And I disagree. I would prefer it if we didn't have to have ANY bars.Crocket wrote:I don't think one extra bar would be too much to keep up with.Serpardum wrote:I believe that the interfaces should be as inatrusive as possible. There should be the minimal there that allows one to get into the role. Extra bars, messages, etc.. tend to take away from that.
Hunger and Thirst
Moderator: Gamemasters
OK, so you don't want the message. Well now you get the "You are encumbered" message when you're lumberjacking and you carry too much. But you can avoid it if you keep it mind how much you can carry, just as if you can avoid the hunger messages if you remember to eat.Serpardum wrote:When I'm doing something, however, I generally get engrossed in it. If I"m searching for something, scouting, fighting, mining, lumbering, talking, searching for something, etc... I'm role playing the character, in essence living the character.
When I'm in the middle of doing something and I start getting message, "you're hungry, you have to eat" or such it throws me out of what I'm doing and I'm back to playing a game again. Because the interface is talking to me again.
Still don't like the possibility of message or don't want to remember to eat to avoid it you say? Fair enough, then don't put in a message at all. Right now there already is a kind of hunger system where you don't regenerate health and mana if you're hungry but there's no message that tells you that either. So use a similar principle, except make the effects of food on "hunger" last a longer reasonable time than it does on regeneration. Then all you have to do is add effects to it such as speed and skill effectiveness reduction to say 75% at a certain state of hunger and then 50% when it reaches the next stage of hunger. Then you won't have to face the messages but you'll notice its effects if you don't eat for an extended period of time but do energy consuming work, which is basically moving and use of all skills. As well you'd have another powergaming deterrent in a small way.
This could lead to pointless eating, Dyluck. If a player is blacksmithing away and realizes they are failing more than normal they will in 95% of the cases just plop a cherry in their mouth and go about their work again. They will not take the time to stop and eat or rest in any way. Just a simple shift in their mouse location over the food and click. It will just be another thing for most people to work around rather than with.
I must say that it is a very interesting idea however. That brings up the whole topic of hunger being brought into the game without the use of a bar that should be looked into further.
Possibly a persons original attributes decline over time while they are overcome with hunger. Very gradual, mind you but still there. Eating would restore these attributes to their peak level (those which you start with) and possibly a different type of food would be better suited to regain different aspects of your attributes, with some of the more hearty foods encompassing all attributes.
I must say that it is a very interesting idea however. That brings up the whole topic of hunger being brought into the game without the use of a bar that should be looked into further.
Possibly a persons original attributes decline over time while they are overcome with hunger. Very gradual, mind you but still there. Eating would restore these attributes to their peak level (those which you start with) and possibly a different type of food would be better suited to regain different aspects of your attributes, with some of the more hearty foods encompassing all attributes.
Dyluck, when I said eating pointlessly I meant that they would eat without regard for the desired purpose. They would only eat when they noticed their production skills dropping because they would be making less money this way; they would not stop to eat but would just click quickly on the food and resume work immediately. Not overeating but only eating when production slowed.
I would rather see attributes lower because to me this sounds more realistic. When you become hungry you begin to grow weaker. Your mind does not function as well nor does your body. Intelligence, strength, dexterity etc. all decline when you withhold yourself from eating. Your memory of how to make a craft do not (only in extreme circumstances would they) but your ability to make your body do those actions fail.
I do not know but I would think causing skills to decline with hunger would be much more trouble than good because it would take forever to regain the skills you lost because it would be hard to keep craft skills earned from crafts separate from craft skills lost from death and from hunger. That seems confusing so I'll try to put it another way just to be safe. Now there are set numbers for everyone's individual attributes. Nothing makes them rise or fall yet, but if hunger made them fall and eating made them rise back to their initial level this would be the only variable in this equation.
However, if skills were lowered from hunger they may have to be kept separate in how they are regained (only from hunger and not from work) because when you die your skills also drop and the only way to regain them is through work. If you could regain your skills lost from hunger by work and create hunger by work as well this would negate both aspects of the equation. Work would cause the skill to rise but hunger would cause the skill to drop. One would be faster than the other, probably hunger decreasing the skill faster than work increasing it so hunger would be noticeable and this would cause skill to drop. Once the skills had dropped how would the program distinguish how to regain these lost skills? It seems hard to make the skills lost by hunger to be regained only by eating and not work, because if it had to be regained by work it would take forever. If it could be regained by food what would stop eating from raising all skills?
