Mood - some things to make the game a bit more FUN (difficult)

[infectedmochi]

As far as complexity driving away new players, I think that’s silly. Lot’s of people love complexity in the games they play and are drawn to games that provide such depth. Many of us here come from dwarf fortress and that game is fuckin ridiculously complex. But people still play it and new people still waste hours trying to figure out how to dig their first tunnel or stop their first magma flood. Being afraid to add new things because we think it will be to hard for new players detracts from the game for us and seems presumptuous about what new players can handle/learn.

I like complexity in games too, especially roguelikes - they don’t feel quite like “roguelike” if they don’t have a complex aspect, preferably more. Now there is the whole reasonable complexity vs pointless complexity debate, but my general consensus toward roguelike + sandbox games like Cataclysm is that complexity is an important part of it’s charm.

[timtek]

I like complexity in games too, especially roguelikes - they don’t feel quite like “roguelike” if they don’t have a complex aspect, preferably more. Now there is the whole reasonable complexity vs pointless complexity debate, but my general consensus toward roguelike + sandbox games like Cataclysm is that complexity is an important part of it’s charm.

Oh no doubt, and the game still needs to be accessible to new players. But to take an example from dwarf fortress again. Toady creates algorithms that create these massively complex worlds for us to build in that are almost completely unnecessary but add an incredible amount of depth to the game. You don’t need 700 years of history to build a fortress, but since you’re only pushing a few buttons to make it happen it’s not complex to the player and it makes the game a lot more fun.

That’s kind of how I view this suggestion. I think it would be very difficult to implement but from the players perspective it would be rather painless. Especially for new players since the worst effects would probably not manifest until later in the game. It’s not like someone is going to go insane on day 3 or 4. But a few seasons or even a year living in this hellish world, with these mechanics, would really add some interesting things to players who are starting to get bored.

[John_Candlebury]

I like the ideas, except for occupation, mostly because you painted it as I need human contact to not become insane (which perfectly reasonable mind you) but the problem is that the game is still not ready to support this, things like working NPCs and Survivor towns should already be place for it to work as well a more user friendly, affordable or useful way to spend high amounts of time, either adding a training feature or reworking crafting could do.

Also we have to remember that most of the time our characters are doing extremely dangerous and nerve wrecking things and that a few hours of rest everyday will most likely be a comfortable experience rather than a terrible fight against boredom

[Heruedhel]

Hi.

Not meaning to shoot your idea down, but I would like to say what I don’t like about it.

I am generally not a fan of adding more meters for the player to fiddle with as it just adds another layer of things to micromanage and, in my opinion, actually detracts from immersion rather than enhancing it. I am all for making the effects of mood more substantial but I don’t think dividing it into sub-categories is the way to go on about it. I like complex systems, but complication doesn’t always translate to complexity, often it just translates to tedium.

I also don’t like hidden meters. Since we’re discussing them right now and thinking about them, of course they sound intuitive and easy to grasp. However, with my long experience as a software developer, I know that what might seem very intuitive and straightforward to the designer can often end up being very confusing to the end user. I don’t like it when the game starts punishing me for stuff I am not aware of.

Another problem I see is that this system punishes players who actually try do better for their character. If character A is a flee ridden, diseased, dressed in rags, raw meat devouring beast, the addiction system means that he’ll be doing as well as character B who created a little heaven on earth where gourmet food is in plentiful supply, the bed is warm and fluffy, and his own private strip joint is teaming with scantily clad beauties. Except, character B has to do ten times the amount of work just not to suffer any penalties. In practice, it might end up that people will avoid things that make them happy, just so they can remain happy.

All of this is theoretical of course, as there is no way to really tell how any system will work out until somebody actually tries it. If you ever get around to making this into a mod, I would love to try it. But generally speaking, a lot of ideas that try to simulate real life in games for the sake of reality, drive people to develop playing styles that are more unrealistic than in abstracted systems.

Anyways, that’s how I feel.

