Rethinking the player's role in the game

jasonrohrer · 2019-06-04 22:34:18

This game has a big metaphysical problem: what is the player, exactly, in the midst of this endless reincarnation?

A wise soul? And what is the player's goal across lives, as they move from body to body, and situation to situation? Obviously, they can get better and better at the game, and help each subsequent family more and more, by why would they want to?

These are on-the-ground gameplay problems.

But they are related to the artistic and aesthetic aspects of the game. How does the game feel? How does saying goodbye feel at the end of a good life? I'm not talking about at the end of your 10,000th life, but if you think back to when you first started playing and lived a really good life. It obviously doesn't affect everyone the same way, and of course it wears off with repeated exposure, but at least some players feel something profound there. And across multiple lives, there's a sense of meaninglessness. The sands of time wear everything down to dust. Percy B. Shelley said it best:

I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

The game is supposed to, at least in part, feel a little bit like that. So we have each life being unique and fleeting, the inability to continue projects across lives, and the ultimate impermanence of everything you do in the game, long-term.

Of course, those aesthetic goals fight with on-the-ground gameplay concerns. Games that have specific aesthetic goals often have this problem, because player's motivations are what turn the aesthetic engine in the first place.

For example, if you don't really care, and everything is meaningless, why would you bother building a statue that will eventually be turned into dust? The statue turning into dust only works as aesthetic content if someone was motivated to build it in the first place.

As a very specific example, we can see how the "every life is different" goal and "death is goodbye" enable the super-annoying repeat /DIE behavior. (to the tune of 5000+ dead babies a day.... I don't even know how many dumpsters would be sufficient). Hey, if every life is different, and death is goodbye, then you can reroll by dying. Furthermore, you have an inherent lack of investment in this life, so why not? You don't lose anything. But then we get to the point where more than half the babies born in the game /DIE.

The excessive /DIE behavior highlights a fundamental problem with the game, and I believe that problem is deeply related to the player's role in the metaphysics of the game.

If a player was specifically connected to this family, and then necessarily this life (because wasting a life in this family would hurt this family), then suicide would no longer be a problem.

But connecting a player to one family (which I've toyed with before) undercuts the "real goodbye" aesthetic and also, likely the "every life is different" promise.

I've also toyed with a player being connected to a gene, and the spread and survival of that gene. Thus, it's not one family, specifically, but the player's gene pool. Getting born chews up a bit of that gene pool, and dying early, before reproducing, doesn't re-spread those genes.

But what is the benefit of widely-spread genes?

It seems like, maybe, they serve as tickets for that player into a wider variety of potential birth situations in the future. Small gene pool means low variety. Large gene pool means high variety. This would also encourage migration, back-to-the-landing, etc, to spread genes far and wide into different situations.

A player who had spread themselves far and wide might be tempted to /DIE to pick their situation, but doing that would chew up the valuable resource that they spent time in past lives to achieve.

A player who chewed up their entire gene pool this way would eventually stick themselves in one situation permanently, until they leveraged that situation to spread out more.

The way this might work is thus:

1. If you have no genes left in the game, a mother is chosen for you and given your gene.

2. When you get born, all fertile mothers who have your gene are possibilities (using the normal fertility weighting, perhaps).

3. When you are born to a mother, your gene is removed from her, unless she is the last fertile woman on the server with your gene (in that case, she keeps it). This means that your forthcoming brothers and sisters won't have your gene (though elder brothers and sisters will)

4. Whenever a mother has a baby, the baby gets all the mother's carried genes, plus the genes carried by the nearest adult male character (with some distance cut-off).

This is a little half-baked, but I'm just trying to sketch out an idea of how this might work.

lychee · 2019-06-04 22:38:31

Repost

lychee wrote:

I'm fairly fond of this general idea (and the other variants that have been proposed in the past). xD
--------
((Don't read beyond this point if you have better things to do)):
I've always been sort of intrigued by the premise of what if the objective of OHOL was the complete opposite of the way Jason designed it. Like: the *only* way to play the game is to be reborn as your own grandchild++. If you failed to have any descendants, there'd be no way you could spawn into the multiplayer server until after some time period reset (in the mean time, you'd have to kill time on a local singleplayer server or a "chill donkeytown" server, maybe with a better "campaign" and some "AI"), after which point you'd never ever see that old family/town again.
It wouldn't be like "Minecraft" (as Jason often says he'd like to avoid) because having a living chain of descendants is pretty hard (in OHOL, lots of family branches die out all the time) and takes a lot of time/energy to raise a kid. In all likelihood, your chain will die out sooner or later.
Instead, there would be a powerful motivation to ensure that your kid(s) do well. You would *want* to teach your kids everything, from avoiding mosquitos or standing on items during a bear attack, how to run a diesel pump, or how to make pads. You'd *want* to help see your son get married, you'd be happy to see grandchildren, and you'd *want* to leave some kind of inheritance/property to your kids and grandkids.
You'd probably want your own kids to do better than your cousin's kids.
If a town is going up in flames, you might put your own family ahead of the rest of the town. Maybe you'll take a wagon and jump ship before it's too late, and look for greener pastures along with your kids. It'd just be you, your spouse (same objective/goals as you), and your children in a household.
It'd be a different feeling to the game, I wonder?

lychee · 2019-06-04 22:42:10

In all seriousness, I think it’s a cool idea — although maybe it might be better to try it as an official mod or fork of the game?

It’s a pretty hefty change if you’re serious about it, so rather than taking OHOL through a rollercoaster of crazy things, I’m sure you’d find a bunch of players willing to test out an unconventional mechanic.

If it seems to work out well, maybe roll it after that point?

Valareos · 2019-06-04 22:43:12

I see one potential misuse.

You will start having some males do nothing but hang around the town's fire (like right on top of a woman there), or following a female constantly and doing nothing else, for the single purpose of spreading his genes.

I like the idea in general though

dankm00dy · 2019-06-04 22:58:21

I think this proposal is interesting but PLEASE consider that there is a portion of the player base that don't want to be forced into advanced cities. I was just fine with the system before war swords and natural springs, but I fear this is where the game is going (maybe I am wrong though). I put a lot of hours into this game because I enjoyed Eveing and being a part of new civilizations. I was told that I could choose the life I want to live. This is what kept me playing so long.

Advanced cities are, no offense, extremely boring to a lot of people. Maybe they aren't vocal on the forums, but I promise we certainly exist. I will play an advanced city every now and then, but I do not want to feel like I am stuck in a life just so I can MAYBE get an early civilization later.

Some people loved the flexibility they had over the lives they live. Sometimes I can only play for an hour at a time, I don't want to hope it's actually a life I will have fun in.

Last edited by dankm00dy (2019-06-04 22:59:59)

Valareos · 2019-06-04 23:10:18

If the trouble is /die babies trying to be Eve, then perhaps a solution for the short term is having a "Past Life" Score

+1 for every consecutive 10 years you live (so +6 for dying of old age)
-5 for every /die

And if you don't have 5 Past life score, you can't /die
Get a Past Life Score of 60 and you can choose to re-spawn as an Eve (for cost of 60 Past Life Score) using a /eve command on a 50 year old character (kills character, flags as eve for respawn)

This would of course be separate from the normal Eve Generation.

Kai · 2019-06-04 23:25:02

Not entirely sure I comprehend the genes thing fully. Most of the time I play the hand I'm dealt.

However, when I first started playing, not too long ago, one of the few things I lacked was those few instances where you'd get reborn into the same family you were an early generation of, and be able to see how far things have come, and see what became of your "projects", if anything. IMO this happens way too infrequently (naturally). Does this happening really diminish the "goodbye" and "every life is different" thing?
Everyone who was around at the time should be dead and things have changed so life will be different.

futurebird · 2019-06-04 23:47:54

I don't totally understand this idea. Is that that by having more decedents you have more options even beyond those descendants for places to be born? But since many of us kinda want to hang around the same family ... why would we want more options?

Or is it that you can still never go back but the potential choice you have increase if you have more decedents, even though you won't get to be one of those decedents?

I like the questions you raise, Jason, but I don't follow the mechanic you describe. It sounds kinda neat, but I don't totally get what's going on...

Spoonwood · 2019-06-04 23:55:51

jasonrohrer wrote:

The excessive /DIE behavior highlights a fundamental problem with the game, and I believe that problem is deeply related to the player's role in the metaphysics of the game.
If a player was specifically connected to this family, and then necessarily this life (because wasting a life in this family would hurt this family), then suicide would no longer be a problem.