It seems more simple to affect attributes and more realistic than to affect skills, in my mind.
I would rather see attributes lower because to me this sounds more realistic. When you become hungry you begin to grow weaker. Your mind does not function as well nor does your body. Intelligence, strength, dexterity etc. all decline when you withhold yourself from eating. Your memory of how to make a craft do not (only in extreme circumstances would they) but your ability to make your body do those actions fail.
I do not know but I would think causing skills to decline with hunger would be much more trouble than good because it would take forever to regain the skills you lost because it would be hard to keep craft skills earned from crafts separate from craft skills lost from death and from hunger. That seems confusing so I'll try to put it another way just to be safe. Now there are set numbers for everyone's individual attributes. Nothing makes them rise or fall yet, but if hunger made them fall and eating made them rise back to their initial level this would be the only variable in this equation.
However, if skills were lowered from hunger they may have to be kept separate in how they are regained (only from hunger and not from work) because when you die your skills also drop and the only way to regain them is through work. If you could regain your skills lost from hunger by work and create hunger by work as well this would negate both aspects of the equation. Work would cause the skill to rise but hunger would cause the skill to drop. One would be faster than the other, probably hunger decreasing the skill faster than work increasing it so hunger would be noticeable and this would cause skill to drop. Once the skills had dropped how would the program distinguish how to regain these lost skills? It seems hard to make the skills lost by hunger to be regained only by eating and not work, because if it had to be regained by work it would take forever. If it could be regained by food what would stop eating from raising all skills?
It seems more simple to affect attributes and more realistic than to affect skills, in my mind.
I didn't say anything about effects on the desired purpose for eating that you are talking about, which I assume is an RPG purpose. You can't control the fact that people don't eat for RPG reasons. If they just eat for a single moment so that their activities are back to normal efficiency, that's fine. At least it's better than not eating at all, and food becomes slightly more important.
I didn't say for the actual skillbar to reduce, I said skills should be lowered to 75% or 50% efficiency during a hunger state. Once you've eaten back up to a full state, you're back to 100% of your actual efficiency state. I didn't say that eating increases skills while hunger drecreases it on two opposite sides of a continuum.
Skill, speed, attribute, sure whatever.
I didn't say for the actual skillbar to reduce, I said skills should be lowered to 75% or 50% efficiency during a hunger state. Once you've eaten back up to a full state, you're back to 100% of your actual efficiency state. I didn't say that eating increases skills while hunger drecreases it on two opposite sides of a continuum.
Skill, speed, attribute, sure whatever.
Let me reiterate what I would prefer.
Making eating give you some *advantage* over not eating.
Don't make not eating give you a *disadvantage*.
Eating right now will allow you to heal, that is an advantage. If you don't eat, but don't fight, then eating won't effect you.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Also, Dyluck, you bring up a good point, those "you are encumbered" can be a bit annoying. I put them in without much thought, but I could just as easily take them out.
Do people find them annoying enough to remove them?
Making eating give you some *advantage* over not eating.
Don't make not eating give you a *disadvantage*.
Eating right now will allow you to heal, that is an advantage. If you don't eat, but don't fight, then eating won't effect you.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Also, Dyluck, you bring up a good point, those "you are encumbered" can be a bit annoying. I put them in without much thought, but I could just as easily take them out.
Do people find them annoying enough to remove them?
I don't find the encumberance messages very annoying, nor would I find the hunger one annoying. There's a lot of other non conversational messages to deal with already, such as when you're smithing so I don't find this one much more of an annoyance. I don't think it's neccessary to get rid of all game generated statements nor that they ruin the RP feeling that much. Some messages might be unnecessary, but some are helpful. But I think the encumberance message is more useful becuause it's difficult to tell when you start to become encumbered if the only visible affect is a tiny barely noticable change in speed, whereas with hunger you need only to eat every hour or so to avoid it.
But death or no death, you should still have to eat regularly between reasonable intervals to keep up your abilities, so what's wrong with that? Sure, you might be forced to eat if you want to stay at your peak performance, but only after a reasonable interval of time, and that's very logical. You won't be a slave to eating, but it won't be pleasant to simply ignore eating either.
