a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
On an empty server (11) I couldn't find any animals (except rabbits and geese).
Everything has disappeared, even the mosquito.
I've kept my mouth shut through the shitshow that was the rift and again for the pain in the ass skills update, but man what in the fuck is this shit? Why does Jason like making this game more and more of a chore to play with each update? I just don't get it.
I know why Jason does it. Few people have noticed this statement by Jason.
My local designer friend Casey wrote this essay on modernity:
There's a problem with modernity. Nothing has ever been so comfortable, easy, convenient, or meaningless. Some people say it's a spiritual crises. But I don't think so. Formulating the problem like that has an answer baked right into it. Spirituality/religion was lost, therefore... But that is an old answer, a bad answer, and an irrelevant answer. The problem with modernity is a new problem, and it won't have an old answer. It's not that people have changed, they're the same as always. It's that the circumstances have changed.
It would be nice if the circumstances hadn't changed. If life was still infused with meaning and beauty. When you were born, the meaning of your life was invisible and surrounding you, like a fish in the ocean. Everything fit together. You can talk all day about how hard life was then, and how easy it is now. I believe it. But making life easy does not make it meaningful. And I believe if any person could honestly see the two options in a clear way, they would choose the difficult and meaningful life over the easy and meaningless one. Every single time.
So why not just go live in a cabin in the woods? It's a nice fantasy and one that a lot of modern people have. At least some variation of it. But hardly anyone actually does this. Are people just stupid cows that can't see what's best for them? I don't think so. I think going to live in a cabin is just play-acting at a meaningful life. We have some vague picture of what a meaningful life might look like, and we would be enacting that. Just like a little kid has some idea of what a house looks like, mommy and baby, cooking dinner, etc... We see ourselves enjoying the simple things in life, nature, the slow pace, the peace. But people aren't stupid. We know when it's real, and when it's a game.
Before we can even talk about a solution to modernity, we need to make it clear what the problem actually is. Human beings were built for a specific set of circumstances. The modern view of the human is as something incredibly adaptive. That's wrong. There's a narrow band of existence that humans thrive in. A meaningful life can only ever be found within this band. So the first problem with modernity, is that it doesn't even provide a solid concept of what this life is like.
How did we lose this concept, and deviate so far from a workable path? Modernity is the result of a series of small compromises and changes over a few thousand years. Any one of these compromises looked at individually makes sense. A tractor is a lot better than a plow. But when you add them all up, you get something ugly. A painting with lots of detail but no sense of composition or beauty. A story with a lot of events, but no narrative.
And humans are narrative beings. It's how we think, and it's what moves us into action. Narrative is the connective tissue of life. It gives purpose to actions beyond their immediate usefulness, and brings them together into something coherent. Story is the organizing principle of experience.
A compelling narrative has a well known structure to it. The world begins in a state of disharmony. It calls out a challenge to its protagonist: come change the world, make things right again. The journey is challenging. To rectify the disharmony requires some type of transformation to occur. And the transformation requires a sacrifice. Finally, the result of the transformation connects back into the world and changes it for the better. The story is complete and we can say that something meaningful has occurred.
A meaningful life is a life with a compelling narrative. When the world needs you. When you have to change and grow and sacrifice to answer that need. And when the results of your efforts have a renewing effect on the world. Those are the ingredients for a compelling narrative, and a meaningful life. Life without a story is nothing. It's the classic nihilistic complaint, we are just cosmic dust in an infinite universe. And if your life lacks a story, you might as well be a chunk of rock, or a speck of cosmic dust.
Everything you know about a compelling narrative is something you know about a meaningful life. It doesn't start on a whim, it starts with the world calling out a challenge to you. That's why the cabin fantasy is nonsense. It captures the superficial appearance of meaning without providing anything real. A real narrative has a goal, something worth fighting for. How many times have you heard about people working for a better life for their children? And a narrative has challenges. Consider the disgust we feel towards those who have everything given to them. If there is no challenge, there is no narrative. And if there is no narrative, there is no meaning.
