[abbr=Yay! Quote pyramids! ]Yeah
[quote=“FunsizeNinja123, post:21, topic:5254”][quote=“Inadequate, post:20, topic:5254”]I’m fairly certain Cata tech hasn’t advanced to the point of stopping the aging process. Also, this is a really bad idea.[/quote][/quote]Remember that CDDA takes places at least 40 years in the future, I’m pretty sure they’re further along in anti-aging technology than we currently are.
I’m actually really not against this idea, but it should be pretty damn slow ageing. Currently we lack any end game goals, and halting/reversing ageing is an interesting one. It’s something the player would definitely want to do something about, and could be given some interesting tasks to complete to get towards it. Although games currently don’t have much reason to last over a few in game years at the very most (due to lack of late game content) I’m sure it’s the developers goal to have games that play out much longer.
I’d suggest that whilst it’s probably not feasible to die of old age in the game (as in, even in a long, long game you’d only age say 30 years), you could suffer some side effects due to being 60 and living a pretty terrible lifestyle (fighting monsters, drinking bleach) and some degradation could take place which you could aim to reverse. Similarly, some sort of disasters/random events could cause you to age/go into some sort of ageing stasis which could have similar effects. I would hate to see ageing being common or something players need to constantly worry about, but it provides such a fertile ground for late game missions that I’m very for it.
Science wise, I don’t think the technology is too far off:
Regardless of the scientific truth of that article, as soon as we can clone/make organs we can pretty much keep repairing things forever. Also, first aid kits heal everything, so…
Realistically slow aging is almost entirely pointless. Hardly anyone is going to play the same character for thirty years, and someone that attached to their character probably doesn’t want to deal with aging at all. It’s a mechanic that would see no play outside testing.
Unrealistically short lifespan could be fun as a survival resource, like food or water, that’s harder to resupply but depleted relatively slowly and thus unimportant early on. But this would not fit in vanilla, because in vanilla indefinite survival is supposed to be easy if you shirk danger, and the only point of aging would be to force you into danger to find rare medicine or crafting components. It also would be easier to justify as something other than aging; maybe you’re slowly dying from zombie magic, and the medicine reverses the damage.
That’s not the direction it’s supposed to be going in (as the recent design document states) - it’s supposed to be difficult to survive and have many things that are uncraftable (although you might be able to just scrape by) which need foraged parts, so I think it’s fine to expect, especially with late game.
I agree though that realistically slow ageing would be difficult (until the game got to DF levels of extended play), so it would probably be better to have it as part of a mission/random late game event. Ways of artificially ageing would be interesting, especially if it was mainly late game monsters which you need to prepare to counteract (this is done quite well in the might and magic series).
Well, on the one hand, the outline has a survival section that claims survival will be difficult and take a lot of time. The outline also has a progress section that suggests that survival is only the first, potentially short stage of the game, and after that you have time to explore and learn skills. The low-intensity section also suggests that you aren’t obligated to pursue elements you aren’t interested in, and super-intense situations are rare if you do not seek them out.
So to put all that together, there is apparently an early point in the game where you have enough spare time to go exploring, yet can instead avoid exploration and spend as much of that time as desired on survival tasks in safer locations. I think it’s likely that survival will be easy at that point.
[quote=“ted, post:27, topic:5254”]Well, on the one hand, the outline has a survival section that claims survival will be difficult and take a lot of time. The outline also has a progress section that suggests that survival is only the first, potentially short stage of the game, and after that you have time to explore and learn skills. The low-intensity section also suggests that you aren’t obligated to pursue elements you aren’t interested in, and super-intense situations are rare if you do not seek them out.
So to put all that together, there is apparently an early point in the game where you have enough spare time to go exploring, yet can instead avoid exploration and spend as much of that time as desired on survival tasks in safer locations. I think it’s likely that survival will be easy at that point.[/quote]
There’s certainly a point where survival will become easier, but I don’t think it’s a design goal for it to ever become easy or trivial (being a survivalcraft game that would make the game kinda pointless). Food and Water based survival may become easier, but I imagine other things will take up the mantle of making survival more difficult (monsters, poison rain and so on).
Really though, I’m very much for ageing being optional/a late game effect, and definitely shouldn’t be a short term/early game concern.
[quote=“Binky, post:28, topic:5254”][quote=“ted, post:27, topic:5254”]Well, on the one hand, the outline has a survival section that claims survival will be difficult and take a lot of time. The outline also has a progress section that suggests that survival is only the first, potentially short stage of the game, and after that you have time to explore and learn skills. The low-intensity section also suggests that you aren’t obligated to pursue elements you aren’t interested in, and super-intense situations are rare if you do not seek them out.
So to put all that together, there is apparently an early point in the game where you have enough spare time to go exploring, yet can instead avoid exploration and spend as much of that time as desired on survival tasks in safer locations. I think it’s likely that survival will be easy at that point.[/quote]
There’s certainly a point where survival will become easier, but I don’t think it’s a design goal for it to ever become easy or trivial (being a survivalcraft game that would make the game kinda pointless). Food and Water based survival may become easier, but I imagine other things will take up the mantle of making survival more difficult (monsters, poison rain and so on).
Really though, I’m very much for ageing being optional/a late game effect, and definitely shouldn’t be a short term/early game concern.[/quote]
To clear up a few things:
Survival, in the sense of food/water/shelter, is important but ideally fairly straightforward, and thereafter not a constant concern. You can turn it up if you’re into survivalcraft (reduce city sizes, etc) but if you take a few days, pin down a supply of water & the means to purify it, locate a reliable shelter, and develop some means of reliably obtaining food, you should be able to maintain that base without devoting most of your character’s time to this day-to-day maintenance.
(The idea is that you have to look after your character. We’re not as strict as Unreal World, but much more so than GearHead, where you can operate literally around-the-clock with food as a recovery item rather than a fuel. Even Nethack, which does require food, doesn’t require hydration or sleep (and in fact sleeping is purely a negative there). Different genres, different priorities, and all that though. Not saying they’re bad games because they don’t require maintenance.)
Now, if it turns out that there’s fungus nearby, or you missed that Triffid grove, or oops there’s a Jabberwock, then yeah, rebasing may make Survival a high priority again. Ditto for winter and temperature problems.
And as for aging, I think ted nailed the problem with timing. By the time you’ve played a char long enough for aging to be a factor, you’ll find it an unfair effort-wasting mechanic. I’m not sold on imposing the type of Terminally Ill ted proposes, but I could imagine it being something possibly associated with the Nether Cliff.