One Hour One Life Forums

Aight guys. Certain countries have LISTS of allowed names or at least give you a stop to a name that would get your kid bullied in school, and they aren't backwater countries either. Names that switched gender only did so in recent human history where name meanings are so far removed from the languages they originated in. If each time we spoke names we said "Flower girl" "Warrior" "Shinig light" "Thirdborn boy" "Son of twin" we would err some more. Where do we think name meanings even come from? Languages.
How does a language develop? Like a group of people.

Legally in the world, some goverments can stop you from naming your children whatever you want.

It is true that names are only a semantic value, but ignoring that as simply such and running it under the hyperpolitical gender-erasing race-erasing modern day politics without head or tail isn't truthful either. Humanity has always been hyper aware about such things. Names in particular have been put under a very high moral ground worldwide. Why are there so many stories about  finding out the 'true name' of someone? Or why did certain cultures have names that mean 'unwanted' or 'black dog' for either their childhood or entire life if not but to decieve malevolent spirits. Why do certain cultures have specific names for occasions of birth? Specific names for twins, the third born boy, the child that is 'enough children now'. Why do some cultures name their children semantically the same but tend to choose similair things for either gender regardless? And why are such practices not universal but contained among a culture of people?

The phenomenom of New York is only an extreme yet extremely tiny fragmant of the whole history of humanity, and a small fragment of an ironically 'global' world. Exchange of name practices happned slowly, very slowly, so slowly it's mostly tied with periods of migration. Not googling baby lists on the phone, and even then, outside of cultural crockpots, that practice is rare.
Names are a product of a culture's language and it's based off it. Language, a thing which is developed among a certain group of people over many generations. If names, language weren't tied with 'race', we wouldn't have hyper-political activists running around telling people to not learn different languages unless they belong to that race.
-eyeroll-
Or advocating against cultural exchange.
-more eyeroll-
Something that has been exchanging at a slow rate throughout the whole of human history.
Something we have to accept is indicative in the now yet fluid in a multi-generational time span.

It is culturaly deep. And that goes much deeper than 'race', which seems to change meaning and what it includes on a whim of politics.

Like genes, language, practice, they evolve on their own, they fork and diversify, they exchange when new g/l/p's are introduced, they spread as population migrates. They also assimilate.
A group of people is united among those and many more different factors. But those different factors can interchange, split, dissapear, get assimilated or incorporated at different rates.

In the dark ages in europe, some family in the Anglo Saxon kingdom wouldn't name their newborn Rikka, Snežinkai or Aputsiak. Yet all these names are semantically equivalent.
They'd name their child in Old English. Yet. The names would become typicaly Norman only a few hundrets of years later. Why? The Normanl conquest of course.
Yet a name like 'Mary' 'Peter', Biblical and Hebrew names would replace those a few hundreths of years later? Why? Because the romans spread christianity, then the catholic church furthered their grip.
And even then. Those names, from another culture, STILL they tailored to the needs of a culture and a language. Why is a name like Eliyyahu turned to Ilija, Elijah, Ilyas, Elias depending on the people they settled in? Because a name is the child of a language, and language goes historically as deep as a person's genome and culture etc. and goes through the same historical transformations, asimilations, adaptations.

On a side note it would make sense to bracket names and assign them randomly to a family that springs up alongside a language.
And as two families mingle, so do their names and your lineage forever expands on their available naming pool.

But should it? -shrugs-
People pick out their favurite names, but booting someone out of their safe zone isn't necessarily bad.

OHOL is interesting specifically because of the human nature to it. Think about it when it was the norm to dump your child at the 'daycare' by the fire. If you felt bad about that and the meh relationship your had with your child, that tells something about the world in the real...

I don't think you understand what I wrote. I wasn't talking about the abundance of apples, but that the acquisition of apples requires grafting from another tree displaying desireable apples.

Apples are great, simply by having apples I agree 100%. The are so many more things you can do with apples. You can make vinegar, you can dry them, you can make apple juice...