The problem with modernity, then, is that it does not provide the setting for a compelling narrative. The world doesn't seem to need us anymore. And if we take on some challenge anyway, it seems there are many easy roads on one hand, and many foolish roads on the other. And even if we find a road that demands something from us, the results of our efforts don't seem to affect anything. The world is in a solved state. It may not be impossible to live a meaningful life but it's damn sure not easy.
The reason that modernity provides no story to so many is simple. Every narrative has an end, and the narrative of the modern world is ending. The big questions that we have been asking over the last few thousand years have been answered; we know where we came from. The challenges we have been struggling against have been solved; survival is basically a given. Any remaining questions, and any remaining challenges, are small detail work left to a small contingent. We have constructed an unbelievably efficient machine that is modernity. All that's left to do now is keep the wheels turning and try not to screw it up. There is no meaning in that, because there's no story to it.
We can see the modern world tearing itself apart because of it. It's preferable to destroy everything than it is to live without meaning. To merely keep the machine of modernity running is utterly pointless. It's not an idea that can sustain the collective effort of the Western world. Every fracture we see in the culture, is some new group of people being left empty. The number of actors in the story of modernity is shrinking. When you're left without a productive narrative, the only possible narrative is the destruction of the world that left you behind. Only in it's destruction can a new story rise.
Picture a forest. All the physical resources are basically allocated, locked up in the trees. It takes a fire to destroy it all, free the resources and give everything a chance to grow again. The seeds dropped in a mature forest are essentially doomed.
It's not a coincidence that the narrative of the modern world is ending now. It's happening because modernity has put everything on fast-forward. Cities, mass media, multiculturalism, and other trappings of modernity, have given people tools to very rapidly parse any narrative to it's logical endpoint. Post modernism is the culmination of this. Not just parsing any particular narrative, but parsing the very idea of a narrative to it's endpoint.
This is getting high minded. But it's easy to see in simple terms. Can you honestly picture yourself being proud of your country? To the point where you would enlist and risk your life for it? No. The idea seems insane. Yet, there are people still living that did that exact thing. The only conclusion we can draw, and still maintain our perspective on life, is that they were stupid rubes. They were hoodwinked into something terrible.
And that's the exact perspective modern people must maintain on all of history. That it was horrible, dirty, miserable, that life was nothing but suffering. That modernity swooped in and saved us from all that. The hubris to think that things were terrible for the last two hundred thousand years, then suddenly got good in the last fifty. That hubris must be unique to modernity. It's sad more than anything.
If you want to understand the difference between modernity and antiquity, consider a scenario. Your life consists of sleeping on a small hard cot for only 5 hours a night. You eat thick grey flavorless gruel. Your day is spent turning a large wheel around in circles. It's heavy and difficult.
In antiquity, your effort turning the wheel is moving you closer to something beautiful and transcendent, you are pulling yourself to heaven. It doesn't matter that the work is tedious and difficult. It has a purpose.
In modernity, your effort moves you forward, but not towards anything in particular. Just in a larger circle. Maybe you turn the wheel less, or not at all. What's the difference? You can eat your thick grey gruel all day if you want. You can wither away sleeping.
Life is only a heavy wheel and gruel when you get down to it. There is no escape from that, no alternative. The sole redeeming factor to the whole operation is why you wake up and turn the wheel. If you have a good reason, then being alive is better than not being alive. If you don't, it doesn't really matter either way.
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6106
I remember her to this day because the views that Jason considers wise irritated me terribly.
Such things can only be written by a teenager who has not survived anything yet and thinks he needs strong impressions.
I barely refrained from writing what I think about the author of these wisdoms, and about the American elites (zombies, zombies) and US foreign policy.
In short Jason thinks the challenges are interesting and people love the challenges.
People really love a light, easy and pleasant life.
If there are to be any challenges in the game, the reward must be adequate to the difficulties.
Such a reward is not simply survival.
Jason makes it harder to play without giving anything back.
Well, this is not a very thoughtful tactic.
Jason I really admire your diligence, but you can do the same without complicating the whole game.
Just code so that only brown people can use the knife on the rubber tree.
And that only black people could get water from a hot spring.
And so with gingers it's a little harder - maybe make a small 3x3 zone around a tarry spot?
