a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
Yes, I think the length could vary. Perhaps the first winter after a reset could be short, like 15 minutes, but then they grow longer with time, making survival ever harder.
There seems to be two main reasons behind the Rift:
- Bring people together
- Create a time of lack -> struggle
However, the rift also has its own issues:
- No surprise when it comes to where you're born
- No sense of winning
Seasons in an open world can solve these issues.
The idea is to have an open world, easier road building (like flat rock mining), and no Eve window.
Then implement two seasons, winter and summer. Summer is the present state in the game. During winter, no food grows, no rabbits can be caught, and you get no eggs from geese, no lambs from sheep. Clothes and fire become extremely important. During summer you have to gather food and hope your family has enough to last through winter. The length of winter and the time between winters can be somewhat random. The need for clothes should be lessened during summer.
If all families die, the world resets.
If they live through winter, all structures remain. All wild plants grow back - milkweed, burdock, bananas, everything. It's a time of abundance.
Here's how it would solve the current issues:
- Bring people together:
In an open world where you're born as Eve, but you have no chance of surviving if you spawn in during winter, you have to find cities with a surplus of food. More roads will help you locate them, even in an infinite world. With the peace mechanics implemented in the game, people should be more eager to build roads than right before the Rift was implemented. Road building will be an important summer activity.
- More variety in lives:
The pre-Rift system offered variety in whether or not you were born into an early village or an old city. With seasons, more variety exists because you might be born in a time of lack or in a time of abundance, forcing you to make different choices. A problem with the pre-Rift world was that people tended to /die in order to have a say in what life they wanted to live. This can either be fixed by giving people the option to be reborn where they last lived, or just keep /die-babies as an accepted part of the game. To give people an option of where to be born is not very different anyway than forcing everyone to live in a very small Rift that makes it easy to return wherever they want to be...
- Creates a time of lack but with a purpose and a win state:
The purpose is to prepare for winter (if summer), or to survive winter, and if you're alive when summer comes it will give you the feeling of having won, even as a new cycle has begun.
Can you program bots that make both compost and carrot-berry-bowls for other uses?
As a result of this mismatch, in a recent arc, I personally visited a village that had 50 surplus backpacks stored away. Backpacks were so plentiful as to be worthless.
If backpacks were worthless, nobody would be using them.
They don't lose their value because there are plenty to be found.
Granted, people don't fight over backpacks if there are enough for everyone. But is the presence of conflict over an item what defines its value in your mind? And not its usefulness?
Sometimes it feels like you don't understand your own game, Jason...
I think residents of OHOL should go on a mass strike and refuse to make another berry carrot bowl until a farming update happens ![]()
With the entire food economy supposedly based on limited water supplies, having and endless source of wild meat that required no water to produce was clearly broken.
Did anyone mention that compost gets boring? Pick berries, pick carrot, mash and put on wheat, pick berries, pick carrot, give to sheep, dirt on bush, water on bush, repeat
It's a boring task with no tech to make it quicker. To make everything dependent on the compost mini game makes the game even more tedious.
(I would guess. I'm not playing nowadays.)
That's clearly way too many bunnies. It is no wonder the situation was getting out of hand. Fortunately, Jason noticed in time.
Thank you for saving the players from the mean killer rabbits, Jason. ![]()
Makes sense considering how many snares you find on the map due to people always making more and more. If not just breaking it'd be nice to remove the rope from the stakes considering eventually you'd have a bunch of useless traps since rabbits become so scarce on the map that 30 snares just aren't doing anything anymore.
This would most likely make a difference. Ropes are always needed for something.
Well, strictly speaking...
The only thing that prevents a new player from learning what to eat is that they die from hunger before they learn.
They could in theory pop into the game from the start if they didn't die before they had time to figure things out. I guess.
I agree Dodge, more could be done to try to keep new players.
And I guess we'd have to ask them why they don't return.
Since there are other games based on OHOL with better tutorial areas, I guess they are a good indication of what is needed.
And if Jason doesn't want to hire someone to help work on the game, perhaps this is something another person could do? Build rooms in the tutorial area to expand and improve it?
Would it be possible to create an abundant tutorial village, so that after walking around on your own a bit, you have an option to meet up with other new players and explore the village together?
But that's only a guess i could be totally wrong, stop pretending you know why player numbers are declining.
I haven't played in a while. I don't know when I'll be back, but I don't feel very inspired.
I'm not sure I can point to one specific thing that makes me not play though. I was very tired of griefers. From what I understand, the new curse system has made it better, but for some reason it's not enough to make me jump back in.
When I consider playing, what pops up first in my mind is the countless hours of picking berries and carrots and making compost. And I feel tired even before I begin. I actually like being a farmer in the game, but I don't like how there's no development in the actual tasks farmers do.
I'm not fond of the rift. I'm not fond of wilderness where plants don't grow back. It just doesn't feel like wilderness, like nature. Ultimately, there will be scarcity and there's nothing we can do to prevent that. So it's as if the big underlying theme of this game is: "Meaninglessness. Nothing matters. Eventually everything goes to he**."
And I'm not fond of player made apocalypses or wars.
I still find the game fascinating which is why I pay attention to the updates and what you all think of them. And I believe there will come an update that makes me pick up the game again. But making rabbit hunting harder isn't it.
That said, I do wish there was a bigger optional tutorial area. I spent a lot of time there learning how to forge, and I'd like to use an area like that to learn to build engines.