Having to eat once every hour or so to stay at peak performance isn't going overboard with realism or anything.
It seems it's just that you presonally had previous bad expreiences in other games with other hunger systems.
Why? The fact is that not eating gives you a disadvantage, and at the extreme, death.Serpardum wrote:Let me reiterate what I would prefer.
Making eating give you some *advantage* over not eating.
Don't make not eating give you a *disadvantage*.
But death or no death, you should still have to eat regularly between reasonable intervals to keep up your abilities, so what's wrong with that? Sure, you might be forced to eat if you want to stay at your peak performance, but only after a reasonable interval of time, and that's very logical. You won't be a slave to eating, but it won't be pleasant to simply ignore eating either.
Having to eat once every hour or so to stay at peak performance isn't going overboard with realism or anything.
It seems it's just that you presonally had previous bad expreiences in other games with other hunger systems.
@Serpardum - No don't take the encumbrance messages. It's nice to have a little warning that your speed is going to start slowing down.
If you simply want to hunger for a power-gaming deterant, a better solution would probably be the stamina bar idea (I think Roke has mentioned it several times in this thread.) That would force people to actually STOP working and wait until their stamina returned. I think hunger could be worked into stamina by changing the rate at which stamina regenerates based on your hunger. Being hungry would also have its own ill-effects, but they probably wouldn't show up for 3 illarion days or so. I think this would make a little more sense than having just hunger affect your skills.
If it's an advantage instead of a disadvantage for eating that is wanted, just institute the luxury point system.
Kragmar
If you simply want to hunger for a power-gaming deterant, a better solution would probably be the stamina bar idea (I think Roke has mentioned it several times in this thread.) That would force people to actually STOP working and wait until their stamina returned. I think hunger could be worked into stamina by changing the rate at which stamina regenerates based on your hunger. Being hungry would also have its own ill-effects, but they probably wouldn't show up for 3 illarion days or so. I think this would make a little more sense than having just hunger affect your skills.
If it's an advantage instead of a disadvantage for eating that is wanted, just institute the luxury point system.
Kragmar
I don't like the concept of hunger anyway, so I have no feelings about why it should be in, other than so bakers can make more money.
No one has yet to come up with a better reason, and in my opionion, that is not a good enough reason.
As I have said, why dont' we forget about the hunger/hunger bar. If the main purpose to introduce hunger is so people will buy from bakers, then there are much more better ways to do this.
The luxury point system is one way, which is in the game description so will be introduced. I just never think about the luxury point system because it's a bit.. alien to me.
I do tend to think, however, that the luxury point system would definately drive up baked good sales as people bought cakes and pies.
I'm just not sure that now is a good time to introduce it.
And before anyone asks, no, we wouldn't put in hunger as a tempory fix until the luxury point system goes into effect. We try not to do any temporary fixes.
If you don't have time to do it right in the first place, when are you going to find the time to do it over?
No one has yet to come up with a better reason, and in my opionion, that is not a good enough reason.
As I have said, why dont' we forget about the hunger/hunger bar. If the main purpose to introduce hunger is so people will buy from bakers, then there are much more better ways to do this.
The luxury point system is one way, which is in the game description so will be introduced. I just never think about the luxury point system because it's a bit.. alien to me.
I do tend to think, however, that the luxury point system would definately drive up baked good sales as people bought cakes and pies.
I'm just not sure that now is a good time to introduce it.
And before anyone asks, no, we wouldn't put in hunger as a tempory fix until the luxury point system goes into effect. We try not to do any temporary fixes.
If you don't have time to do it right in the first place, when are you going to find the time to do it over?
@Serpardum: Well, I think your personal feelings of simply "I don't like it" and your previous experiences in other games are making you biased in your evaluation of the matter.
I don't think simply "people buying from bakers" is the main purpose of a hunger system, at least it's not mine.
My reasons are less "focused" and they are:
-It's a realistic concept, as much as the weight system and other realistic goals that we strive for. It is reasonable and not overboard if system is done properly.
-Food becomes slighty more important and sough after as a neccessity. All food related occupations get a minimal worth that they deserve.
