Rotor
Survivor
Several different suggestions were made that did not involve jars to get the immersion, whether you buy it or not, your choice. TFP went back to jars, so be it. I will raise a jar your way as well.
Feedback on 2.5
- Thread starter for4gerz
- Start date
Several different suggestions were made that did not involve jars to get the immersion, whether you buy it or not, your choice. TFP went back to jars, so be it. I will raise a jar your way as well.
theFlu
Hunter
Staring at a lake, having a bag full of imaginary gas containers, but being unwilling to grab water.
Staring at a lake, having a bag full of buckets, being unwilling to grab water and use it for boiling said water.
Staring at a lake, having a bag full of cooking pots, being unwilling to grab water and use it for boiling said water.
Staring at a lake, having a bag full of jars, being able to grab water from lake and boil it.
Staring at a lake, having a bucket in hand, being able to grab and boil that water.
The first three rely on the character being braindead. The latter two are a matter of choice of a tool. If jars is all you have, jars is what you'll use. I don't mind at all what the tool is, just that the character doesn't pretend to be ■■■■■■■■ to enable a pointless on-the-rails crafting gate.
Jost Amman
Hunter
Wow! You're even lazier than I am!
theFlu
Hunter
Having no jerry can doesn't make your character unable to interact with the gas in the barrel.
Having no jar makes your character unable to interact with the water in the lake.
I think the problem is that complaint were: "i want immersion so let us use jars to scoop water from watersources".
Now they can and the complaint (when enabling full jar refund on use) shifts to "i have way to many jars".
I dont get that either.
theFlu
Hunter
Couple options..
1) Different people. Riamus here is annoyed there are any jars in the game; generally "complaining continues", but in reverse.
2) Same people. Me, I want to use the lakes for water. I might find "water survival" too easy with that. I might suggest things like reducing the number of jars, removing cooking pots from trader stock, introducing new steps for purification, whatnot. "Complaining continues", but at a different end of the same issue. It's a part of a whole, we all have our opinions over what is good...
But complaining about complainers isn't going to make either of us shut up ...
Not trying to shut anyone up. I just dont get it. Just another opinion.Couple options..
1) Different people. Riamus here is annoyed there are any jars in the game; generally "complaining continues", but in reverse.
2) Same people. Me, I want to use the lakes for water. I might find "water survival" too easy with that. I might suggest things like reducing the number of jars, removing cooking pots from trader stock, introducing new steps for purification, whatnot. "Complaining continues", but at a different end of the same issue. It's a part of a whole, we all have our opinions over what is good...
But complaining about complainers isn't going to make either of us shut up ...
I would love to see gas cans added.
Kyoji
Survivor
That is a gameplay concept not an immersion one as I stated.
theFlu
Hunter
I'm non-native, you might have to explain the difference to me; but for me any discontinuity in game logic can easily break immersion. That can be more of a personal issue, for sure, but they're not mutually exclusive by any means.
Kyoji
Survivor
I was responding to the claim that jars were mostly about immersion when I think it was mostly function. The biggest gain for jars returning wasn't realism but the fact it added value to water sources in the game and that it showed the devs care about the fans.
This is also why I push back against the intense desire people have to make everything about realism now even when it hurts gameplay such as wanting to change dew collectors to makeup for people getting jars back (which I think creates a massive jars surplus which breaks water survival).
So my point is that function is more important than realism and I don't understand why the intense desire for jar refunds on consume when we do not have the same outcry for cans or gas, etc. My explanation is that it's function instead of realism and the fact that it's something we had before that people want so they can feel closer to A16. Jars in themselves are trivial in the grand scheme of things IMO. It's the importantance of understanding why we liked A16 a lot and the survival elements that came with it is the important thing.
Not sure if this makes sense. I have a hard time conveying information sometimes.
Rotor
Survivor
A bad one as it breaks immersion.
Rotor
Survivor
Immersion and interaction. In the mother of all water jars thread, very few argued for "realism" not that there werent. The "realism was quickly abated by the "it is a game".
It was never about the Jars. And water survival was not an issue w/o the jars.
The Jars refund not so sure where that came from. As one of the ones who advocated for the ability to obtain water from a water source and boil it, I could care less if I keep them or not. If I keep them, well no big deal, if I dont, just means I have to find another or make one.
I dont know what it was like in A16, I wasnt around. But I came in the version right before Jars were taken out, and my first reaction was "WTF?" Dunno if that gives you perspective from a Non A16 worshipper.
theFlu
Hunter
Hmm, well; I do sorta kinda agree with the principles in that. Realism shouldn't be taken too far, no-one wants a tree farm to grow for a decade...
