PC Partial hunger penalty is the opposite of logic

When people are hungry, they don't have as much energy as they would if kept full.  Lack of calories will reduce your energy levels and make you feel tired.

The buff in the game seems to mimic real life, as the first hunger penalty is a reduction in max stamina (i.e. less energy).

 
fragtzack said:
When hunger < 50%, the player gets a performance penalty.

People and/or any animal do not have degraded physical performance at 50% hunger. 

This design is just plain illogical and the opposite of immersion and QOL design.
Click to expand...
Suspension of disbelief is kinda needed sometimes, so players arent constraint by heavily restrictive situations that mirror real life.

If you're complaining that some elements dont make sense and should replicate what we see in reality, then i guess the game should be updated so you spend few years building a Jeep from scratch, without skipping a single nut, to a fully operational vehicle, instead of few minutes in a crude wooden workbench 😉

 
fragtzack said:
When hunger < 50%, the player gets a performance penalty.

People and/or any animal do not have degraded physical performance at 50% hunger.

This design is just plain illogical and the opposite of immersion and QOL design.
Click to expand...
As a person with a nutrition certification, I challenge you to go 1-2 days without eating nor drinking water.  Drink nothing but sweet beverages and tell me how you feel.

Older people have to be even more careful with nutrition and or staying hydrated, as well as proper sleep cycles, because those bodies require more upkeep.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starvation  <--facts.  It's even possible to go several days without eating and no longer feel hunger because there's a neurological feedback that tells your body not to expect being fed and there's so many other things going on.  YOU WILL SUFFER even if you think you're feeling fine.

So, about that immersion?

Consider verisimilitude;  Immersion is a very personal experience.   I garantee you what you are arguing is an abstract problem in a game that frames the fight more important than the nutrition.

 
Here is what really doesn't make sense (bear with my simple math for just a minute).

Let's say your hunger meter max is at 150, then your 50% penalty starts at 75.

When you start the game, your 50% penalty is at 50.

So you are actually penalized as you level.  The hunger penalty should be a static number, let's say 50.

Why would you get hungry at 50 points of hunger, then later in the game get hungry at 75 points of hunger?  You have more food in you but get hungry sooner?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RyanX said:
Here is what really doesn't make sense (bear with my simple math for just a minute).

Let's say your hunger meter max is at 150, then your 50% penalty starts at 75.

When you start the game, your 50% penalty is at 50.

So you are actually penalized as you level.  The hunger penalty should be a static number, let's say 50.

Why would you get hungry at 50 points of hunger, then later in the game get hungry at 75 points of hunger?  You have more food in you but get hungry sooner?
Click to expand...


That's not a penalty and you are only looking at one portion while ignoring other parts of it.

  • When you start out, you are at 100 Food, 50% of that is 50, so once you lose 50 food units you are reach the 50% mark.
  • When you are at 150 food, 50% of that is 75 so you have to lose more food units (25 more) than you started at to reach the same level
  • When you are at 200 food, 50% of that is 100 so you have to lose even more food units (50 more) than when you started out at.
The math says I should be striving to get up to 200.  So what if my 50% mark moved from 50 units to 100 units, it now takes twice as much loss to reach the same point.

 
There is no loss of physical performance in real life until calorie reserves reaches zero. When you first start feeling hunger IRL, that does not mean your calorie reserves are zero.  

The above links about real life effects  of starvation is the effects when your calories available reaches zero. 7D2D is introducing malnourishment effects before calories available reaches zero. 

You can go all day without eating. About half way through the day, you will probably start experiencing hunger. However, you will not suffer any malnutrition effects until your body until you have been hungry for considerable time(I.E. when you body has finished digesting/observing any remains). Your hunger feelings start LONG before your start experiencing any effects of starvation/malnourishment.

The logic being presented by a few above posts and in 7D2D means that as soon as someone is done eating, their physical performance starts to degrade. Just blueberry logic.

  Hunger and thirst are both physiological simulations that body does to prevent malnourished  or dehydration states from occurring.  

 Hunger is NOT malnourished

Thirst is NOT dehydrated

7D2D and  a few of the above posts about RL are completely devoid of medical fact about every animal on earth. 

But sure, this is a game. Go ahead and make purple weapons the are completely bendable like putty yet shoot the densest and highest velocity kinetic energy in the universe. Because "this is just a game, we can implement the most ridiculous laws of physics we want" is really the only excuse that is logical. 

Hunger is NOT malnourishment. A stamina penalty at 50% hunger is completely unsound, both as game play design mechanic AND definitely in RL. 

Read from a medical experts here:

https://www.hopkinsallchildrens.org/Patients-Families/Health-Library/HealthDocNew/Hunger-and-Malnutrition

https://www.wisegeek.net/what-is-the-difference-between-hunger-and-malnutrition.htm#:~:text=Hunger and malnutrition are two separate conditions. Hunger,not receive the amount of food they need.