I don't know how you can believe that.

Players intentionally don't eat or go killed by a wild animal to die.

Suicide is a problem in the real world in spite of people being connected to their family and their own life. No one really understands why it exists. The motivations of suicide in the real world are all over the place and can't get nailed down. It's not all that hard to accomplish. Suicide in any game doesn't have consequences like in real life. So, suicide in any game will happen more often than in real life. The motivations come as even more likely all over the place (no.. not everyone is /dying to become Eve necessarily or for any reason... players could be picky about their mother or something... or suicide could be happening by a bot for some reason).

jasonrohrer wrote:

A player who had spread themselves far and wide might be tempted to /DIE to pick their situation, but doing that would chew up the valuable resource that they spent time in past lives to achieve.

So what? What is the player's goal in the first place? I'm not asking what you want their goal to be, but rather what goal they have in the real world. Does someone come into their room unexpectedly and now they don't have time to play instead of playing? /die then happens.

Keyin · 2019-06-05 00:05:07

jasonrohrer wrote:

1. If you have no genes left in the game, a mother is chosen for you and given your gene.
2. When you get born, all fertile mothers who have your gene are possibilities (using the normal fertility weighting, perhaps).
3. When you are born to a mother, your gene is removed from her, unless she is the last fertile woman on the server with your gene (in that case, she keeps it). This means that your forthcoming brothers and sisters won't have your gene (though elder brothers and sisters will)
4. Whenever a mother has a baby, the baby gets all the mother's carried genes, plus the genes carried by the nearest adult male character (with some distance cut-off).

This is a little half-baked, but I'm just trying to sketch out an idea of how this might work.

My question for this is, how would twins/triplets/quads work? I presume the game would try to find a mother with all or as close to all as possible, and would just settle if there was none.

Also, this could disproportionately hurt Eve/early familes. It is easy for me to imagine a city where many people have all of the most common genes/players linked to them. Isolated low gen families would be limited to people who have no genes alive, so mostly just people who haven't played in a few days/new players/ people who spam DIE.

Established lines living in the metropolis would have access to all of the players eve/new families do AND active players, which would compound their yum/temp advantage.

Also, what if your gene gets pretty much fixed into the males on the server? You /DIE through all of the fertile females, but there's still old women and men of all ages with your gene? You might not be able to /DIE out of a family because a man with your genes keeps giving the women around your gene.

Last edited by Keyin (2019-06-05 00:35:18)

Tarr · 2019-06-05 00:22:37

There's definitely some ways to abuse the idea of having males rub off on women.

1.) Creepy Uncle Stan - Guys who just sort of stand around women in an attempt to be close enough to rub off their genes on babies. Basically imagine groups of guys just standing around in an attempt to make sure they can respawn back to a town in the future. Not sure I mentally like the idea of a bunch of old perverts trying to stand next to the baby fire instead of working.

2.) Sex Dungeon Simulator - Basically trap any number of toddlers and force feed them to keep them alive. Seems pretty easy to be the only male rubbing their genes off on the next generation if you've trapped a number of players in unescapable prisons. Basically catch children and release the children of your kidnapping victims. Baby snatching has a real upside when you can make sure you can come back in the future.

3.) Highlander mode - If you rub off your genes on the women around town then in your own best interest it doesn't ever make sense to have more than one alpha male. Basically either push out other males from the community or remove any actual competition. The only time it makes sense to keep another male around is if they're from an outside family and have your genes already from a previous life.

Maybe the system is good, maybe it's not. It's definitely able to be abused and I'm not sure in ways you want to push the community towards.

pein · 2019-06-05 00:39:32

well there is a connection between hours played and suicide

as i said to you multiple times, nerfs are not the answer, nerfs are needed for balance, but people will do what they want and if you force them into a corner they will not want to do what the others want from them rather die, quit, just to show they got a choice

you can push people better with rewards

now lets see the groups:
newbees who just bought the game
they don't know about suicide, they don't suicide
they don't have the experience to tell that this much soil and this much water wont sustain the people
the fact that they don't suicide wont change that that life will be boring, leaves a bad feeling behind
i still remember my first lifes where i was grinding hard to survive and everyone around me died

there was no tutorial and learning controls takes a while but after that it wasn't that hard to survive and rarely got a good life
and cant say that was a good experience