"Added value to water sources" is basically an immersion argument; the way the lakes were disabled felt bad. You can call it a mechanical value, but water wasn't an issue, so the "value" was always in the game. The immersion comes from the natural source being a natural source again. That's a good type of realism. How much of a struggle should we make it from there, is a matter of opinion.
Because, the "natural mechanism" of lakes is tied with the ability to use it. If you obviously have a water container in the form of a drink container, you wouldn't delete it if you knew you needed one. If the lake dynamic was, say, "grab with a bucket or a cooking pot, bring to campfire, boil into drinks", I wouldn't mind having no jars at all. They would be "reasonably abstracted away", like the gas cans and plated meals... The problem for me is when the abstraction becomes a silly mechanic.
Jost Amman
Hunter
I think the HUGE difference between water and ANY other liquid in the game is that water can be found anywhere in lakes, rivers and sewers.
That alone means that being able to scoop water makes water survival a balancing nightmare.
Imagine if you had lakes of fuel, where you could scoop fuel at will.
That would make managing fuel consumption a joke.
It's the same with water. I think we all can agree that, barring immersion, water survival should not be allowed to be solved on day 1.
How do you solve this issue? Everyone has their own opinion on this.
That alone means that being able to scoop water makes water survival a balancing nightmare.
Imagine if you had lakes of fuel, where you could scoop fuel at will.
That would make managing fuel consumption a joke.
It's the same with water. I think we all can agree that, barring immersion, water survival should not be allowed to be solved on day 1.
How do you solve this issue? Everyone has their own opinion on this.
Kyoji
Survivor
Basically you agree with me then.
I think it's semantics but seems like we agree to a point and just disagree with the jar return. I think the realism should be trumped by balance.Hmm, well; I do sorta kinda agree with the principles in that. Realism shouldn't be taken too far, no-one wants a tree farm to grow for a decade...
"Added value to water sources" is basically an immersion argument; the way the lakes were disabled felt bad. You can call it a mechanical value, but water wasn't an issue, so the "value" was always in the game. The immersion comes from the natural source being a natural source again. That's a good type of realism. How much of a struggle should we make it from there, is a matter of opinion.
I am all for jars and using them to get water.
The abstraction of removing containers is for balance and should be understood as such.
When people wanted jars back they pleaded that they didn't want the system brought back one for one but with adjustments to make water harder to come by. I myself was one of those people. But people wanting jar return on use are breaking the balance of the game and are now pushing for dew collectors to require jars because of realism.
I don't want people that complain about EVERYTHING to push their luck and keep trying to move the needle only for it to backfire and the devs not listen to us because people are posting bad things about the updates and devs.
The update was a win. People clamoring for even more and that it was bad because they didn't go far enough can take a hike as far as I'm concerned. I'm not against proper suggestions but some have pushed the limit on what is constructive criticism and what is pure slander.
I want positive changes to happen and I love they are embracing survival roots. I just think we need to maintain civility when we do it.
theFlu
Hunter
Absolutely, it's a survival staple. Plenty of ways in the genre, canteens, processing, weight limits; kinda up to TFP to find a good match to their idea of the game.
This may sound trollish, but I'm rather serious: We have oil shale. Free for the picking, from day one, all over the desert. Difference is; grabbing some is a bit of an issue, processing is a matter of tech.. similar things can be applied to water.
theFlu
Hunter
If that's your fear, well, I wouldn't worry. Madmole is a little moody at times, but they're also rather reasonable as a team. The are making the game for an audience, and understand it well. People throwing random ideas at them is an entire subsection on the forum, they'll have to pick and choose; a couple bad ideas about Collectors isn't going to break them
InfiniteWarrior
Survivor
We've discussed just using the buckets or a refillable canteen (so long as it's not like the Vault 13 canteen that magically refills on its own), etc. I think the main thing is that those natural water sources are no longer sitting fallow in 2.5. Sure, you can use them to reroute the water to a water pit or something, but if you want to play mountain man or something, that's incredibly difficult without some kind of natural water harvesting.
The most intriguing "feature" of this game, imo, is that you can play it any way you like despite any and all objections to the contrary. Seriously. You can play it as an ImSim; a homesteading sim; or as a survival sim. Any way you like.
Hopefully, they've come up with a decent balance between natural harvesting and dew collectors. Guess we'll see as we test the 2.5 build. I honestly don't think it matters if min-maxers decide to set up industrial glue farms with it. Most players won't, I don't think. Not everyone is into optimizing to the point that they have to specificdally "farm" resources, etc. and so on. The refund slider is a pleasant surprise. I get the impression from what people are saying that this build will hit a nice middle ground.