And I do think it would be a great help for beginners if they learned that there was other kinds of food to be found besides berries. I wish there was a table in the game we could place food on. A similar table could be found in the tutorial, and it wouldn't have to contain all the foods, perhaps just a pie and some cooked meat, but it would be a simple item for new players to recognize. "Table means food."
Interesting to me would be:
Rabbits disappear and springs stop giving water because of seasons.
They're gone for a while, then they return.
In an open world, but with an improved road building mechanism so that cities are connected.
When winter comes, people are forced to stay together. If they lack resources, they have to move to other towns or go buy supplies.
Then - a new season of abundance.
If all towns die out during winter, the apocalypse resets the world.
I just don't understand why everything has to be so artificial with the rift and forced scarcity when seasons solve the same problems.
Why did people switch from fur to cloth in the real world?
Because it was more practical.
Why don't they switch in the game?
Because fur is more practical.
(And, hunting rabbits is more fun than farming berries and carrots.)
Change that, and people will use less fur.
I would prefer a farming update over rabbit extinction.
Sigh. It feels a little like the current philosophy behind the game changes is "If you're not having fun I'm going to make sure you're having fun! Whether you like it or not!"
jasonrohrer wrote:https://i.imgur.com/qzkm5t0.png
The point of the arcs is to see what happens over the long haul to villages as fundamental resources run out in a finite area. .
Let me give you the simplest answer to this question, WE F**KING DIE .
Thank you
Yeah... it might not be the most interesting of all experiments...
The apocolypse is just our zoo keeper cleaning up our exhibit when it gets too messy.
It did always feel like the Eves popping up were in reality beamed down from a mothership.
Alternatively, rivers could be the "roads" radiating out from 0,0 ... They are like natural "roads" which would block land-movement (foot travel or horse travel), but allow rapid travel using a boat or raft. Rivers could be crossed on foot by constructing a bridge.
How about... [warning, incoming suggestion]
Shallow Rivers.
You can walk up or down (or cross) a shallow river, but your speed is reduced by half.
Babies can't enter shallow rivers.
A cart without wheels can be used as a boat to travel the shallow river quickly. The animation of the moving person shows the shaft of the cart being used as an oar/stick to push the cart along.
And as for the OP suggestion.... wild roads.... well.... the world is supposed to be untouched when the arc starts. That's a premise of the game.
That's why there have been suggestions that the wild roads could be rivers, or paths made by animals.
Or roads from earlier iterations. If we could mine for flat rocks, road building would be simpler.
Please, free us from this hell cell.
Soundtrack:
If You Love Somebody Set Them Free
In the case where the name is unavailable, I prefer that the auto-name-picker chooses a name based on gender. But I'm okay with mothers selecting any name regardless of gender.
A sign can take like 30+ skewers, I aint farming dat
Farming update needed
Before the Rift, we cared that our lineage died because when the line died out, we lost access to that village, probably forever. A long line gave more chances to see the same village in future lives.
It is the village I care about ... not the family name.
Yes. The thing is, regardless of which family occupies a town, they're played by the same players. What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet...
I have a fond memory of a pre-Rift life where our family was dying out, and a young woman with a child happened to stroll into town. She fled her birth town for some reason when she was a child and had been searching her entire life for another place to live. Everyone were so happy! It meant that our hard work was not in vain, the town would go on.
I too think that the Rift takes something away from the game that existed before.
The best part about the Rift is that it intensifies the problems that were already present so that they are easier to find and deal with. For example, the problem with bears resetting in their caves producing too many of them was discovered because of the Rift.
I suspect that some of the ideas that have been implemented since the Rift was introduced would be beneficial in an open-ended world too.
It would have been great if we could find a way to have the best of both worlds, the pre-Rift sense of discovery and adventure along with the closer interactions of the Rift.
Well, like I said before, you can't have it both ways.
You simply cannot have all these things exist simultaneously:1. Permanence of families.
2. Permanent reachability of player-built areas.
3. Lots of variability in terms of which "tech era" you are born into in each life.
4. Towns close enough together to allow interaction.
1. Do we need permanence of families? Why not marriages as a way of creating an evolving history of families? In an open-ended world, if marriage offered some benefit to the families, it wouldn't take long before an Eve-family sought out others.
2. and 4. Roads. More flat rocks + less griefing = more roads. Pre-Rift there was a time when people didn't consider it wise to connect their towns because of the vulnerability to war, but the peace mechanism just might have fixed that.
3. The open-ended worlds had this.
It seems to me that the two main problems with the pre-Rift worlds were:
- People wanting to play Eve sometimes caused a player drought, and old families died out. The Rift fixed this but only because it removes the ability to play Eve except in certain windows.
- There was never truly a lack of resources, since you could always get more by horse or car. But even in the Rift, the concept of lack seems a bit artificial since it is direct result of the Rift, and when it happens, there is no way to overcome it. When it happens, there's no reason in struggling to help your town survive, because you know the Apocalypse is imminent anyway. In an open-ended pre-Rift world with seasons, the goal itself could be struggling through the time of lack, and the sense of achievement could come from whether or not the family succeeded.
Well we only need more Eves because the end condition is based on number of families, which is a weird condition if you think about it.
I agree. Can we have marriages soon? A wedding could include two people (from different, peaceful families?) both saying (or writing on a document, with the aid of two elders perhaps) "I am <new last name>", and thus a new family could be created.