so choosing to die when people chosen a bad spot and were unable to help in any way, rather they even leach on you was a common thing to run away from them, also this people try to eve and that's not always a bad thing to stay and teach them , but gets boring fast

so separating very new people from this tasks, would be a good thing and they would likely enjoy a few lifes with similar skilled people to find out things for themselves

lets say 30-50 hours people shouldn't Eve and shouldn't born into higher generations

now this wont guarantee they learn much but maybe they learn to survive on their own in the wild, exploring and setting up cities
also this goal to reach 30 hours would feel like a reward

now setting limits like this, maybe 100 hours you can suicide once an hour, or 200 the ability to choose to be an Eve daily once
this would give more control to people who play more, and is a reward for playing the game

shopping for lifes where they got a farm at least can be understandable, like i remember how many times i had to die on bad parents who cant even plant carrots, and how good it was to see finally some farm so i can at least rely on food and don't have to start all over again from scratch while everyoen dies around me

similar is stacks of iron, i don't want every life to be the one to get iron, gets boring fast

similar to have sheep, i like to make pens but is understandable that people don't want to build that thing every life and then born somewhere and do it again

the main problem is that fun and tech doesn't always come together, a good game should provide more options over time so people would love to get into higher tech

otherwise i agree that being a male or having a wrong name or not having a backpack shouldn't be a reason to suicide, or that mother doesn't talk to you for straight 3 minutes and accept all your flaws and dump all her clothings on you

i seen people suicide for not naming them a specific way and i seen a player today who tried every dirty trick to convince others to give everything to her for her existence, like the crown from other lady, then when i asked other lady to test out the bug (you can wear an ingot by hammering your crown on you, around your neck)

the next step i wanted to test if i can stack another ingot on me so i can make a bell on my neck
she gave me, my daughter stole it and i was asking straight 3 minutes to give it to me back, and then tried to blackmail me to get another old shoe (i even offered my snake shoe, and she didn't wanted it, like i will go fishing to get back soemthing which never even belonged to her)
then she tried framing me to others that i want to kill her
well when she was loking for a bow that was enough to me to stab her

so the problem is that we don't really parenting, and people try to guilt us, frame us, or play nice until they get what they want and then they laugh on your face. or i seen streamers to kill their mom first. that doesn't feel nice even after 500 hours and you start dumping kids on the baby fire when you get killed by your 8 year old kid who you raised well, without doing or saying anything bad for him, also surprises you that they go against you so easy. so some sort of cotrol over your own kids, like disarming them or immobilize them would be nice. sure it could be abused but seems like people need some sort of motivation or fear of their parents simulated in game.

---------------------------

your genetic idea sounds good on paper
but i hardly understand how you can predict good or bad lifes and give them as reward or punishment
and with all the preferences going around, like Eve or not eve, low gen or high gen, low pop or high pop
rp or work, combat or peace, fences or mixed families. it's more like how much control you allow for their preferences, not what most people prefer. like if you force me to high gen high pop, i wont feel like a reward and i might sabotage by lives to get "punished" by intent.

ofc some sort of small bonuses sound good, some reward for staying in a bad life cause they asked you or try your best in a hard life instead of giving up.

so yeah, maybe if you got 10 genes A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K
you can spend 1-3 to get your preferred options, i think if people play one hour a day they should get some benefits like choosing a generation or gender
now if they suicide they lose genes so they cant choose next lifes, but if they live to older age, they can "spend" on a next life that they want to be a girl this time in a peaceful city with higher tech or Eve in the wild far from anyone
i would even accept curses for a gene , like you can curse every person who wronged you, and you lose a gene each but not multiple on same person
that has a cost
or erase some of your curses for a few genes, not al lbut up to 50% or very expensive so you cant fully afford

gender: that is very unbalanced toward females, like at least 65% of people die before age 20 if they are male, and if they pass the 20 min mark they more likely to live to old age
population: now im not sure about this, maybe not everyone prefers lower pop, this is something i would give it for free to choose by anyone
would solve a lot of problems
if a family or area has 0-5, 5-10, 10-15 pop it wont necessarily mean that it's eve camp or murder zone, but this reason can be understood
i never get why people want 30 people on a camp which sustains maybe 10, and they still don't work to feed them
peaceful area: no kills happened in range for last few hours
now the reverse can be a positive or neutral for some, but generally people want no conflicts also would make the game a bit more friendly for some
sure if you feel like combat and battle and high drama is for you or that earns you some genes then go on

