Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

Go! Bwah! · 2018-04-06 20:11:42

So here's what I see as the core promise of this game (from the trailer):

"As players continue climbing up through the tech tree, I'll be staying ahead of them"

It turned out that one person couldn't deliver on this promise. So what we have instead is a game made artificially difficult, apparently in the hopes that players will be inspired to work harder and smarter to meet the challenges. However, players aren't actually parenting or rebuilding civilization and there's not the same motivation to coordinate, perform repetitive tasks, etc. as there is for real-life rewards, so instead the rational thing to do is to quit playing and focus on other things that do have appropriate rewards. I believe we've seen that in spades; the playership numbers had dropped by something like 30-40% before the "hours played" counter was frozen, and that was before the apocalypse pissed off half the base.

Once you get to the end of the tech tree, the game gets stale, and the apocalypse was apparently a way to freshen it up and make it interesting again. But, most of us have already started out in pre-city times, and it was fun once, but for me at least, once was good enough and it was a relief to get to a more relaxed state. I know Jason really wants us to "up our game" as he said in Discord last night (I think re: the carrot-farming nerf) but given the promise he made in the trailer, I think that's pretty unfair; he should look at upping his content-creation game first.

That said, I respect how much work the dev has put into this (and is putting into it), and you can't get blood from a turnip. So I propose that, if he wants people to actually play the game while waiting for new content, that the focus shift away from balls-out frantic survival and toward roleplaying and social playing. It seems like the game is just ripe for it, with the naming and the parenting and the (expanding) variety of objects, but right now the core roleplaying/social mechanic seems to be something like "I am <profession> and ask/tell people what I need and/or what they are doing wrong", and seriously, screw that.

I don't know exactly what this means in practice, but it's close to a 180-degree turn from current direction, things like:

* turn energy consumption down
* make resources more renewable
* make it more likely to spawn near old family
* add ability to name animals, and have pets
* add visible emotes
* add "hearing" of farther-offscreen chatter
* add more fun items - flutes, baby-carts that kids can pull, feather headbands (geese can drop feathers of different colors), rope that can climb trees, etc.
* add writing and signs
* add cyclical events (pseudo- day/night, seasons, weather, etc.)
* etc., etc.

I suspect Jason would absolutely hate this idea, which is why I think he's the perfect person to do it - there would be no danger that it would become too cutesy and overdone. In a word, it would be balanced, which the game is everything but right now.

I might get a somewhat skewed response from the forums (where I have to assume the more "serious" players congregate), but I'll ask anyway: what do you think? What game would you rather play?

Last edited by Go! Bwah! (2018-04-06 20:19:47)

starplayer · 2018-04-06 20:17:16

Of course, what Jason should do is get someone to help him, like Notch did with Minecraft. But Jason doesn't want to become Notch, has he said on Discord. So he will be doing all alone. And so all won't be much.

Because ironically, he doesn't seem to understand that one person can't do it all.

Drakulon · 2018-04-06 20:33:14

I dont mind that he cant keep up with the content.
Making a game takes time, i prefer a solid game with depth much over a rushed game.

I like this points:
* make resources more renewable
* add visible emotes
* add writing and signs
* add cyclical events (pseudo- day/night, seasons, weather, etc.)

Go! Bwah! · 2018-04-06 21:03:24

starplayer wrote:

Of course, what Jason should do is get someone to help him, like Notch did with Minecraft.

I considered that, but if people are playing through a weeks' worth of work in hours, how many people would he have to pay to "stay ahead"? Ten? Twenty??

I mean, I would gladly give his promise a pass if the content didn't always last the full week, but I think even a day or two would be untenable.

Drakulon wrote:

I dont mind that he cant keep up with the content.

I don't mind either. What I mind is the presumption that he can respond by making the game more difficult and expect enough people to invest more real-life resources to keep building things up, as though the game were that rewarding or our real lives were that unrewarding.

Maximoose · 2018-04-06 21:21:35

I like your ideas, I also don't mind if he can't keep up with the content as you can continue perfecting your methods at the end of the tech tree and improving things, making roads and buildings, etc. There is always more you can do and I like that it can be relaxed, if you want to start from scratch you can just run away into the wilderness, the world is pretty much infinite, which is why I also think the apocalypse should be removed, let players who want to continue to develop civilizations do so and if you want a more intense survival, players that wish to can do so. I like the relaxed end game of being more creative, building things to help make it more efficient.

Also, why don't you have a spawn option to spawn as an eve in the wilderness or to spawn as baby, as an option. Just an idea but might be good for those players that want a "fresh start"

Last edited by Maximoose (2018-04-06 21:25:36)

bread_lord · 2018-04-07 02:18:37

For an opposing viewpoint, I will readily admit that I most enjoy games with punishing -- even unfair -- levels of difficulty. I personally find the "balls-out frantic survival" to be the most enjoyable part of OHOL: selfishly, I would be inclined to oppose a concerted shift towards a gentler and more social experience. Admittedly, a civilization-building multiplayer game is an odd choice for a player who generally resents social and creative/building additions to games so my opinion on whether certain parts of the game are enjoyably balanced might not be very representative of the playerbase's views.