-Brings possibiliites of roleplaying scenarios and conflicts concerning control over food supplies and resource territorries.
-Can't do things for an extended period of time as effectively, such as powergaming.
I've already acknowledged the fact that the effects of some the benefits stated above are minimal at this time due to the abundance of food. However, with the addition of some other balances, the effects can be increased, and many possiblities realized in the future. I dont think such a hunger system needs to be introduced at the current time as the effects would be minimal, but I don't think it hurts either. It's still a good start to me. Either way, it's still a good idea somewhere along the road.
On a kind of unrelated note, when I read this quote ("We try not to do any temporary fixes. If you don't have time to do it right in the first place, when are you going to find the time to do it over?"), I had to laugh when I thought back about how when the disastrous effects of the implementation of the new intelligence system became evident through the next wave of pks and the disability and retreat of the defending roleplayers who no longer had enough power to handle them, and then the excuse given one year ago to quiet the cry for salvation was "Like I said, this is only a temporary solution!"
I don't think simply "people buying from bakers" is the main purpose of a hunger system, at least it's not mine.
My reasons are less "focused" and they are:
-It's a realistic concept, as much as the weight system and other realistic goals that we strive for. It is reasonable and not overboard if system is done properly.
-Food becomes slighty more important and sough after as a neccessity. All food related occupations get a minimal worth that they deserve.
-Brings possibiliites of roleplaying scenarios and conflicts concerning control over food supplies and resource territorries.
-Can't do things for an extended period of time as effectively, such as powergaming.
I've already acknowledged the fact that the effects of some the benefits stated above are minimal at this time due to the abundance of food. However, with the addition of some other balances, the effects can be increased, and many possiblities realized in the future. I dont think such a hunger system needs to be introduced at the current time as the effects would be minimal, but I don't think it hurts either. It's still a good start to me. Either way, it's still a good idea somewhere along the road.
On a kind of unrelated note, when I read this quote ("We try not to do any temporary fixes. If you don't have time to do it right in the first place, when are you going to find the time to do it over?"), I had to laugh when I thought back about how when the disastrous effects of the implementation of the new intelligence system became evident through the next wave of pks and the disability and retreat of the defending roleplayers who no longer had enough power to handle them, and then the excuse given one year ago to quiet the cry for salvation was "Like I said, this is only a temporary solution!"
no, please don't. It helps to know why a person is slow. Some people might think it is lag that is slowing them down.Serpardum wrote:Also, Dyluck, you bring up a good point, those "you are encumbered" can be a bit annoying. I put them in without much thought, but I could just as easily take them out.
Do people find them annoying enough to remove them?
@Serpardum As you can see Serpardum, actually there are a lot of people that want Hunger/Thirst bars implemented, and it is only a small group that includes you and some others that are acting in a very stubborn way that are against this. There are countless others that have not posted which I am also sure would like Hunger/Thirst bars implemented.
As well, so far the main objection you have to do this is something along the lines of "Well, I just don't like the idea.".
And I repeat. The main purpose of this proposal is not to bring more business to bakers; that is just a side purpose. The main purpose is to allow illarion players to play in a mroe interactive and realistic roleplaying atmosphere that makes the game more fun to play in.
You say in your posts that you "become" engrossed in what you are doing in illarion, and it is because you are playing it to the essence of your character. Well, if you truly want to play your character to its essence, then you must realize that every being has physical needs like hunger and thirst. Part of playing your character to its fullest is eating and drinking, and you should see eating and drinking to increase Hunger/Thirst bars as part of the engrossing experience of illarion.
I doubt that anyone will just "forget about Hunger/Thirst being implemented". Just as you see no reason for this to be implemented most of us see no reason why it shouldn't be implemented.
You really should be more alert to the current player demands for this, and have a change of mind regardless of your own personal opinion. Instead of having your one person pleased, it would be better to have many people pleased.
As well, so far the main objection you have to do this is something along the lines of "Well, I just don't like the idea.".
And I repeat. The main purpose of this proposal is not to bring more business to bakers; that is just a side purpose. The main purpose is to allow illarion players to play in a mroe interactive and realistic roleplaying atmosphere that makes the game more fun to play in.
