game. Again, just because you feel a certain way doesn't mean that it applies to everybody.

That being said, I do agree that killing back in the days was too easy and skilled killers were able to get away with murdering an entire town. People who wanted to build and see their town and family thrive were rightfully angry and frustrated. However, some people were telling Jason to fix the griefing "issue" by banning them entirely from the game, adding the curse system, etc. I would have loved to see a justice system put into place, giving us players the necessary tools to capture and bring them to justice for their action. It's a part of civilization as well, setting up order by putting up laws and punishments. Not relying on a single all-mighty man to fix our issues.

Spoonwood · 2020-11-26 23:50:10

Tea wrote:

Let me offer you my point of view on why the "old days" were in some ways better and more fun. You see, when I first played this game, people died instantly when bitten by a snake, boar or bear or even killed by a knife. We were paranoid going behind trees because the chances of there being a snake behind it was pretty high. When killed by a knife or arrow, there wasn't even a pile of bones in a pool of blood, you just drop dead.
When your mom gave you a name, you had to try and remember it because names and family names didn't even exist yet. Baskets were decaying and carrots that were stored in them, were thrown on empty tiles as soon as they did. It was the wild west back then.

Less exploration of the landscape was possible because of instant death. No one could conceivably get healed. I don't see how baskets decaying like that was better. I don't see anything better there.

Tea wrote:

Families and towns don't last long enough to even leave a legacy behind.

I think families last longer than they did for most of the time periods you've described.

Tea wrote:

Stealing, murdering, lying, betrayal, etc. (all things that people consider as griefing by the way) can be found in any civilization at any time. So why not in a game who's main goal is to build a civilization with other players. Why not have all the elements that surrounds a civilization.

Those things best not get encouraged and get discouraged, because those things aren't about civilization building or parenting. They aren't about rebuilding civilization from scratch. They are inconsistent with the concepts that Jason has said this game is about. Also, those things still exist in game, as I've seen some of them recently, and will necessarily exist, because of human nature. But, There's a world of difference between encouraging those things and them happening sometimes.

We all end up better off to recognize bad things as bad. When/if we start viewing stealing, murdering, lying, and betrayal as good in a game, we can become confused with respect to good moral judgment. Encouraging those things to exist in a game thus encourages the failure of our moral judgments. And that isn't good for us. I think also, that a necessary part of real civilization building also is good moral judgment.

Tea wrote:

I got bored doing the same tasks in a town over and over again.

Alright. Why not go to another town then?

Tea wrote:

How can you possibly say that someone is lying about how they feel when playing the game.

Because Hailerm has said some other things which indicate those feelings as not his true feelings, or more complex than he realizes at least.

Tea wrote:

To reiterate, there are people with bad intentions in every civilization, so why shouldn't those people play that role in this game.

Because they aren't playing the game consistent with its concepts as advertised and described, and they actively hinder those trying to play the game consistent with its concepts as advertised and described. Why should people play a multiplayer game, when they aren't trying to play in a multiplayer fashion with cooperative play, but instead trying to thwart any real or significant multiplayer playing of that game? How could there exist a *real* multiplayer game with bad actors running amok and the power to destroy the multiplayer nature of that game so well?

Last I checked, we don't call criminals civilized. Likewise it makes no sense at all to treat destructive players as if they were civilized. It seems to me that you treat destructive players as civilized by saying that they have some role in the game. That seems to me like a failure in moral judgment, because bad behavior should clearly get recognized as bad. Likewise, Jason talking about griefers having a role in this game indicates a serious failing in moral judgment on his part, because it's treating bad actions as if they were actually good.

Tea wrote:

However, some people were telling Jason to fix the griefing "issue" by banning them entirely from the game, adding the curse system, etc. I would have loved to see a justice system put into place, giving us players the necessary tools to capture and bring them to justice for their action.

That might have been interesting with complex and difficult decisions for players. But also, justice systems in the real world reserve the right to the harshest penalties. Players would likewise need the right to reserve to the harshest penalty, permanent banning from the game on all public servers. Unless I've misunderstood something, Jason doesn't even have that right, because he didn't have an end user license agreement when he started selling access to his servers and still doesn't have one. And he says "Lifetime server account" on onehouronelife.com. So a player driven justice system, just couldn't happen, or he'd have even more serious problems with honesty.

Eve Troll · 2020-11-27 02:44:01

Honestly i agree with a lot of teas points. The game isnt about building a utopia from scratch. Building this world without murder and griefers doesnt exist. And civilization is full of griefers, why should the game be any different?