Even with an invisible wall, it will be more realistic, than an immediate illness after entering the forbidden biom.
It seems to me that it will be much easier to code.
Why should everyone except a special race be deprived of bananas or seal fur?
And I still think it's a stupid idea.
And racist, especially towards whites.
Another stupid idea.
Jason !!!!! Finally, understand that you won't force players to do anything they don't want.
You really are an amazing person.
Once again I repeat - do you want to achieve something?
Encourage players to do this.
This of course makes no sense but I will write again.
Each family should be able to produce a unique, exclusive item (or several items).
Yes, family, not race!
Your idea is racist.
These items can not be anything very valuable and laborious.
For example, one family can produce colorful grass skirts, the other can have hats with rabbit ears, such fun things.
You can of course consider that these were also more useful things but it can not be very valuable because no one will sell it.
In the center of the map stands the belfry (remaining from ancient civilizations).
The belfry rings as the wind blows and anyone willing to trade can come to this place.
In addition, it will be a landmark, a crossroads and a great market where people will trade for pleasure.
Wow great!
Jason, you know this is a stupid idea, right?
First of all, it's even illogical - explain to novice players that they can't eat.
Why?
Because you must starve to eat.
Wtf?
Such a new player when he dies a few times will stand his whole life with a gooseberry in his hand not to die again.
Living in Eve's camps is already extremely difficult because of the drying water sources.
So of course we need it to be even more difficult.
Walking on the map will be very difficult for players with mod zoom and completely impossible for vanilla players.
Passing through some zones (polar and desert) for a naked person will be impossible completely.
So there will be no more seal hunting and the only clothes available at Eve camp.
So Eve's camps will die out even faster.
Once you calculate the optimal number of buckets of water and gooseberry per player what will you achieve?
It's supposed to be optimal ...
Only does this optimally balanced game get better than that?
Here's an idea ... professional titles that convey skill. When you approach adulthood (16 years old and beyond), you can claim a profession using a text command ... for example, "I am a baker." Once you have declared your profession, you gain the associated title "Tom Johnson the Baker", which can be viewed by other players. From this point onward, you are a baker and can do baker things better than non-bakers. At any time, you can change your profession, "I am a smith." .... maybe you tried out being a baker, but it wasn't the right fit, so you decided to change careers. No problem, now you are Tom Johnson the Smith and have access to smithing skills. You can change jobs as much as you like without direct penalty or special training. But if you remain in a particular profession long enough, you will eventually master it.
After twenty minutes (twenty years working in the same profession), you will become a master smith or master farmer or whatever. Now you are even better at your chosen profession and gain additional benefits for choosing to specialize, rather than job-hopping forever. Since you can't pick a job until you are 16 and it takes twenty years to reach mastery in a given field ... and you will be dead by sixty ... you can only master one profession each life. You can change jobs a lot as a young person, but the more time you spend in different jobs, the less time you will have as a master of your chosen field later in life. And if you die before reaching forty or change jobs too much, you will never reach master level. If you reach master and switch professions, you lose mastery, so either stick with your chosen job at that point or take the hit.
In this system, it would benefit you to seek out a master smith or master farmer or whatever when you need to do a specialty job that is outside of your field of expertise. And it would be important to decide on a career path relatively early on in your life. Once you master a given field, you would want to actually use your specialized skills, rather than changing your skill set again and again to fit the situation. And as a child, you would want to get to know the village and figure out what skills will be needed - if the master baker is getting really old, you might want to become her apprentice before your village runs out of tasty pies.
...
So what does it mean to be a "farmer" or "master farmer"? What about "smith" and "master smith"? What is the difference between a baker and a non-baker? There are a number of ways this could be handled, depending on how exactly you want skills to work. One option would be to lock certain transitions - only bakers can bake pies. Only master bakers can bake the best pies. Only smiths can smith tools. Only master smiths can smith the most advanced tools/tech. Only farmers can farm/harvest crops. Only master farmers can farm/harvest the most advanced/specialized crops.