[Binky]

Snip

Good points, and ones I agree with. I think the problem with mood is that you instantly get into a big problem with displaying/abstracting it as it is by nature, an internal thing. I feel that for the most part, players (of any game) like to be able to see the mechanics and results of their action, and I feel your initial proposal is too complex/hidden without a ton of meters and numbers (which would make it just a number balancing game if they were all shown).

However, I think there definitely needs to be an improvement in mood and morale, and at the base of it I really do like all the ideas. A simplified version of the ‘adjusting to your surroundings’ mechanic could be useful, as could a sanity scale if it was major acts (killing an npc/zombie children/cannibalism vs nice bed/nice food/making friends)

[Paquito]

I think mood is on the list of things to eventually improve, as the mechanic isn’t quite balanced at the moment. I think the storage space refactor is a higher priority at the moment though.

[Ter13]

For the most part, I thank the discussion of the abstractions. My background is also in game design as well, and simplification of complex mechanics and tying them into the game is actually always a difficult process especially when hacking an idea into an older implementation. So while I do understand that all of this sounds micromanaged from the player perspective, the way I see it being tied in is definitely in the vein of simply: “Don’t live in a shithole, don’t spend too much of your time laying around doing nothing, and don’t kill 800+ zombies a day, every day.” However, I understand that ideas are all invariably bad until people see them in action, so… There’s that.

As for Inadequate, the only thing I’ve got to say to you is that there are two people on this board I have heard about. Well in advance of lurking. You are one of them. --You might well think about what that says about you.

Conflation of difficulty/fun is actually, had you played any other roguelikes (judging from your reputation, I doubt highly that you have), an inside joke. The word: FUN, all in caps, is generally a way of saying: difficult for the sake of being difficult. Which is sort of what Roguelikes are meant to be. Or maybe I utterly misinterpreted the last 20 years I’ve been playing them.

[Killer-of-Lawyers]

The level of difficulty varies widely by the branch of roguelike, and is generally inconsistent, especially in the *hack variants which are heavily dependent on spoilers for their difficulty. I think Inadequate has a problem with conflating difficulty with tedium, which is something that is important to avoid in a game.

That said, I think the mood system could be rewritten in a fun way, but I question why you’d take a moral hit for killing a bunch of zombies, kids or not. They’re trying to eat you, so why would you feel bad about it? In a game where you will be fighting a lot of zombies it doesn’t make sense to penalize the player for fighting zombies.

[ClaytonRISING]

I could understand taking a moral hit for butchering a corpse, but I agree that there shouldn’t be a moral penalty in any degree for killing them.

That being said, I think there should be a system for “synergy” in actions that effect moral.

Like, butchering a corpse with a pocket knife should give a bigger moral hit than, say, butchering one with a machete.

Or smoking weed and then eating snacks: a bigger moral bonus than just smoking weed or just eating snacks haha.

[Hyena_Grin]

I’m very much in favor of making the game harder. And I’ve certainly made that case in relation to mood before. Unfortunately there is at least a vocal group of Cata players and contributors who don’t want the game to be harder or more complex (at least, unless that complexity makes zombies more interesting). I’ve gotten pretty rude and unhelpful responses from GlyphGryph for making a suggestion regarding food/condiment modifiers. And gotten into sparring matches over something as simple as pointing out that there’s not enough negative pressure on mood. Because apparently any negative pressure you need to manage is a hassle and is boring/dull/whatever. Or in GlyphGryph’s immortal words ‘completely miserable’ and not worthy of a response beyond his disdain.

I’ve more or less given up on making complex suggestions. I’ve put a decent amount of effort into a bunch of posts about systems and the like. I’m not arrogant enough to assume they deserve any special attention; not having the time or skills to actually mod the game myself is a huge drawback. Usually what happens is that either the suggestion was already planned in some capacity (not identical but close enough), liked by Kevin and others but not implemented because frankly it’d probably be a lot of work and it’s tough to make people like a suggestion enough to work on it themselves (can’t possibly blame anyone for that), just outright refused for being too tedious/boring, or you get people like Inadequate who follow you around to every post you make in order to -1 it in some capacity, just because they think your ideas are dangerous or something ridiculous. Been there. It sucks. Ignore him. Don’t even respond. He exists to derail your threads.