genearation: now this wont say much as i was in an eve camp like place gen 62, so wont say much
age of buildings maybe better, cause sometimes new families go to old camps and it's deceivign for some

tech level: now this could be archieved with some sort of totem which is good to make by players, like if they got tools they can prove axe with a butt log, bowls with a bowl of water, shovel with a dug stone, etc.
sheep they can prove by placing fleece on the totem
now not sure why this totem would or should be helpful but would be a good indicator of what the camp looks like
maybe people who want to play could choose a totem to do so
but faking low level of civ would atttract and disappoint some people so this totems should be good to make or needed to make to advance
or some sort of snapshot of the city around the fire could be good enough for me to decide if i want or not to join them

the reproduction part is ok, like i would be happy if someone doesn't want to play but stays until her kid grows up , heck even feed berries to a granddaughter if she decides to stay
but of course male side you can just control age
and people would feel forced to stay then isn't the best mechanic
i could imagine some sort of behaviour that would earn points, like making 2 compost and getting 5 firewood near fire, get a few furs or make bowls and plates, then i don't care if they die, they were helpful
just i guess this sort of thing is hard to track, maybe completed recipes? but it wont help if they combine everything on sight
total clicks or clicks per minute or moving locations for items?

also not sure if living to age 20 to be a requirement is easy to do for some people so maybe this should come after a player has a few hours under his belt but i guess newbees don't mind playing any life

instead nearest adult male, should be random adult male or nearest similar age male to mother preferably not from same mother cause i really hate people following me or force me to their dumb rp

also i don't quite understand what is the difference on skip list when you always get a gene minimum
having no genes should have a consequence of like waiting 5x minutes to play each time
or some specific task i next life that someone gives you a task from predefined ones and you got to complete to pay off "debt"

but this pollenization type genes really just motivate me to run away at some point of my life to find a family for my next life
so it still wont help the family if you get a kid like this, cause will run away with no risk and comes back to you to run away again
so maybe lose some rights if he runs away?
if someone dies on you and lsoes genes, next life he/she cant carry a weapon or wear clothes or looks smaller/uglier
or has to do what others ask to earn their approval, maybe they need to say "thanks"
sure some people would do it for free for others or wouldn't do it even if he works a whole life
or people trick others into saying it
so my previous idea of tasking them and trackign task would be more fair for both sides

but what are this genes anyway? is it like fixed? percentage based? or they would grow with the hours people play?
sure it would be nice if someone earns 100 and can start an eve run, this would remove genes from pool, but how are they shared to motivate people to stay and help?
sounds like a reward to stay at same place if it's good and only bad thing if you want to escape, and for others isn't a really good mechanic that your poor geneless kid follows females for sake of escaping the life they don't like

in comparation, if you would get 10% of genes (copy) of someone who says "thank you XY" to you, wouldn't be perfect but at least would make long living loyal people worth more to get good with and weird nutwits who give away thanks you for free not so compelling

sorry if it's too random i just played with ideas on the go

Last edited by pein (2019-06-05 00:40:20)

Saolin · 2019-06-05 00:41:09

Valareos wrote:

I see one potential misuse.
You will start having some males do nothing but hang around the town's fire (like right on top of a woman there), or following a female constantly and doing nothing else, for the single purpose of spreading his genes.
I like the idea in general though

Sounds just like real life ;p. Thing is people would sometimes murder those doing so for a variety of reasons (lack of work, blocking their own genes from passing, getting annoyed with being followed) and then, as often happens, standersby would subsequently discuss whether the murder was justified, or whether retaliation was necessary. And I think if done to the extent you describe, would often be seen as justified.

Last edited by Saolin (2019-06-05 01:27:11)

Bob 101 · 2019-06-05 01:31:25

What about Proper Burial= Getting another life in that town.

By proper Burial I mean an actual marked grave, Preferably with the correct relation marked.

It adds a sorta good karma system, Being good prompts others to bury you so you can return. Then you might do it for the people who buried you and so on.