The point about griefing being pretty much just random stabbings in the past was spot on. Now we have one of the most boring, destructive, and annoying forms of griefing. Back in the day if you were quick on your feet you could survive a killer. It felt triumphant overcoming them. Now its just, "oh no, someone stole the truck and all the oil".

I really dont get why people had such a problem with the killing elements. It was easy to deal with. And as tea mentions there was a certain point where it worked. It mirrored society and was driven by player behavior. Now its just driven by game mechanics. Everything that has been added to control player behavior has just made things more boring imo. Language, biome restrictions, memescore, leadership, and the kill mechanics.

The rift was more dynamic. It sucked being stuck in a box, but families and towns were given the time and opportunity to grow in character. Families would invade towns pushing the original fams into a nomadic lifestyle for a few generations till they settled again. These were interesting lives. Lives that dont exist anymore due to in game mechanics that block diversity.

NoTruePunk · 2020-11-27 06:40:31

Eve Troll wrote:

The rift was more dynamic. It sucked being stuck in a box, but families and towns were given the time and opportunity to grow in character. Families would invade towns pushing the original fams into a nomadic lifestyle for a few generations till they settled again. These were interesting lives. Lives that dont exist anymore due to in game mechanics that block diversity.

That still happens. And if families were more stable reproductively and less resource stable late game then elective migrations east might happen, which would be remarkable.

Eve Troll · 2020-11-27 06:53:56

I meant like conflict driven hardships. Those dont happen, and its still impossible to invade another families territory and take it over. Being the last surviving female of your slaughtered bloodline carried emotions and feelings that dont exist in this game anymore. You held a resentment towards that family, a duty to future generations, and this ambition that you would one day take back your homeland in the name of your family.

The only hardships we face these days are technical ones. Emotional hardships hardly exist anymore.

Spoonwood · 2020-11-27 08:04:39

Eve Troll wrote:

Building this world without murder and griefers doesnt exist. And civilization is full of griefers, why should the game be any different?

In order to play a social game with other people, you and the other people have to play by the same moral code. Destructive players aren't playing by the same moral code, and in the worst cases have no moral code whatsoever. The game thus should be different as it can be, because that way it remains or could become a social game and possibly even have real teamwork.

Why should griefers be allowed to play the game? They aren't looking to play the game in what its spirit should be, whatever that could be. So what if they exist in civilization? Civilization takes steps to lessen or minimize the effects of that behavior. It develops systems so that behavior becomes less likely. Or at least a good civilization would do so. Keeping serial destructive players around works the opposite way. It makes that behavior more likely, more effectively, and shows how morally corrupt the game is, and has been from its foundations. It ensures that the game isn't art, and is just a bunch of code that people use.

Eve Troll wrote:

I really dont get why people had such a problem with the killing elements. It was easy to deal with.

As a one hour one life game, the game has a permadeath feature. Before healing, one was just dead. There was NO way to deal with such killing, one's character was just dead. I don't think people find making pads easy initially. And then some destructive players learned how to corrupt the healing process. And if a camp doesn't have pads, there's no way to deal with the killing elements once affected by them, if one is playing the character. One's character is just dead. In many cases the killing elements aren't easy to deal with. In many cases the killing elements are impossible to deal with for characters and their players.

Eve Troll · 2020-11-27 08:58:40

Those were the heartbreaking emotional hardships i was talking about. Seeing someone die and feeling the helplessness of standing there with a needle and thread but no pads teaches a lesson that would stick with you forever. It is very clear there are people who play this game who want to live in a perfect world. Im sorry to break it to you but a perfect world does not exist. Even if it did, it would be boring.

Games that seem 'perfect' have rigid structures around them that limit freedom and diversity. It limits the human elements that are really the only interesting parts of this game. You might not agree with me about the kill mechanics. But im sure you see how biome restrictions have limited diversity. All elements that have been added to limit freedom and force behavior reduce the diversity of experiences. In an attempt to make the game more diverse it has instead made it more monotonous and restricted. Kill mechanics are no exception. There is no "getting rid" of griefers so folks who think thats an option should just give up because its not happening. 2hol is a good alternative if you have a problem with that. All these kill mechanics have done is push griefers into a different zone. There will always be a new zone and it will likely be more annoying and destructive than the last. Currently i hate the resource griefing, ill take people trying to kill me and chase me around any day. Its insanely easy to outrun people if they dont have help. I mean seriously, you cant delete your problems and jason has given way to much leeway to the concept of it. At this point he might as well remove killing. What i have seen, is people cursing way more than the used to. People used to just stab people who irritated them and only cursed people they had serious problems with. Now you get cursed for minor stuff willy nilly because its the only power people have over each other. Old system was better. Tea was never saying insta killing was good, they only brought it up in reference and talked about the progression of the killing mechanics, highlighting the time period they thought it was best.