You say in your posts that you "become" engrossed in what you are doing in illarion, and it is because you are playing it to the essence of your character. Well, if you truly want to play your character to its essence, then you must realize that every being has physical needs like hunger and thirst. Part of playing your character to its fullest is eating and drinking, and you should see eating and drinking to increase Hunger/Thirst bars as part of the engrossing experience of illarion.
I doubt that anyone will just "forget about Hunger/Thirst being implemented". Just as you see no reason for this to be implemented most of us see no reason why it shouldn't be implemented.
You really should be more alert to the current player demands for this, and have a change of mind regardless of your own personal opinion. Instead of having your one person pleased, it would be better to have many people pleased.
Of course I am. Everyone is biased toward their own point of view.Dyluck wrote:@Serpardum: Well, I think your personal feelings of simply "I don't like it" and your previous experiences in other games are making you biased in your evaluation of the matter.
I tend to agree with that. It is realistic.Dyluck wrote:-It's a realistic concept, as much as the weight system and other realistic goals that we strive for. It is reasonable and not overboard if system is done properly.
This has already been discussed ad nauseum.Dyluck wrote:-Food becomes slighty more important and sough after as a neccessity. All food related occupations get a minimal worth that they deserve.
I don't think the game would lend toward territory wars. Not without true territories. And having to fight for food would just make me mad and go on a PKing binge to anyone who was involved.Dyluck wrote:-Brings possibiliites of roleplaying scenarios and conflicts concerning control over food supplies and resource territorries.
Or non powergaming. Such as hunting, scouting, farming, or any of the miriad other things people like to do. I don't think this is a viable reason.Dyluck wrote:-Can't do things for an extended period of time as effectively, such as powergaming.
But the entire argument that people have been giving is that introducing a hunger system would be minimal to the people who didn't care for it. But now you go the opposite way and say it has to have a lot more effect.Dyluck wrote:I've already acknowledged the fact that the effects of some the benefits stated above are minimal at this time due to the abundance of food. However, with the addition of some other balances, the effects can be increased, and many possiblities realized in the future. I dont think such a hunger system needs to be introduced at the current time as the effects would be minimal, but I don't think it hurts either. It's still a good start to me. Either way, it's still a good idea somewhere along the road.
So you prove my point in one of two ways:Dyluck wrote:On a kind of unrelated note, when I read this quote ("We try not to do any temporary fixes. If you don't have time to do it right in the first place, when are you going to find the time to do it over?"), I had to laugh when I thought back about how when the disastrous effects of the implementation of the new intelligence system became evident through the next wave of pks and the disability and retreat of the defending roleplayers who no longer had enough power to handle them, and then the excuse given one year ago to quiet the cry for salvation was "Like I said, this is only a temporary solution!"
1) If the implemenation of hte illelligence system was indeed temporary, and it had such a disasterous effect, it proves my point not to do things temporarily.
2) The intelligence system has been in for, how long? So it is not indeed temporary, so we didn't do a temporary fix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So far we have, what I consider viable reasons:
1) For makers/farmers to make more money
2) For realism.
I"m not sure that is enough of a reason to implement it.
Of course, if the other PTB want it, it will go in, but I still don't see a good enough reason for it.
-
Drathe
- Official Illarion Banner Contest Winner
- Posts: 714
- Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2001 9:46 pm
- Location: Climbing from a window
cor Dyluck..you took a caning there. Tho, I have to agree With Serp, food system is for want of a better word, 'bad'
You know its good to have 'realistic' things but..there has to be a line.
Fun or realism....hmm. Its a hard balance. Tho..say the food system is implimented...well..would we have to poop as well..I mean how can you eat and not poop.
You know its good to have 'realistic' things but..there has to be a line.
Fun or realism....hmm. Its a hard balance. Tho..say the food system is implimented...well..would we have to poop as well..I mean how can you eat and not poop.
@Drathe/All Fantasy realism as applies to illarion is the fun. Get that into your heads. Is working at a medieval craft, fighting demons fun? Well both of those things are of fantasy realism. They are both things that have derived from realism.
@Gro'bul That sarcastic comment was very rude and inappropriate. There is much more benefit and like for the implementation for Hunger/Thirst bars than there is for a "heeding the call of nature" implementation.