Alternatively, I would prefer a failure/boon system. Non-bakers can bake, but there is a 20% chance for a failure - burnt pie (half value or inedible). Bakers can bake well - 10% chance of burnt pie and 10% chance of tasty pie (double value). Master bakers can bake even better - 20% chance of tasty pie, no failure risk. Non-farmers can farm, but there is a 20% chance of rotten harvest (inedible). Farmers can farm well - 10% chance of rotten harvest, 10% chance of double harvest (two crops instead of one). Master farmers can farm even better - 20% chance of double harvest, no failure risk. Non-smith can smith, but 20% chance of creating twisted iron when using the smithing hammer (requires reforging in scrap bowl). Smiths can smith well - 10% chance of twisted iron and 10% chance of crafting durable tools (double uses) when making finished tools. Master smiths can smith even better - 20% chance of durable tools, no failure risk.
Each profession grants you access to certain special abilities and reduces risk when attempting skill-based activities. Anyone can help prepare ingredients and put together pies, but only a baker or master baker should bake the pies. Anyone can make charcoal and smelt iron, but only a smith should use the hammer. Anyone can make rows of dirt, plant seeds, and water crops, but only a farmer should harvest the crops when they are ready. However, if the smith is dead and you need a new shovel, Farmer Bob can do what needs to be done to keep the village alive.
I considered some kind of actual job experience requirement for declaring or advancing in a profession, but I feel like it adds an unnecessary layer of complexity without really providing much from a gameplay perspective. I don't want professions to feel grindy - "I must bake exactly ten pies to become a master baker, oh no ... I only have enough wheat for eight pies. I guess I am stuck as a regular baker until the farmer harvests more wheat." This encourages you to play a job mastery mini-game, that won't always match up with the realities of your village or its needs. There is a high chance it will end up feeling artificial and too gamey. I'd rather keep the focus on the decision to pick the right profession for you and for your village and then to aim to utilize your advantages while avoiding your weaknesses. The time requirement is important, because it rewards deciding on a profession early and sticking with your choice. You can keep changing jobs to gain the basic advantages, but if you do that, you will end up a "Jack of all trades, master of none", never reaching master level in any of your many jobs.
It might even be better to call the advanced title "senior baker" or "senior farmer" to emphasize that this is a rank achieved due to time in the field. This also fits nicely with the fact that anyone who has reached a senior rank will be in their forties or fifties. They will soon be an elder and need to be replaced by younger skilled workers. As a child in the village, you can look around to see who is "senior smith" or "senior baker" and if the village has any younger bakers or smiths yet. Ideally, most early villages will need at least a few key positions filled, with other players just picking up work where they find it... but larger towns will have many more jobs that need doing and might even need engineers, tailors, carpenters, masons ... and more! This means more unique jobs held by different players and valued by others.
Also, keep in mind that whatever you pick as a profession will impact the choices of other players. If I am fourteen and I see my village has one senior smith and three regular smiths, I probably will not become a smith. But if I see we have only one baker and the pies are running low, I might pick that job for myself. When my younger brother is born, he will see the village has a senior baker and me, so he might decide to be a farmer instead of baking. If I decide to change my profession later on because I can't find a smith to make a new hoe so I can farm wheat ... and the senior baker dies of old age while I'm working the forge ... suddenly our village won't have any bakers. And because I changed jobs, it will be a long time before we have a senior baker, even if I switch back as soon as I notice the problem.
Now imagine the chaos that could be caused by a random murderer ...
Very good ideas, Destiny, although I would prefer there are no penalties for non-professionals.
I think that awards for specialists would suffice.
When it comes to updating tools, when I have 8 place for tools, I don't mind that much.
When I am only 6 places it starts to be a problem.
Also, some tools are irrational (e.g. hot coals).
Seriously?
Placing the bowl on hot coals really does not require any practice.
I don't like Jason's approach in this patch and others.
He generally uses the carrot and stick method.
Only he forgot about carrots a long time ago.
It looks like this:
- you don't want to make clothes and build houses? I will force you- correct the temperature
- you don't want to build fences? I will force you- swords,
- you don't want to make engines? I will force you - three restrictions on water resources,
- you don't want to communicate with each other? ...... etc.
If I wonder why some people like it.
Personally, I don't like if someone pushes me and pulls me somewhere I don't want to go.