Last edited by Eve Troll (2020-11-27 09:09:30)

Spoonwood · 2020-11-27 16:30:02

Eve Troll wrote:

It is very clear there are people who play this game who want to live in a perfect world.

When I think about this it strikes me as odd. With a world where one goes in knowing that one is going to inevitably die, and the same will happen to everyone else, how would the world ever be perfect?

Eve Troll wrote:

It limits the human elements that are really the only interesting parts of this game.

I find this very strange to hear from someone who has spent a significant amount of time pumping oil on bs2 and playing in a low pop context, often enough by himself.

Eve Troll wrote:

But im sure you see how biome restrictions have limited diversity.

The putting of deserts, tundras, and jungles in mountain biomes only was biome restrictions. The changing of character abilities with at least 15 players on a server were race restrictions. Yes, biome restrictions limited diversity. The temperature overhaul also involved biome restrictions, in that they could no longer have interactive effects with each others. Yes, those biome restrictions limited diversity. Specialty biomes also got restricted in terms of what could grow in them. And that limited diversity also.

Eve Troll wrote:

There will always be a new zone and it will likely be more annoying and destructive than the last.

Yes, and that's a reason why it would be better if serial destructive players got banned.

Eve Troll wrote:

Now you get cursed for minor stuff willy nilly because its the only power people have over each other. Old system was better.

Willy nilly cursing can at least sometimes get undone fairly simply and quickly. On the other hand your baby getting eaten by a bear or stabbed by some jerk can't or comes as complicated and difficult to undo.

Eve Troll · 2020-11-27 17:06:43

In a cut throat world about surviving it makes sense there would be risk of your family dying or some lunatic trying to kill you and your family. Death is the easiest thing to undo, you just click respawn. In comparison cursing is pretty hard to undo. If someone is serial griefing sure, it deserves a curse, but cursing because someone named their kid or just because they were suspicious of you doesnt warrant a curse and honestly would prefer to be stabbed over it. Ive seen people randomly throw accusations around and have everyone in town curse them with no evidence by them saying "curse this person, they did this". Might as well just stab them and be done with it vs a potential 90 day ban.

I stand by my statements. A lot of these restrictions remove a lot of emotion from the game. Sure i play low pop, but mainly because i like to see my collective effort last longer than a few days. You can really stretch the potential of late game and have full ability to experiment and learn without risk. Plus i really only started playing there after tool slots and biome restrictions. I dont like restrictions.

That being said, the main issue i have with bs2 in its current state is that its grown monotonous and everything goes away faster than its made. The restrictions have turned what used to be exhilarating and unique lives full of drama and conflict into just doing tech to have it vanish. Even towns you invest in will likely be gone in a day or two. Even though we were stuck in a box, the rift gave more precedence to towns. Often towns could survive through updates and you could really see them grow into powerhouse cities. Your effort wasnt lost and made a huge impact in the long haul. That first eve camp could turn into a fortress and house many different families throughout the arc, even into the next one. This is impossible now. Towns are race restricted and the forward push west by spawns makes resettling nearly impossible, unless you want to set yourself up to be at a disadvantage.

Killing really wasnt a big deal. Sure it could be annoying, but it made for memorable lives and it gave griefer types something they enjoyed without it being overly destructive. Now all we get is people sabotaging the well and disabling a town and killing it through tech. Incredibly boring if you ask me and ide rather just go toe to toe with them with weapons than have to spend most of my life cleaning up the mess they left behind. I had a lot of difficult and harrowing lives during the rift, and before the rift. I dont think a warsword level of killing is good. But the current system is almost as bad imo.

There was this perfect point in the rift. Before tool slots, where if the rift was taken down the game would be almost perfect imo.

No iron change, no tool slots, no memescore, no homeland, no biome restrictions, no hierarchy, no kill restrictions, no generational food decay, no tap out range for oil or water, no eve restrictions.

It was pure freedom, and just your family and survival. I would take that game inside the rift any day over what we have now. Sure it came with dealing with people trying to kill each other from time to time, but for me, thats a small price to pay.

Last edited by Eve Troll (2020-11-27 17:09:29)

Spoonwood · 2020-11-27 17:23:43

Eve Troll wrote:

There was this perfect point in the rift. Before tool slots, where if the rift was taken down the game would be almost perfect imo.