@Gro'bul That sarcastic comment was very rude and inappropriate. There is much more benefit and like for the implementation for Hunger/Thirst bars than there is for a "heeding the call of nature" implementation.
Sure people might have biased opinions, but the idea is to try and not have a biased evaluation of the argumentationSerpardum wrote: Of course I am. Everyone is biased toward their own point of view.
Not quite sure what you mean. But I don't buy (Pun intended) the claim that changes are never made with econonic support it mind. Take for example the rise in bottle prices.Serpardum wrote: This has already been discussed ad nauseum.
I didn't think it would be an easy thing to do either and especially not any time in the near future, but like I said with the support of other balances it could be just one possibility someday. It's just one example, an extreme one probably.Serpardum wrote: I don't think the game would lend toward territory wars. Not without true territories.
With that kind of attitude, you're right.Serpardum wrote: And having to fight for food would just make me mad and go on a PKing binge to anyone who was involved.
And why should someone be doing something repeatedly for an extended period of time without needing to eat? The system would be made so that one had to eat after a reasonable amount of time, not every 10 minutes or something.Serpardum wrote: Or non powergaming. Such as hunting, scouting, farming, or any of the miriad other things people like to do. I don't think this is a viable reason.
Don't understand what you're trying to say, but my paragraph that you referred to was to show the argument from both sides. I acknowledged that a hunger systems's effects would be minimal at the current time but I also believe that it's effects would increase correlationally with other balances in time. I said that I'm for hunger system, not neccessarily for the current time, but neither did I see any harm in doing so.Serpardum wrote: But the entire argument that people have been giving is that introducing a hunger system would be minimal to the people who didn't care for it. But now you go the opposite way and say it has to have a lot more effect.
1) You're rightSerpardum wrote: So you prove my point in one of two ways:
1) If the implemenation of hte illelligence system was indeed temporary, and it had such a disasterous effect, it proves my point not to do things temporarily.
2) The intelligence system has been in for, how long? So it is not indeed temporary, so we didn't do a temporary fix.
2) You're right
So in other words:
1) Your co-workers have either changed their philosophy once again, or you are on a different channel than they are.
2) They lied.
I think you probably thought my original paragraph was to challenge your comment of not doing temporary fixes to negate your reason for not implementing the hunger system, but that was not the intention, as denoted by the fact that I said it was "on an unrelated note" from our actual discussion here. It was actuallly more directed at the people who implemented the intelligence system and their credibility and the inconsistency of some things that some individuals say on behalf of the "team".
Maybe you're right, it's not that much reasons, but I would say the same for half the things that get implemented anyways. A lot of times I've seen things changed just because of a not very well thought out spontaneous idea of the moment,a one-sided view of the situation, or an experience from only one particular scenario. Well, that was mostly just ranting.Serpardum wrote: So far we have, what I consider viable reasons:
1) For makers/farmers to make more money
2) For realism.
I'm not sure that is enough of a reason to implement it.
Anyways, I don't see it as an extremely good reasons but I think it still passed above the bar. I only see minimal positive effects for implementing it, but I don't see any valid negative effects.
@Drathe: Yes, there needs to be a line, and implementing a hugner system doesn't cross that line. You just probably think it does because you already have your own rigid vision of bad system in mind, but the system we implement won't neccessarily have to be the way that you envision it or experienced elsewhere before.
Everyone says that hunger and thirst would cross the line and be too realistic.
How about these examples, I think they cross the line more than hunger does.
Using a zombies entrails to make thread.
Having to dig up ore and coal.
You have to have ore and coal in order to smith an item.
Once you get a ham you cannot eat it until you cook it first.
These are just a small sample of ones that I have noticed. I'm sure there are more. I like all of these because it is what sets Illarion apart as a realistic atmosphere. I think that hunger and thirst would only make it a better system.
How about these examples, I think they cross the line more than hunger does.
Using a zombies entrails to make thread.
Having to dig up ore and coal.
You have to have ore and coal in order to smith an item.
Once you get a ham you cannot eat it until you cook it first.
These are just a small sample of ones that I have noticed. I'm sure there are more. I like all of these because it is what sets Illarion apart as a realistic atmosphere. I think that hunger and thirst would only make it a better system.