It’s the last two that finally burned me out. It’s become evident that although I love Cata, the design is perilously close to going in a direction I don’t like. It gets easier and easier all the time, and although I’m not in favor of it turning into a game where you are constantly dying, it bugs me that there are these interesting systems at play that have become irrelevant and have little to no impact on whether or not you survive. And have less impact all the time. The entire reason I play Cata is for a zombie survival sim of sorts. It’s either a survival sim or it’s not. The impression I have been getting is that it’s really more of a sandbox dungeon crawler with a survival sim skin on it. If an element of survival gets in the way of killing zombies for fun, then it gets the axe. And people who get off on just running around gunning down zombies can’t understand why someone would actually find the process of survival actually entertaining. Like, genuinely entertaining. It boggles their mind. They say things like it’s ‘dull’ and it’s ‘boring’ and ‘tedious.’ I’d say I don’t understand why they feel that way, except that I know the world is full of games that ignore survival in favor of action and excitement at all possible times. They don’t seem to understand that tension can be quiet and slow. Dread is something which develops over time as a situation becomes increasingly dire. And in the spirit of classic storytelling, the environment itself and the very protagonist are sometimes their own worst enemies. That’s how I felt when I first played Cata: DDA, and that’s what I thought the spirit of the game was, really. Zombies were just a backdrop for a more nuanced emergent storytelling game about a character trying to survive in a bad situation. I suspect I was wrong.

These things may change over time. I’m not standing on a rooftop declaring the game is ruined. It’s not. I’ve had a lot of fun with Cata, and though I’m waiting for Z-levels before I play again, I expect I’ll have more fun with it in the future. But I have no control over what happens to the game going forward, and I’ve kinda washed my hands of that. Ultimately it’s not my game, I don’t physically contribute, and it’s free. So there’s only so much I can expect from it. Still hoping though.

[ClaytonRISING]

Yeah, a majority of the player base doesn’t respond very well to suggestions relating to an increased difficulty, unfortunately.

Honestly, mood isn’t very much of an issue because for every moral penalty there is five ways to easily get rid of it.

[Binky]

[quote=“Hyena Grin, post:30, topic:4335”]I’m very much in favor of making the game harder.
snip[/quote]
I wholeheartedly agree, and I know a lot of others, including a lot of non-forum people, do too - it can also be easily seen by pretty much all of the recent forums posts having been about balance in some way or another.

I think part of the problem is that to live up to the kickstarter, loads of new features have had to be rolled out without much time for a balancing aspect (all of which don’t sound fantastic fun on paper or are a bit behind the scenes) and a lots of community stuff is going in which also going in without much thought to balance either (mostly OP weapon adding and lots of ‘making life easier’ improvements).

I’m hoping (really, really hoping) that once the big hurdles (NPCs, inventory overhaul) are in, then a lot more focus can be put on balance, a lot of the rubbish can be ripped out and it can be made survival-y again.

I must say though, that GlyphGryph has always been extremely cordial with me (especially compared with the extreme vitriol from DCSS devs)

[Heruedhel]

I’m not really sure who’s side I’m taking here and I risk derailing the thread, but here goes.

I’m all for putting more challenge in the game, but I prefer an approach of making the existing systems work in more relevant and interesting ways than adding more stats and items and meters and hoping that this will make things better. I will reiterate that complication does not always translate to complexity.

Chess, for example, is an extremely simple game. you can write down the rules on the back of an envelope. Yet it is highly complex in the sense that you can create all sorts of different, interesting situations and strategies and moves through this very limited set of rules.