Wasn't there something like a trail of babies following moms at the end of the Rift sometimes? I found this post and its link: https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=8215

Eve Troll · 2020-11-27 18:03:55

Yea that was because the rift wasnt optimized for an apoc tower to trigger. So everyone died thinking they could eve after it. But the eve window didnt open and the remaining moms were flooded with babies. Or maybe it was just because it was my blood that triggered that apoc, who knows.

Dodge · 2020-11-27 18:41:40

It's really too bad that Jason took a shortcut on the limited map idea and made it into a rift box, even though the rift had some of the most interesting lives, engaging, challenging etc, it also had some of the worse due to being a tiny box, had it been different it would have been a success and half of the weird mechanic that we have currently would have no reason to be.

Jason knows that the current stuff is not the best but it's still something, the best that you could think off in that moment in other words.

Solving these issues like why the game has no trade, is not that easy as you would think, so using a forced mechanic so players exchange comes as one possible solution, not the best but still something.

Pretty hard to convince him to remove all these mechanics that he spent a lot of time making to replace them with something that creates these situations without needing them.

Sunk cost fallacy

I really hope he puts them into question and changes them for something else, because currently the game has never been so boring and each time i launch it i remember why i dont play it anymore.

Eve Troll · 2020-11-27 18:47:35

Couldnt agree more dodge.

DestinyCall · 2020-11-27 20:25:23

The rift had its own set of problems and I am glad it was removed. It is easy to remember the past through rose-colored glass. Life in the rift was hella repetitive and the arcs were very short. Nothing lasted and you could expect everything to be wrecked and awful within a day or two, because the box was too small and griefing was rampant. Many people were very unhappy with rift gameplay and with good reason. It was "different" and "dramatic" but it lacked a lot of what I love about OHOL. You can only have your entire family eaten by bears so many times before it gets kinda boring and predictable.

That being said, there were some good things about the rift that could have been leveraged into interesting new game mechanics - like the idea of using geographic barriers (oceans/mountains) as a way of restricting or defining different regions to allow for easier long-distance navigation and to make the open map feel less repetitive and endless. Prior to the rift, I rarely traveled outside of town or went long distances, because a thousand tiles felt really really far away. After the rift, I knew that I could actually run a long distance in just 15 minutes and it changed how I viewed my game space. Although I found the rigid cube-shape unnatural and off-putting, I liked that I could use the rift edges to orient myself to the rift and navigate around without a map. In a randomly generated open world, that is impossible. Banded geography does something similar, at least along one axis. I see that as a positive, since it gives people more options and helps them understand where they are in the game world, which can be super helpful.

Unfortunately, I feel like the wrong lessons were learned from the rift "experiement" and instead of evolving into something more interesting, development has ended up stuck in a rut lately.

Biome restrictions are definitely an example of sunk-cost fallacy. They haven't really worked from the beginning in my opinion, and building more mechanics around them hasn't made them any better, just harder to get rid of. At this point we are "stuck" with them, because I can't see Jason taking them out completely after trying so hard to make this method get the results he wants. It would feel like throwing away a year of progress, even if it made the game better and opened up new avenues for advancement.

Dodge · 2020-11-28 13:49:58

DestinyCall wrote:

It is easy to remember the past through rose-colored glass.

Everyone can have their opinion, you have your own, dont need to dismiss others.

DestinyCall · 2020-11-28 15:44:55

I am not dismissing your views. Just sharing my own.

People will often talk about how the game was much better in the past, but they forget that at the time, we had many of the same complaints that we are facing now. Boredom, repetitive game-play, excessive griefing, etc. This game has struggled with giving players a clear purpose beyond raw survival for a long time. Once we reach a stable town state, things quickly start to fall apart.

Some issues have gotten better or worse, thanks to various updates and new mechanics, but many of these core issues are largely unchanged despite the passage of time.

Dodge · 2020-11-28 16:14:07

Sure

Eve Troll · 2020-11-28 17:43:36

Planting outside of biomes though?

Dodge · 2020-11-28 22:18:38

In the rift when you reached top tech level you had something to do, other villages where trying to invade you to steal your ressources and you had to protect your village.

But now there's nothing, it's extremly boring, nothing happens.

I will admit that it was exagerated due to being a tiny box but still much more interesting than currently, i would take being killed by invaders over dying of boredom anytime in this game.

Destiny you want this game to be like stardew valley or some crafting simulator but this isn't what this game is about and by saying this i'm dismissing every point you make and everything you say by categorizing you as someone who is out of alignement and should rather play another game instead of trying to make this one into some PG stuff where everyone has to be forced nice to each other or they get banned.

The same way you dismissed my statements on the past game by categorizing them as nostalgia "rose-colored glass" instead of an accurate desciption of how my experience of the game was.