Last edited by Bob 101 (2019-06-05 01:37:39)

kittykatthegreat · 2019-06-05 04:48:52

Alot here in the forums will probably argue with this because over and over again I see "the game is supposed to be you just play with the hand your dealt". Well I dont see it that way, I slash die if it looks like a life that I'm not going to enjoy. It's my hour vs their few seconds of get rid of the bones. I don't believe I've ever hit that 200 in a day mark like some, but I do know that I have slashed died to become eve, because that is one of my favorite ways to play. Its one of the few lives in the game that you are actually free to choose and play with new ways to start things up.

you wanted us to address problems instead of solutions, so here is my problem and why I slash die. Not every life will be fun some more obvious than others right at the start. I feel like I was alot more open to trying out lives before the spring and come together updates. Before those if I was born into a situation I didn't like it was a lot easier to run off and do my own thing because heaven forbid your try anything different from the main style of play without being called a griefer or getting killed, even if its not hurting anything. Example, when i was newer I wanted to build a building. So I went a ways south of town used fertile soil and skewers to grow some wheat to make adobe I believe all I took from town was a bowl (they had sheep and where not hurting for supplies). Some chick runs down there and is like "ummmmm what are you doing???" So I told her not to worry about what I'm doing and to mind her own business and play her own game. She says it looks like organized griefing. Runs off and comes back with a bow to shoot me. This is one of many times in this game that i had a project in mind for the town and someone else in the game decides to police me, because there is only one way to do everything right?

So I think part of the problem is everyone has found one way to do things and that's the ONLY way to do them, which makes lives blur together and get boring and meaningless. I'm still here because I have high hopes for this game and got a ton of good hours out of it. But lately I find myself playing very little because I quickly grow bored with most lives and quit for the day.

Dodge · 2019-06-05 05:19:50

"Rethinking the player's role in the game"

Gene idea is interesting, you could have a starter family and then you would need to travel to other civilisations in order to have new generations and spread your gene, which would allow you to be born to where part of your gene is.

But i think you already talked about another idea which was: hard limit on the number of Eve's per day, if all the lineages on server die then nobody can spawn until next Eve spawns.

This would give a much higher responsability to the players and how they live their life, since depending on what they do, they might not be able to play at some point or only in limited lineages.

Coupling that with adding Adam and making fertility and lineage survival based on meeting other families then it would be in the hand of the players to make lineages on server really survive.

Genes could make it possible so that you have a higher chance (or only chance) of spawning to direct descending families, your future generations would act as some sort of saving point for your genes, which would be your future plays.

But that brings some sort of continuity between lives, when they are supposed to be unique so im not sure the gene idea is good.

Unless the player is represented as some gene that speads itself to increase it's chance of survival.

But i prefer the new life each time you get reborn with actions in your life having consequences that could potentially affect your future plays or the whole server.

MultiLife · 2019-06-05 05:39:47

Valareos wrote:

I see one potential misuse.
You will start having some males do nothing but hang around the town's fire (like right on top of a woman there), or following a female constantly and doing nothing else, for the single purpose of spreading his genes.
I like the idea in general though

This somehow feels hilarious to me. So that's how flower humans would work.

Saolin wrote:

Sounds just like real life ;p. Thing is people would sometimes murder those doing so for a variety of reasons (lack of work, blocking their own genes from passing, getting annoyed with being followed) and then, as often happens, standersby would subsequently discuss whether the murder was justified, or whether retaliation was necessary. And I think if done to the extent you describe, would often be seen as justified.

I mean, at least there would be an actual gameplay reason for killing. Although it shouldn't be the ideal way to go. Because in a game like this it goes instantly genocidal and extreme.

Last edited by MultiLife (2019-06-05 05:42:06)

Amon · 2019-06-05 11:18:40

Interesting. Though sounds like a far more overly complex version of returning as a child to your own children. If you wanna return you better take care of your kids, dammit!

However the male rubbing off seems a bit... iffy. Perhaps they should just take it from (a spouse, please, we like consenting, right?)(I don't think people that like roleplaying marriage would enjoy having infidelity by proximity) or their nearest female realtive; (sister/cousin), forcing them into a proper uncle family role.

Last edited by Amon (2019-06-05 11:19:26)

Spoonwood · 2019-06-05 12:02:50

kittykatthegreat wrote:

Alot here in the forums will probably argue with this because over and over again I see "the game is supposed to be you just play with the hand your dealt".