We both might agree on finite resources, however: I would prefer that the difficulty remain tied to player ability and not to a world of vanishing resources. While I don't know if I like the idea of simply adding in resource respawns (because I know allowing players to become "entrenched" and comfortable is something Jason is against), I would like to see it possible for players to restore the world as much as they can destroy it. It's possible to dedicate one's life to replanting milkweed everywhere, for instance, but not trees, wild bushes, or dug carrots (to say nothing for wildlife or stones). It shouldn't be easy, necessarily, but I wouldn't mind having the option to play more than a milkweed nomad from time to time.

Pernicious · 2018-04-07 03:19:25

The videos on youtube of the game got pretty stale once I heard people say "Make pies" a billion times.

Don't starve has its base destroying monsters. Along with summer fires that can destroy bases. As well as diseases that can affect crops and many berry bushes can cause berry eating birds to spawn.

Better than wolves mod for minecraft, which seems to have ideas this game is starting to consider such as further random warps after respawn. Just accepts that eventually players will make enough bases, roads, landmarks that they'll always find a path home no matter how far they warp. And thats its point. So it adds goals that require searching the world very far from spawn. Such as preventing npc villages from spawning within 10,000 blocks of spawn.

Salem the crafting MMO, similar to this game has permadeath. But allows claimstones for players to own land with a weekly gold upkeep that increases as more land is bought. But because theres no life time limit people get extremely attached to characters and may quit the game forever when the main dies. It keeps interest by having a large number of natural items in the world to find that are consumable for skill points/exp. But it is insanely grinding and boring later on due to slow character growth.

Wouldn't really off the top of my head know ways to make this game more social, other than a crowned town leader able to give players a profession (With a visual change). That if a player did things related to it, they would make better items or additional items or grant a perk. The higher tech the crown, the better professions the leader could give. Like a guard sees people with a knife even if in backpack as red and are immune to a knife kill, but not a bow kill. So the king or queen decides what a village needs or asks people what they want.

Last edited by Pernicious (2018-04-07 03:53:59)

aFilthyPeasant · 2018-04-07 03:39:47

bread_lord wrote:

I personally find the "balls-out frantic survival" to be the most enjoyable part of OHOL: selfishly, I would be inclined to oppose a concerted shift towards a gentler and more social experience.

I find the best part to be the roleplaying, tbh. I wish children could speak more, then i could ask more questions as a child. RP the kid role until I grow a teensy pubescent mustache and am able to pick up more things and do different types of crafting or jobs. Then I could give long, drawn out, rambling speechs to the youngsters who desperately want to know something, but instead I am a shrived old man who wont directly answer them cuz im rambling about my life and how things were and how they have it so much better than my generation did. But I also find the bluntness of the game to be heartening; mothers disowning their children because they cant support them, or as some of us found out we were not wanted. Sometimes the harsh reality of finding your child's corpse, although you lived in a successful town and the baby was just stupid and didnt eat in time or something.

The best thing about this game is the family names and stuff as it only makes sense that you would know who your mother is, perhaps even by name. I think the next step would to build outward with the crafting recipes. As it stands there are a few really long lines of crafting, starting from a few resources. Either those few resources need to be expanded and have more connections between them or we need more items to build what we have. The latter is definitely a more relaxed approach; it just makes crafting easier since there are more possible inputs. Even if later types of crafting required more complicated techniques of crafting, say smithing requires a technique other than throwing one of the two items on the ground, then throwing the other item on the ground and combining them. Say a table could allow you to set 3 items together and craft all 3 together at once, which would open up new possibilities with so many of the existing items.

I believe as roles for a city are filled, the requirements may change and jason will have to add more items, but I think his initial goal of building up higher than we could is not very realistic. it needs to be a heavy crafting game where the knowledge is passed on, but specializations or jobs and really defining those roles and what items they require and in what combinations should be how he shifts gears.

Go! Bwah! · 2018-04-07 04:43:58

I definitely see the attraction of both the survival aspect and the social aspect. It just seems to me that the roleplaying aspect has more longevity. How many times are people going to build villages from scratch before it becomes drudgery? Once that wears thin (for those that it does) there needs to be something creative to do between updates, and it is relatively easy to be creative in social play.

I think there's a "quality and quantity" thing going on here too. It remains to be seen if there will be enough "quality" players who are crazy enough (in my opinion) to keep plugging away and keep civilization running at a given level of difficulty. That's Jason's call, but if there aren't, I think making it a more social game gives him another option.

sammoh · 2018-04-07 05:47:09

I am incorporating money, religion, and some nomadic enhancements on my test server this week. I hope people RP as nomads if i give them the tools.

Homura · 2018-04-08 11:34:37

Well most people ragequit when they see their mother is 'poor' (i.e. isn't wearing a full set of gear with a second set of gear available). So apocalypses don't cater to this demographic. Moreover, this is a civilization-building game. I'll be switching to a server with no wipes.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2018-04-06 20:11:42

Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#2 2018-04-06 20:17:16

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#3 2018-04-06 20:33:14

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#4 2018-04-06 21:03:24

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#5 2018-04-06 21:21:35

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#6 2018-04-07 02:18:37

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#7 2018-04-07 03:19:25

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#8 2018-04-07 03:39:47

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#9 2018-04-07 04:43:58

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#10 2018-04-07 05:47:09

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

#11 2018-04-08 11:34:37

Re: Should this become more of a roleplaying/social game?

Board footer