Obviously not serious about the last two paragraphs but now you get it.

NoTruePunk · 2020-11-29 11:34:40

Eve Troll wrote:

I meant like conflict driven hardships. Those dont happen, and its still impossible to invade another families territory and take it over. Being the last surviving female of your slaughtered bloodline carried emotions and feelings that dont exist in this game anymore. You held a resentment towards that family, a duty to future generations, and this ambition that you would one day take back your homeland in the name of your family.
The only hardships we face these days are technical ones. Emotional hardships hardly exist anymore.

I'm telling you that still happens. It might not be frequent, but I personally have been born to the sole refugee of a mother fleeing war. She posted us up in a dead town far away where the waring Carrols wouldn't find us. It was a shithole, and convincing everyone to move back after the war was over took quite a bit of work.

Eve Troll · 2020-11-29 12:06:43

Good to hear it happens occasionally. I really miss the harrowing elements of this game. They used to be prevalent in almost every life, especially in the rift. Sure it was stressful but it gave a dynamic to the game that has since been lost. Griefers also rarely griefed in they way they do now. They had many different avenues to grief that didnt have extreme impacts on the overall survivability of a town or family. Knicks and bruises vs going straight for the jugular. Its a lot more satisfying to get beaten down then stand up and overcome that hardship. There isnt anything satifying about having a town disabled within a generation that results in hours of recovery just to get back to the state it was in before the damage. If the ginger town gets hit and the supply of oil is disabled it basically kills late game for the server. None of that is satisfying.

As dodge mentions there are some folks who would prefer this game to just be exclusively a cooperative and friendly experience. Those kinds of systems only work in single player games, or games with such rigid structures any ability for people to be disruptive are disabled. But even then people find exploits and holes to dig into.

Given how much this game is ruled by the human element and given the amount of access players have to the fabric of the game i dont see that ever happening. Think about human civilization, has the world ever existed where it ran exclusively upon cooperation and friendliness? Expecting that to change in this game is like expecting humans to change, its a nice thought but we do have to accept the world we live in and do our best to survive. In my perspective all of the mechanics that have been added to control or promote behavior have only make things worse, more destructive, and boring. I hope we can see the game return to a place where the human elements of this game are not filtered or suppressed by mechanics anymore.

When i used to have an upsetting life, it would remind me of some element of society that has occured in the past. Wars, slavery, betrayal, murder, raids, bandits, being a refugee, etc. As upsetting as those lives could be, they gave me a unique experience and a look into the psyche of what it would feel like to live in those circumstances. That isnt part of the game anymore. And there are abundant elements that have no tie to reality while disabling those older harrowing elements. Stuff like leadership, kill mechanics, homeland, biome restrictions, and previously tool slots.

One day i hope to see the human element set free.
https://youtu.be/xpXabRngjho

Last edited by Eve Troll (2020-11-29 17:17:05)

One Hour One Life Forums

#76 2020-11-26 08:22:22

Re: Your first grief?

#77 2020-11-26 16:21:10

Re: Your first grief?

#78 2020-11-26 21:51:10

Re: Your first grief?

#79 2020-11-26 22:09:40

Re: Your first grief?

#80 2020-11-26 22:45:51

Re: Your first grief?

#81 2020-11-26 23:50:10

Re: Your first grief?

#82 2020-11-27 02:44:01

Re: Your first grief?

#83 2020-11-27 06:40:31

Re: Your first grief?

#84 2020-11-27 06:53:56

Re: Your first grief?

#85 2020-11-27 08:04:39

Re: Your first grief?

#86 2020-11-27 08:58:40

Re: Your first grief?

#87 2020-11-27 16:30:02

Re: Your first grief?

#88 2020-11-27 17:06:43

Re: Your first grief?

#89 2020-11-27 17:23:43

Re: Your first grief?

#90 2020-11-27 18:03:55

Re: Your first grief?

#91 2020-11-27 18:41:40

Re: Your first grief?

#92 2020-11-27 18:47:35

Re: Your first grief?

#93 2020-11-27 20:25:23

Re: Your first grief?

#94 2020-11-28 13:49:58

Re: Your first grief?

#95 2020-11-28 15:44:55

Re: Your first grief?

#96 2020-11-28 16:14:07

Re: Your first grief?

#97 2020-11-28 17:43:36

Re: Your first grief?

#98 2020-11-28 22:18:38

Re: Your first grief?

#99 2020-11-29 11:34:40

Re: Your first grief?

#100 2020-11-29 12:06:43

Re: Your first grief?

Board footer