Take DF Adventurer mode on the other hand. It is very complicated. You have a gazillion types of underwear, you can choose to attack a monster’s pinky instead of their neck. Yet doing almost anything, managing inventory, attacking a monster, moving around …etc takes a great amount of effort on the player’s side, but at the end it is still a very shallow game (Disclaimer: DF Fortress mode is pure gold).

So please don’t be hasty in assuming that people who complain about over complicated systems just want a “Win Button”.

… the way I see it being tied in is definitely in the vein of simply: “Don’t live in a shithole, don’t spend too much of your time laying around doing nothing, and don’t kill 800+ zombies a day, every day.” …

I would love that in the game, but I don’t think the proposed solution can achieve that. I discussed my reservations in a previous post. Again, I will say that it is impossible to tell until such a system is actually tried. I know how hard it is to convey a solution in mere words. So until a mod is out there it’s just imagined scenarios duelling against other imagined scenarios.

… smoking weed and then eating snacks: a bigger moral bonus than just smoking weed or just eating snacks …

Hell yeah!

[Killer-of-Lawyers]

That was a rather defeatist post. It’s not like if the game goes in a direction you don’t like that you can’t just fork the game off github and make it to be as much of a dying of starvation simulator as possible.

I don’t think you’ll ever be happy though, because ultimately what everyone who wants survival to be harder really wants is either lots of tedium for basic tasks, or doesn’t like the fact that you can reach a point where survival isn’t your main concern. The latter is just a fact of any game. Even games based around just basic survival, like say, don’t starve, can reach a point where you are less concerned with dinner and have time to do other things. Unreal World is the same way. Sure, you may die a lot, but if you survive winter you’re probably going to come out of it with hunger no longer chasing your tail. Does this mean the game is too easy? No, it just means you’ve reached the survival plateau. Cataclysm has a low survival platoe, but it’s not really that much easier. Most deaths, even in the past, were things that happened because the game was new and people didn’t know the right way to start out.

Either way, balance can always be done on your own, and later. There’s a million unfinished systems, and balancing them to every grognard’s liking right now is just going to slow down development. If it really makes you sad, fork the game and make your own spinoff. It’s not hard, afterall, goons managed to do it :V.

[Hyena_Grin]

Yes, because if I don’t have the time or skill to contribute to the mod, I totally have the time or skill to take an entire open-source project and individually convert it into something else.

Seriously, people need to stop saying this. ‘JUST DO IT YOURSELF.’

No, I am not going to do it. Even if the game turned into a Barney the Purple Friendship Dinosaur Simulator I wouldn’t do this. I would go play other games.

Was it defeatist? Yes. Pointedly so. You went on to quite adequately describe why certain lines of thought will never gain traction. Because people such as yourself take every single suggestion to add deeper and more threatening systems (and to cut down on the amount of life-easing bullshit that is in the game right now) and spin it into some kind of ‘you people will never be happy until it’s a tedious slog-fest’ and apparently we humble consumers of survival games don’t even get survival games as well as you do, since you feel the need to tell us how they work.

Thanks for that, it was very helpful. I am going to go stop playing survival games now that you have shown me the error of my ways. Instead I am going to live in the woods.

[Killer-of-Lawyers]

Don’t forget to update your tetanus shot before you leave!

[Hyena_Grin]

Absolutely not.

As you characterized, the crux of this endeavor is to spend as much time as possible tediously avoiding stepping on rusty nails.

Anything less would be a dramatic concession, and I won’t be happy until every single thing I do is far more complicated than it needs to be.

[Killer-of-Lawyers]

At least you’ll die happy!

[Hyena_Grin]

Yeah.

So, Clayton, this is more or less what you can expect. People like KoL. They don’t want to have a dialogue, they just want you to leave. It’s pretty much not worth your time. It’s definitely not worth mine.

[ClaytonRISING]

I concur, Hyena Grin. That’s why I’ve given up responding to them, especially KoL.

I wouldn’t want to threaten their idea of Cataclysm with my opinion haha.