Well ... we have 5 o'clock in the afternoon (in Europe).
32 people are playing on the server.
Again, only 3 families remained, and again of course gasoline and water are running out, and everyone is starving.
It's so boring.
Do you want to play?
This fitness depends only on luck.
Unless someone is playing only to increase this skill.
There was already some good advice here on how to do it.
Some grief wrote something like, "Kill your mother, you won't have younger siblings."
Now, unfortunately, it's so that life at Eve's camp always ends with a , bad place on the list, and life in boring cities is conducive to achieving a good place.
Despite the fact that, for example, at Eve camp I do something really important for my family and I don't even remember living in the city.
Maybe it should be scored differently depending on the generation we live in?
Although ... I wonder where in the table are the last two mothers of the completed arc?
Each had several dozen children who all died.
What's the fault of these two players?
Lol. Surprise!
I really don't know.
Precisely because there are only two mothers.
There is no Eves.
The arc ends again.
Another arc is just ending.
There are probably only two fertile women left and each has a hundred children.
It works a bit badly.
But anyway, there's an obvious "bad" jump in all these graphs around the Steam launch. Steam players make impulse purchases and don't stick with games as long, it seems.
I don't think so.
I was playing when Steam players came in and it was a very stressful experience - for 10 people one knew what he was doing.
I remember my brother who tried to put iron in the blacksmith's oven with his hands.
Then for the first time in a long time I died of hunger as an adult several times, because most players ate only and could not do anything.
It was a very traumatic experience, and I think that's why so many Steam players have abandoned the game. Who wants to play the hunger dying simulator?
Well, I looked through my old posts and unfortunately since February (the infamous temperature correction) I'm just complaining about in the forum.
During these few months, Jason reduced water (twice), introduced fences (which nobody wanted).
Then, to force players to use fences, he added swords and let griefs be killed with impunity.
Do you remember those beautiful days when one man killed all your family?
Then there was a rift and a nonsense system of constantly starting from the beginning.
This time I see it this way - this amendment again limits something and there are so many ways that it will fail, that unfortunately it will be bad.
I can already see this chaos and confusion and weeks of corrections.
Jason, you're going in the wrong direction.
Instead of restricting and forcing players to do something, start giving them rewards!
Finally, start adding something!
Specialization system - here you are.
Let the person who deals with the berries have a random chance of growing a wonderful shrub that gives more fruit - suddenly the bush begins to glow and you get the message: "You have grown an improved bush. You are a qualified farmer."
The beginner's joy will be priceless.
A blacksmith can forge two tools from one piece of iron, a hunter make twice as many clothes from leather, etc.
Let it be add-ons, skill bonuses, and not a nonsens system in which someone can use a stone and another cannot (ha, ha, very realistic).
I also don't know how you imagine creating new technologies - now only a few players know how to make an engine, well making it even more difficult ... yeah it will be a beautiful disaster.
Well, but I know that Jason won't listen anyway.
This is a return to the idea from a few months ago.
You remember?
Only the descendants of Eve born in the swamps were to be able to do things from clay, the savannah people were the only ones who could hunt rabbits etc.
The idea was absurd and now a little changed returns.
I think that this pleasure is not improved by the result we strive for.
And this result is destruction and starting everything from the beginning.
If there was a positive goal, e.g. build a bridge over the rift and move to the other world, it would be really nice.
All players united to escape from the box build a suspension bridge with a thousand ropes and a thousand long shafts.
That would be a real challenge ...
What good ideas!
We really should be developing a lot slower.
Nobody likes developed cities where there is nothing to do?
So why are we in such a hurry to reach this state as soon as possible?
Of course, many people have already talked about it, but the technology tree is irrational.
Why don't we have matches?
A better oven for cooking?
Why is our basic tool a sharpened stone (a knife replaces flint, but a sharpened stone has no substitute)?
We use rabbit bones as needles ... really?
Modern technology is mixed with prehistoric.
It's even easier - from spring to autumn sheep graze on their own.
Only in winter they need to be fed with hay and other feeds.
In fact, for it to be realistic, sheep should be left alone in the pasture.
You don't have to feed them.
They give birth to lambs themselves.