And before I forget, here's another example why I don't buy the claim that changes are not implemented for the purpose of economic support in mind: The ridiculously unreal rate at which a number of tools become broken or lost. The only reason given for this is to have players can sell tools to each other, and any other reasons have not been mentioned or shown. Realism has even been sacraficed as seen through the unbelievable rate at which simple items like rods and buckets are lost. So how can you say there is not good enough reasons to implement a hunger system when there are even fewer reasons for a tad variety of other things that get implemented, like:
-----------------------------
The only reasons I hear from people who simply think a hunger sytem is bad is that they've already created a horrible hunger system that they don't like, which was either created in their own mind or taken from previous experience with another system. But whoever said that our system must be the horrible way you imagined or experienced elsewhere? How can one so quickly and closed-mindedly judge that a hunger system in general is a bad idea when there aren't even specifications to how our system would work yet?
If a hunger system was made, then the specifications would be made reasonable. Is it unreasonable that a character should have to eat after say every 1 rl hour or so to stay at peak performance level? Is it too restrictive on your activities to ask that you can't blacksmith, dig, or fight for hours on end (not that it's recommended anyways) at your peak potential if you don't grab a bite? It's not going to be like you're doing your thing, having fun, and then all of a sudden you can't walk or your heath drops if you don't eat. You would just gradually perform at a weaker level, logically due to ignoring hunger.
Take for example: Characters have 200 max hunger points. It drops at a rate of 1 point per minute. If it drops to 100 points, your speed/attribute/skill functions at 90% efficiency of normal. If it drops to 90 points, then functions at 80%, etc. down to the max of say 50% at 60 pionts. Gradual enough? If not, then simply re-balance.
o if say you ate until you were full at 200 hunger points, then you'd last about an hour and a half RL time before you had to eat something. Cake increases hunger points by 25, meat by 15, fish by 10, bread by 5, apples by 2, etc. Just an example.
And you don't have to watch your bar and look at pop up messages periodically to interrupt you. It could just be hidden or you could check your status by hitting a key or something. If memory is that bad, then just let the subtle decrease in performace be a sign of your malnutrition.
Sound reasonable?
The only reason I see for not implementing a hunger system is that its current impact would likely not be that big (which I agree) compared to the amount of work it might required to program it. Therefore I'm for a hunger system, although not necessarily for now or any particular time yet, like I've said. However, the generalized claim that any hunger system is simply bad is simply ungrounded.
- Bottle price hiked up -Economic support for sand, ash, bottle selling, potion selling)
Tool losses at ridiculously fast rates -Economic support for tool sales. Realism comprimised)
Title field automatically appearing with name - Purpose and advantage? Unrealistic: I tell someone my name and they somehow automatically know my status/occupation/title. Unrealistic: Characters stuck with same title throughout their changing lives; becomes a static life.
-----------------------------
The only reasons I hear from people who simply think a hunger sytem is bad is that they've already created a horrible hunger system that they don't like, which was either created in their own mind or taken from previous experience with another system. But whoever said that our system must be the horrible way you imagined or experienced elsewhere? How can one so quickly and closed-mindedly judge that a hunger system in general is a bad idea when there aren't even specifications to how our system would work yet?
If a hunger system was made, then the specifications would be made reasonable. Is it unreasonable that a character should have to eat after say every 1 rl hour or so to stay at peak performance level? Is it too restrictive on your activities to ask that you can't blacksmith, dig, or fight for hours on end (not that it's recommended anyways) at your peak potential if you don't grab a bite? It's not going to be like you're doing your thing, having fun, and then all of a sudden you can't walk or your heath drops if you don't eat. You would just gradually perform at a weaker level, logically due to ignoring hunger.
Take for example: Characters have 200 max hunger points. It drops at a rate of 1 point per minute. If it drops to 100 points, your speed/attribute/skill functions at 90% efficiency of normal. If it drops to 90 points, then functions at 80%, etc. down to the max of say 50% at 60 pionts. Gradual enough? If not, then simply re-balance.
o if say you ate until you were full at 200 hunger points, then you'd last about an hour and a half RL time before you had to eat something. Cake increases hunger points by 25, meat by 15, fish by 10, bread by 5, apples by 2, etc. Just an example.