According this article, being hungry actually INCREASES physical performance:

https://bcbstwelltuned.com/2017/12/08/physical-mental-effects-hunger/#:~:text=Physical %26 Mental Effects of Hunger 1 Hunger,hunger worse. ... 4 Smells trigger hunger.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah and in real life you can´t carry 500 blocks of concrete and still run like usain bolt or simply pick up your vehicle and you would need a building purely dedicated to build the 4x4 and the gyrocopter including special tools. Workbench is way too small for that.

Before you bring real life into the discussion about a game mechanic you should think about all the things that you definitly don´t want to be like in real life. 

But as always people only bring real life into discussion when it´s a disadvantage. 

It´s simply about balance in the game. Realism only goes a short way in most games. Wich is good. Wouldn´t be funny to play with too much realism.

I could understand your rant if food was actually rare, but it isn´t. It´s a bit harsh with food in MP the first 2-3 days but in SP there is more than enough.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
fragtzack said:
According this article, being hungry actually INCREASES physical performance:

https://bcbstwelltuned.com/2017/12/08/physical-mental-effects-hunger/#:~:text=Physical %26 Mental Effects of Hunger 1 Hunger,hunger worse. ... 4 Smells trigger hunger.
Click to expand...
Did you even read that article?

It says 4 things happen when you become hungry:

  • Hunger leads to lack of judgement
  • Hunger leads to ignoring the symptoms and then not being able to tell when to stop eating (i.e. gaining weight)
  • Stress makes hunger worse
  • And your nose drives you


So based on that article, TFP should add the following effects to the game when you are hungry:

  • You make poor choices
  • Your poor choices leads to more stress, which leads to more hunger
  • Ignoring hunger for too long should cause you to eat everything edible in your base
  • And you should go into areas full of radiated zombies just because you can smell a cheeseburger in the area
🙂

But if it bothers you so much, just mod it out.

 
fragtzack said:
When an animal is hungry, certain senses are heightened
Click to expand...


That right there is a personal reinterpretation of a single line within the stated report.  You've completely missed the forest for the trees, and it was right there staring at you.

My work that I do in real life is driven and surrounded by science based, medical, nutritional, and psychiatric health treatments that focus on revitalizing the human body post trauma, including alcohol and substance addiction with nutrition.  There are so many factors that play about in what all that means you CANNOT just toss them anecdotally into an argument about a video game that doesn't have a detailed focus upon that.   What more is you're looking for an audience to share your thesis with in your very first post, without actually knowing the facts about what you're arguing about, and then calling the state of that focus within a video game illogical.  You followed this up by misquoting the single line you were banking on to support your statement.  This is a shallow argument at best, and is abstract within the context you chose you to pose it in the first place.

I'm not seeing what you're trying to sell here.

And furthermore, even if game devs are aware of such things (and maybe they are?!) sometimes these things are not what they are focusing upon and don't care how much realism is attached to it, because they are trying to present a theme park at us all at once.  I'm educated on this topic and I still don't see a reason to pose it as a legit problem for TFP to solve.  I don't think it was ever their intention to sell that as a distinct and complex simulation of adverse affects.

If you wanna get REALLY pedantic, let's talk about the realism of dysentery and how it got to be a thing in this game while there is a plethora of other more harmful and interesting things that exist when you aren't in full grasp how to clean wounds,  lack of electrical power, or sanitation, or refrigeration technology.   Oh boy!  Botulism and tissue necrosis!   Itchy.  Tasty!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And this an exercise on how one narrative that addresses that abstract can be used to dispel another.   Lawl.

 
fragtzack said:
This design is just plain illogical and the opposite of immersion and QOL design.
Click to expand...
While everyone went into a fight about fasting; longest I've seen / heard of was 382 days, I think; but that's kinda beyond the point.

My question is, how would You make food into a usable game mechanic? Without offering an alternative, there's not much to argue?

 
For me the issue is all the dramatic noises the character makes when their food goes below 50%. It sounds like they are literally dying because they have gone days without food, when really, it's just between breakfast and lunch, and they want you to fill their pie-hole constantly. Like for goodness sake, shutup, you just ate you damn glutton. haha

I expect 'death from hunger' noises and movement penalties to start when you are at zero food, and not a minute before, but it is what it is, so the way I try to resolve it for myself is I imagine the 50% mark is actually a completely empty stomach, and then everything below that is a gradual increase in hunger.

 
You want to talk about food and huger realism in the game? How about killing a bear, cooking the meat, and then a single person proceeding to consume the entirety of that bear in a single day? LMAO video game logic

 
The only thing I'd like to see is hunger be shown in a percentage bar never going above a hundred percent. (well, naybe with buffs or something.) There can be a point system underneath that increases overall as you level up so you have more hunger points to go through but it doesn't make much sense that I have to stuff my face more to get full after leveling. Food could fill a set percentage rather than point amount and it would maintain its value throughout leveling up that way.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top