There's a good portion of people who just don't respect other people making choices for reasons of preference. And it's gotten worse lately. "Play with the hand that you're dealt" is a way of disempowering people and not really caring if they have any sort of liberty or not. But, I'll note that the game designer says things like this too. People have tried to tell him that players want more choice, but he's said that too many Eves existed and thus doesn't want people to have a choice to Eve and in other ways also. I do NOT think things will get better in this respect. So, if you're expecting the game to get better, help you to feel empowered, help you to feel free and things like that, it's just not worth your time to keep on playing this game. At least that's my advice. Quit playing and go play something else. Ask for a refund if you haven't played that much also.

Last edited by Spoonwood (2019-06-05 12:06:45)

pein · 2019-06-05 12:22:01

what about a soul that gets exponentially bigger with years, descendants, and when yo udie it explodes?
then the pieces go to each family in area
then you got your genes spread with a logn life and stuck in mud if you die early
i stil ldont see it as a reward or punishment each case

some visuals would be nice but esentially your death coords get expanded with a number based on years you lived, below 3 just 100, after 40 like 2000 and at 60 would be like 10000, maybe if the map would have a border of 500 impassable other way and only people living to older age could pass trough

Bob 101 · 2019-06-05 12:45:47

The afterlife:

Heaven is an infinite berry field

Hell is infinite bears.

Last edited by Bob 101 (2019-06-05 12:47:44)

Tarr · 2019-06-05 12:54:15

Bob 101 wrote:

The afterlife:
Heaven is an infinite berry field
Hell is infinite bears.

Pretty sure you have those two backwards. I'd have more fun shooting infinite bears than I would tending an infinite berry field with no place to drop the bucket or anywhere to get the soil.

DestinyCall · 2019-06-05 13:58:32

The genetic idea is interesting Personally, I like the idea that we are all just souls, reincarnating over and over. As a new player, you are a young soul - everything is new and fresh. Eventually, you gain more experience and become more jaded. Veteran players are "old souls" both figuratively and literally. But adding a genetic inheritance that can be passed from mother to child could add an interesting twist on the current rebirth mechanic.

jasonrohrer wrote:

The way this might work is thus:

1. If you have no genes left in the game, a mother is chosen for you and given your gene.
2. When you get born, all fertile mothers who have your gene are possibilities (using the normal fertility weighting, perhaps).
3. When you are born to a mother, your gene is removed from her, unless she is the last fertile woman on the server with your gene (in that case, she keeps it). This means that your forthcoming brothers and sisters won't have your gene (though elder brothers and sisters will)
4. Whenever a mother has a baby, the baby gets all the mother's carried genes, plus the genes carried by the nearest adult male character (with some distance cut-off).

This is a little half-baked, but I'm just trying to sketch out an idea of how this might work.

There's a conflict between 1. and 3. In the first instance, your mother gets your gene when you are born and in the other, she loses your gene. This is sounds contradictory - does that mean your mother would simultaneously gain and lose your gene? In that case, none of your siblings would carry your gene either. And frankly, it is not clear to me why the mother should lose your gene when you are born - is this trying to prevent rebirth to the same mother or prevent you from being reborn into the same genetic line a second time? I think all your siblings should carry your genes. It is counter-intuitive that your older siblings would be more closely related to you than your younger siblings. They are all your family.

As for 4, I'm not a big fan of random fatherhood. I think this aspect of the rebirthing mechanic needs a closer look to determine if it can be implemented in a better way. Personally, I would like to see some kind of partnership or marriage system where male players can CHOOSE to take on a fatherhood role with a particular woman. It should be a lifelong commitment for the sake of simplicity and because life is OHOL is short (how many spouses do you really need in one hour?). I'm thinking some kind of phrase that can be spoke by both players to form a partnership - similar to gate ownership. And from that point onward, the woman gains a small fertility boost and the man gains paternity with any future children - his genes will be passed on. This would allow male players to take a more active role in parenting, if they desire. Or choose to be lifelong bachelors, if that's what they want (or if they spend too much time working instead of dating).

Alternatively, if it must be a random genetic sample, it should not be based entirely on proximity. It should be more broad. Like a randomly chosen male within 300 squares of the woman, instead of the closest male player within 300 squares. That way, you won't have a bunch of creepy stalkers following around the only fertile woman in the village. The father will be some random dude who is in the general vicinity and standing right on top of the woman won't be necessary or encouraged by game mechanics.