And you don't have to watch your bar and look at pop up messages periodically to interrupt you. It could just be hidden or you could check your status by hitting a key or something. If memory is that bad, then just let the subtle decrease in performace be a sign of your malnutrition.
Sound reasonable?
The only reason I see for not implementing a hunger system is that its current impact would likely not be that big (which I agree) compared to the amount of work it might required to program it. Therefore I'm for a hunger system, although not necessarily for now or any particular time yet, like I've said. However, the generalized claim that any hunger system is simply bad is simply ungrounded.
-
Drathe
- Official Illarion Banner Contest Winner
- Posts: 714
- Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2001 9:46 pm
- Location: Climbing from a window
I have played other games where they do have a working hunger system.
It, in all of them is annoying. Altho there seems to be 2 styles of system both in my oppinion are not fun.
Both have not made for an ecconamy in food, rather people getting it them selves, or going around asking for it. (for free)
One system (and I am sure some of you know where this is from) when you hunger runs out your ability to move slows..until you are crawling.
Now that is just so fun...crawling for miles to get some where...any where for a dam chickin wing. By that time its not 'please sir, would you have some spare food for a weak man.' but rather, 'hey i need some ***** food some one must av a bit.'
The other system..when your hunger bar runs out your healt slow goes down. Now altho less anoying than walking slow...death from starvation...thats fun to!
Both systems people carry a ton of food around with them at all times.
(so as well as a load of axe, im going to need a load of cakes in my bag to...hmm.. where am I going to carry the two logs I can just about carry before I am encumberd.)
If there is a hunger system implimented in to the game it needs to be carfuly thought out..i say Carfuly with a capital 'C'
It, in all of them is annoying. Altho there seems to be 2 styles of system both in my oppinion are not fun.
Both have not made for an ecconamy in food, rather people getting it them selves, or going around asking for it. (for free)
One system (and I am sure some of you know where this is from) when you hunger runs out your ability to move slows..until you are crawling.
Now that is just so fun...crawling for miles to get some where...any where for a dam chickin wing. By that time its not 'please sir, would you have some spare food for a weak man.' but rather, 'hey i need some ***** food some one must av a bit.'
The other system..when your hunger bar runs out your healt slow goes down. Now altho less anoying than walking slow...death from starvation...thats fun to!
Both systems people carry a ton of food around with them at all times.
(so as well as a load of axe, im going to need a load of cakes in my bag to...hmm.. where am I going to carry the two logs I can just about carry before I am encumberd.)
If there is a hunger system implimented in to the game it needs to be carfuly thought out..i say Carfuly with a capital 'C'
@Drathe I would tend to agree with Dyluck, previous experiences are not a grounded base to say that a Hunger/Thirst system would be bad for illarion. The illarion Hunger/Thirst System as I proposed would do something along the lines of decreasing health slowly after it had gone down to zero. If you are so careless as to not eat and drink then you deserve the consequences! And unless you wish to powergame you would not have to carry a ton of food around. I am sure those people you mentioned in that game were powergamers that did not want truly want to RP but just wanted to get their skills up. Just like the Stamina system that will be implemented this will serve to lower powergaming a bit. One should always stop at certain intervals in work etc. etc. and eating could be one of the reasons to do so.
No offense to the proposal, but the games point is to RP. so really you dont need any bars, you should just RP being hungry or thirsty. It would be to much work to put something such as a hunger or thirst bar into the game, concidering the fact that different races have different eating habits. hobbits eat more than a Human would (breakfast, second breakfast, elevensies, lunch, afternoon tea, super, dinner), so it would require making the bars beings set differently for each race.
Things like this would also restrict your RP, people like me like to be free when we RP, rather than having something like this telling us when we have to eat or drink.
Things like this would also restrict your RP, people like me like to be free when we RP, rather than having something like this telling us when we have to eat or drink.
Hey, its the same in real life, think of the bar as your stomach, when your stomach fells empty and sends impulses telling you "Im hungry", are you going to eat when you want to? No. your going to eat when you get the chance, (unless you have some kind of sindrome but lets not go into that) or your going to starve! so dont think of the bar as a meter, think of it as your characters stomach.
Last edited by Stag on Tue Jun 17, 2003 1:55 am, edited 1 time in total.