Though in my opinion. Apple trees should be like in real life. Example. You have to plant plenty of wild apple trees and among them some can mutate to be better edible to humans. You cut twigs from the good apple tree and graft it onto a young, still growing tree to make it into the same sort that bears delicious fruit.
Wild apples aren't really that tasty, nor are wild pears, but their fruit is usually used in making alcohol.

if worms were not limited, they wouldn't be always exhumed. Simply due being a non renewable, people are taking them out for 'later' or when some unfortunate soul will go through the hassle of fishing.

Having the name list expanded to include a lot of different cultures would be really great.

Also a moment of silence for all the children named Vahn. It's really a blessing that we don't have to deal with stupid, offensive, racist names at all. But expanding on the list to include namelists includic say, Japanese, Nordic, Zulu...
However i think it's good to make a list of lesser known and lesser used names instead and use those instead, you'll likely never run into the same name problem that way.

Almost three days. Sounds about right imo. If you played one game erry day your situation odesen't change much.
Complaining about sameness seems ironic by this point.
The game has been a long time in this point. The rift duration doesen't have much to do with it either...always been the same and going through the same routine since the start of the game, you'll go through eve camp to small town to big town to city over and over and over again. The only differance through the rift duration is how quickly the cycle resets.

The longer it'll last the more horrid towns will get, the faster the arc resets the quicker we'll go through the loop of eve-camp-town eve-camp-town and it'll all feel just so more fleeting. There is no satisfaction in either extreme and hitting the golden middle... good luck with that.
Ideally a shorter rift is better for change of situation but misses out on permanence, a longer rift accumulates more mistakes and added up carelessness from players.

I wouldn't try balance oil just now either.
I think building onto the tech tree with more oil consuimg structures, that'll get us closer to exhaustion, plus give some new goal for people to strive for, while also reducing the sameness of the game lately, if only just for a short while. (Ovens, central heating, nails, anvils, oxen, chainsaws, cupboards, shelves,?? There's so much that can be done to help clutter/tech/aesthetics and an improvement in any of these will appease almost everybody...I think)
Plus perhaps a good grand update may entice new players to try out the game, improving the family survival rate if the player average raises even just so slightly.
But ideally, the rift lenght should be flexible for low populations too.
If it goes on for too long, well... We can devise our own doom.

As I said, the griefing can be stopped instantly with a bow and arrow.

Perhaps the tutorial should improve on the yumming information and offer alternatives to simply berry bushes.
Maybe offer a different food on each station. perhaps even teaching you how to make stew down the line.

It's kinda disheartening to see some ok foods just neglected like that. French fries are easy to make, but apparently they're not eaten so much. Everything eclipses under the berries!
Wish we knew how much of a % of those berries were eaten in basic camps vs outside exploration vs in towns. Ideally for towns it should be twice any other food. Provided everyone is yumming heh.

Its a nice project that improves life over time, especially improved road networking and the change is instantaneous. With each 10 tiles longer you have ten tiles longer road and an instantly reduced travel time.

Imagine then people purposefully trying to destroy all existing families purposefully or ganging up on one another.
Imagine the possibilities of drama.
"Jones hates Africa, but we're at 5 families so we can't risk attacking them else we're gone too"
Or a race to kill off the 5th to restart the world!

First came conquest, then came war, famine and finally death as the harbringers of the apocalypse. A quarter of the population would die.

Rampant griefing. And only griefing. People complained so much about griefing they too began to exhibit antisocial behaviour which in turn only fueled people's frustration.
And grieing is a people issue. We have an organised griefer group goin round being butts.

But!
We're slowly moving update wise to make it less of an issue. Otherwise the rift itself is quite good, it brought us a new terrain generation, navigation is easy, we can fuel iron mines to dig more!
There's nothing necessarily wrong with the update, it's just the update potented problem issues and before people go, turn it back to prevent griefing.
The game can be turned back so much to be a single player game and you'd never encounter a single griefer...ever. But that's not a game we want.

I really like this idea, instantly gives you update on political relations!