One Hour One Life Forums

ugh god you're killing me... one of you please upload that precious video

ethical griefing... I love this so much xD please turn the replay into a video and upload it, pretty please

Christ, chill. I'm not, nor am I able to, force anyone to do anything. All I can do is have opinions and argue them with logic, same as you.

However, I could not care less about what other players want, what the majority wants, what you want, unless they can argue that it aligns with Jason's stated high level goals for the game better than what his current direction is. I happen to generally be in agreement with (almost) all of his high level goals, and am generally pleased with how he approaches them, even if his process isn't what my process would be (and I'm humble enough to know that in all likeliness his process is way closer to ideal given how many amazingly intriguing games he's pumped out over the years flying solo, it's truly incredible). I enjoy spending time on these forums and following his game for these reasons, and if he sold out and started stuffing the game full of softcore gacha microtransaction co-op garbage to satisfy and suck in as many sales as possible I would most certainly not be here, but that's not the kind of game designer he is.

So yeah, I'm just super confused about why there are all these super vocal people that seem to hate his goals and methodologies yet still spend a ton of time on the forums and playing and excelling at his game. Like why can't you guys just be positive and support him in his efforts? You think it's easy to go day in day out by oneself supporting a family ignoring piles of complaints everyday to keep producing what he believes in? He's a goddamn superhero and you guys have nothing better to say about it than "gee i wish you cared about the things I cared about"

How about read what the game is about from him, decide whether you're in or out, and quit whining about your own irrelevant shit. I'm not the dev, you're not the dev, he is. So help him refine things towards his goals or why are you here?

Thanks for the detail, yeah the temporarily immobile baby has been a very nice addition compared to how it used to be. Any chance of getting a 2x multiplier on the penalty for the baby for suicide? It's so annoying when they're obviously just trying to game themselves into a better situation rather than helping you get out of yours... Would be nice to have as much gentle pressure against that as possible.

This is factually incorrect, it's why we have child protective services. It's literally not a right to choose to let your child die (medical reasons excluded, etc etc) or to kill yourself (why we lock people up in a rubber room, not to say that we should or shouldn't, but we do... and helping someone kill themselves is a crime). But that has nothing to do with what we're talking about, just thought it was funny that you used the exact opposite of the truth as a segue to your point.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't mean that Jason has no right to do this or that with his game, which would be entirely out of touch with anything resembling a shared reality.

The main thing that makes things impossible to Just Work in OHOL like they do in evolution is that genes are -not- passed down from generation to generation. The genes, which is to say the things dictating the behavior and fitness of an OHOL human, are the user. Users can't be spliced together and mutated like they do in evolution, and they can't multiply. My point is that you have to just walk away from the idea of trying to make it exactly like evolution because it's simply not possible. Survival of the fittest as an organic mechanism that just naturally arises (rather than being explicitly represented in an abstract way with programming) like it does in real life is not possible. Making things kind of in some ways similar to the context that evolution takes place will not make evolution Just Work unless you pick the exact things it depends on, which are absent here.

However, we -can- still judge genetic fitness via other means, and we can still use genetic fitness as a guide for surfacing survival behavior to the front of the pool. We just can't do it using the same mechanisms that real life does. It's not about, or perhaps it shouldn't be about, judging player behavior as good or bad, but rather as judging it as competent mother capable of giving players a good experience (starving as a baby is neither interesting nor challenging) or not. If they don't give a shit about children, great, they'll end up having fewer of them and won't have to bother with starting a whole new family of them.

But yeah as is, it's kind of situated as more of a judging the player about their behavior overall and punishing their overall experience accordingly, which I tentatively agree is no good... However, it does kind of in a weird way mimic instincts. Instincts can be ignored but there will be internal consequences that your brain will impose on you with the memories of what you did, as with the punishment mechanisms, you can ignore them and while it may slightly nerf you, you'd still be perfectly able to play and if you're mostly just fucking with people it's unlikely you'd even notice the tool slot penalty. The family specializations thing is trickier but that's another thread.

But yeah we're just looping at this point. You don't like games with constraints, I get it

Just saw you mentioned you pushed a map wipe in another thread, thank you!

What's the rule on suicide? Can suiciding babies take a heavy penalty to their own score and no penalty to the family, if that's not already the case? Can babies be made to not be able to escape from their mother's arms until a certain age? A mother should be able to physically overpower a suicidal child until a good few years into life no?

No, because it's more time efficient to find a missing need and fill it than it is to grief a village into needing something and then filling it. Plus if you only baked the pies then you'd only get one step credit out of the many step credits involved in creating a pie. It would be just as many points to find a missing need at any part of the pie pipeline and fill it as it would to do the last step, probably more points since baking pies is a few clicks per pie compared to setting up a water or oil pipeline, or creating tools which is many clicks but which will put your name into many, many items.

Also, it doesn't pay to piss your neighbors off. If someone sees you throwing tools away and remaking them or something like that then you're gonna get kicked to the curb hard. Go find the posts about optimal play for genetic score and tell me that any part of that is better than risking some selfishness over tools.