Keyin · 2019-06-05 14:49:08

DestinyCall wrote:

The genetic idea is interesting Personally, I like the idea that we are all just souls, reincarnating over and over. As a new player, you are a young soul - everything is new and fresh. Eventually, you gain more experience and become more jaded. Veteran players are "old souls" both figuratively and literally. But adding a genetic inheritance that can be passed from mother to child could add an interesting twist on the current rebirth mechanic.
jasonrohrer wrote:
The way this might work is thus:

1. If you have no genes left in the game, a mother is chosen for you and given your gene.
2. When you get born, all fertile mothers who have your gene are possibilities (using the normal fertility weighting, perhaps).
3. When you are born to a mother, your gene is removed from her, unless she is the last fertile woman on the server with your gene (in that case, she keeps it). This means that your forthcoming brothers and sisters won't have your gene (though elder brothers and sisters will)
4. Whenever a mother has a baby, the baby gets all the mother's carried genes, plus the genes carried by the nearest adult male character (with some distance cut-off).

This is a little half-baked, but I'm just trying to sketch out an idea of how this might work.
There's a conflict between 1. and 3.

Re-read them. I was confused at first too.
IF have fertile female with YOUR GENE = TRUE, get born to her, remove gene
IF have fertile female with YOUR GENE = FALSE, get born to random_female + add YOUR GENE to random_female

So if your mom already had your gene, before you were born she was passing it on. removing it when you're born is to 'use it up'. You will never be born to this mom again if you /DIE

In the case that no one has your gene, you're born to whoever, and you can't /DIE away from this mom, because she is the only one with your gene. I'm not sure what happens if you die after she's infertile and the only girls with your gene are girls too young for kids?

DestinyCall wrote:

As for 4, I'm not a big fan of random fatherhood.

But random mating is good, diversity,polygamy, male competition,etc! Having a lover system>marriage, give me infidelity, half brothers and half cousins!

DestinyCall wrote:

Alternatively, if it must be a random genetic sample, it should not be based entirely on proximity. It should be more broad. Like a randomly chosen male within 300 squares of the woman, instead of the closest male player within 300 squares. That way, you won't have a bunch of creepy stalkers following around the only fertile woman in the village. The father will be some random dude who is in the general vicinity and standing right on top of the woman won't be necessary or encouraged by game mechanics.

300 tiles is kind of big. That's more than the area ban. I like the idea of 'creepy stalkers' becoming a thing and having to be dealt with by the other men / the women in town. More true to life. I would say the general vicinity should be more like 30-50 tiles rather than 300.

Last edited by Keyin (2019-06-05 14:51:16)

DestinyCall · 2019-06-05 14:54:27

Question regarding 2:

"2. When you get born, all fertile mothers who have your gene are possibilities (using the normal fertility weighting, perhaps)."

What happens if none of the women in your gene pool are currently available? Like if all your desendents are too old/young/male or on cooldown. Do you get a random mother instead, like if you had no genes in the game? If you have a large gene pool (lots of people carry your gene) is there any preference for which mother gets you or is it completely random?

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2019-06-04 22:34:18

Rethinking the player's role in the game

#2 2019-06-04 22:38:31

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#3 2019-06-04 22:42:10

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#4 2019-06-04 22:43:12

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#5 2019-06-04 22:58:21

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#6 2019-06-04 23:10:18

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#7 2019-06-04 23:25:02

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#8 2019-06-04 23:47:54

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#9 2019-06-04 23:55:51

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#10 2019-06-05 00:05:07

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#11 2019-06-05 00:22:37

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#12 2019-06-05 00:39:32

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#13 2019-06-05 00:41:09

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#14 2019-06-05 01:31:25

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#15 2019-06-05 04:48:52

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#16 2019-06-05 05:19:50

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#17 2019-06-05 05:39:47

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#18 2019-06-05 11:18:40

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#19 2019-06-05 12:02:50

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#20 2019-06-05 12:22:01

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#21 2019-06-05 12:45:47

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#22 2019-06-05 12:54:15

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#23 2019-06-05 13:58:32

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#24 2019-06-05 14:49:08

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

#25 2019-06-05 14:54:27

Re: Rethinking the player's role in the game

Board footer