Of course, the pastures need to be changed because the grass begins to end quickly.
So every village should have several penss.
In pens where sheep do not graze, the grass grows back.
It would be more realistic than feeding sheep with gooseberry bowls.
Of course, that would be too easy.
Here you need blood, sweat and tears.
It can't be too easy!
And also water - each village had its own water source - a river, lake or just a well.
These wells have not dried up for many generations.
And they didn't need engines to extract water.
Just a simple underpressure.
Such pumps are still standing in my city today - just wave this lever and the water will flow.
http://fotoforum.gazeta.pl/zdjecie/4082 … escie.html
No oil rigs, diesel engines, gasoline etc.
Maybe someone should make Jason realize that rabbits don't feed on berries. Sheep don't eat berries either. And especially gooseberry. Compost can be made from everything that is organic. Not necessarily from gooseberry and carrot.
The results of these great changes will be:
- faster dying of Eve camps - lack of readily available clothes and food - rabbit meat and eggs (do I good understand that when you dig a well all the ponds in the area disappear?)
- it creates many opportunities for griefs - how to drain all the water on the map before someone creates the engine
- I have not yet been to a city where all the inhabitants would have advanced clothes, which means that we will be stuck with skirts of grass and animals leather which won't even be stapled,
- the backpack will be something overly valuable,
- a lot of people liked to be a hunter, now it will be a hassle and not pleasure,
- less pies combinations.
What problem does it solve? Are there too many backpacks? So what? By riding a horse cart you can easily find and bring 20 and more backpacks found to the city.
Why doesn't Jason make simple changes that would make the game easier? Eg chopping swamp trees should not be considered hungry work.
Jason works without thinking and in the easiest way for himself.
Why did I know it would be something like that?
Something that will hinder the game and make it less enjoyable?
I am probably a prophet.
Thank you for your answer.
I don't know why the tile should track bones, but I'm not a programmer.
Are you talking about this person:
http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=5239535Seems this is the kind of person this game is for now. What a shame.
Exactly, it's him. Why can't we get rid of this person?
I did have a somewhat similar experience last night... Probably the same griefer. I was born in to a decimated town.. The difference? I made sure I found and killed the griefer with my mom. We didn't take chances, we killed all potential griefers. We worked together to rebuild the fence and town, and we were thriving once again. It was one of the most interesting and fun lives I've had.
I will quote a historical figure:
"Fisher: There will be no order in this country unless 750,000 bastards are shot.
Someone is skeptical about this: Do you think there are 750,000 bastards?
Fisher: It's okay. If not, we will choose from the honest. "
Mr meeseeks, congratulations on your sense of humor ...
Wait, wasn't that a joke?
As for ideas - anything, at the moment the level of griefing is unbearable.
Griefing is fun. For griefere, and non- griefers alike.. But, I agree, the current curse system is broken. I'm usually a very helpful player... But now, when I do, I can grief without fear of consequence...
Facepalm
Soon you will play with yourself, because normal players will leave.
Cannot load the basket with bones on the cart. This also applies to horse-drawn carts.
I really wish I could eliminate at least this ....... very toxic individual.
Do you know him?
He is the one who always boasts in the last words: "I killed 10 people", "I killed the XY family".
I have the impression that the whole damn rift is a playground for one kid with problems.
And I hate rifts, I hate fences, I wish that the good old days of the game came back.
However, I do not believe that this is possible.
The player base has changed too much.
Griefing has only gone down because there's not much of a point to it. The map resets pretty often so any new griefing they do won't be able to add up.
I think you didn't play today.
I haven't seen such a senseless killing festival in a long time.
Griefs now have new fun - finish the arc as soon as possible.
This time the arc lasted several hours (?)
Dchella
If you don't like griefs, play and you'll be shocked.
The game has changed a lot. Unfortunately for the worse. And these changes cannot be undone.
The Black family just died, which caused the end of the world.
I don't know what happened to people today, but mass murders were committed in every family.
The last woman from the Black family fled the city and was killed along with the children by the Bean family.
I was in each of these families and each time someone killed me for no reason and no sense.
But at least I survived the end of the world for the first time.