And the current generic score system does absolutely not cancel out over time, there are many complaints about people grinding endlessly to get it up only to lose days of progress from one shitty griefer baby. That's what happens when you only use one limited metric to measure overall competence for something as critical as playing eve.

That's probably exacerbated due to Jason's choice of algorithm for the scoring system though. I was trying to talk him into thinking big picture and start with desired results rather than starting with a solution and trying to force it to work via surface level tweaks but he wasn't interested in hearing it, and now we're stuck with the top 50 players being determined by fleeting luck until he gets around to redoing it.

I think these two things are exactly the same thing, just worded differently or more or less strongly. Nothing's being forced though, players can do whatever they want if they don't care about being one of the rare eves, etc. Ultimately the question that's trying to be answered here is "how do we select which players should be eves?" and perhaps also mothers, women, etc. There's a huge portion to being a great family starter that is simply unscored in the existing system. This proposed system doesn't perfectly solve it or anything, but it seems like it would be a huge step closer compared to simply looking at life durations.

Prepare to get your mind blown, but we have mechanisms like this in real life - instincts! Instincts punish us by making us feel terrible when we're being bad family members and reward us with warm fuzzies when we're keeping our children and parents and siblings safe. It's not altruism or being a good person, it's instincts manipulating you. These same instincts don't give a shit about, or not nearly as much of a shit about, little squiggly characters on the screen so we need analogous mechanisms to guide the player community, on average, towards what human instincts would normally guide family members towards.

But that's just if you give a shit about earning the right to be eve and whatever else, someone who just wants to build civilizations and doesn't care about family or birthing or anything like that doesn't have to give a shit about any of this, and the system will politely lower them in probability of participating in those things accordingly. If you -do- care about those things, you don't even need to think about the scoring system, it will automatically raise your probability for participation in family mechanisms due to your good family behavior with or without your knowledge of it happening. Or, if you're the kind of player who does like chasing scores then you'll coincidentally be performing as an exceptional family member in the process.

So like, imagine if a town was running low on water how quickly an eve-desiring player would scramble to supply it when they know that pretty much everything that is produced will involve water somehow. Once there's plenty of water there isn't genetic score incentive to keep spamming water anymore cause they'd be competing with the existing water stores for which one gets used so it's better for them to work on more urgent, underserved resources, as they should anyways.

Lol not sure how we got to capitalism, but getting back on track... I was imagining that every time you execute a recipe it would store your id in the resultant item(s?) as well as the ids stored in the ingredients, perhaps it would even display this information somehow. So a more concrete example:

##
pick up stone A from natural spawn point (drawing the distinction here between picking from nature and picking from a box in a village, which should not award credit): stone B (natural stone A gathered by jcwilk)

use B on big rock: sharp stone C (stone B sharpened by jcwilk (natural stone A gathered by jcwilk))

use C on buried wild carrot: wild carrot E (unburied with sharp stone C by jcwilk (stone B sharpened by jcwilk (natural stone A gathered by jcwilk)))
##

So basically in this case I took part in 3 out of 3 steps involved in producing the wild carrot, so I would get 100% of the production credit for someone eating it if that person is a close enough relative. If someone else did the last step then the data might be like: wild carrot E (unburied with sharp stone C by DestinyCall (stone B sharpened by jcwilk (natural stone A gathered by jcwilk))) - in which case DestinyCall would get 33% of the possible production credit if DestinyCall's family member ate it, or I would get 67% of the possible production credit for it if one of my close family members ate it, or if we're close relatives we'd both get our shares if a close relative ate it. It would likely be a very small amount of points for the individual carrot being eaten so it's not really enough to motivate people to go way out of their way to hide a little food, but it means if your gameplay is directed around producing essential things then you'll be rewarded many times with small amounts.

And to be clear I'm not suggesting that wording exist in the game, or that it necessarily be visible at all... Clarity is certainly a challenge here, it would be super awesome though if you could see a breakdown on the genetic history screen somehow of how many points you've gotten from carrots, from pies, etc...

(edited nesting to make it easier to read and clearer about the structure)

Yeah I was thinking what % of the process you were involved with would be your "share" of that pie, so if you did half the steps you only get half the benefit as if you did all the steps, so you get no benefit from stealing pies outright, some benefit from kinda stealing pies, and the most benefit from not leeching materials. Keep in mind this is in addition to many other factors, so there would only be a small additional incentive to be family-greedy.

Likewise, if you're the farmer for the whole village then you'll automatically get a portion of credit for all the food eaten by your family. Same with water gatherer, etc. The most essential ingredients that are for the most things that will get used quickly (ie by your immediate family, not your distance descendants) would earn you the most points. You're more motivated to cook and grow ingredients for a village where your family resides than one where they do not, and you're very motivated to keep your family alive in a village you've invested heavily in since as they survive they'll not only give you survival points but also consumption points.