What happened to 4k maps?

[theFlu]

And such an acceptable map is possible even with the current RWG, and even could be made guaranteed by adding this crude pseudo code routine:
-----------------------
for 30 tries:
do a RWG map
repeat if all traders are in it

If still not all traders in it, tell the users his parameters are too far off for RWG to generate a valid map, does he accept to have an invalid map?

That'd be pretty horrible UX .. map generation takes 2-60 minutes, and you might just get a "can't do it" at the end. What it should honestly be, is a test step in QA.. 3 tries, no map => no release. Fix the settings / generation before publishing it.

3 tries, not 30. Because even with 3, some unlucky user is running into 30. And probably the actual test should be 30 maps, no failures, at the known worst settings.

I don't think that has much to do with progression.

Tomato, tomato; it's all progression

Oops, It's a map thread, so I'll post my distracted ramblings in a spoiler...

Spoiler: Oops, sorry

As you can, by design, loot or craft most of the stuff, slowing down crafting progress 'enough' would just make looting more powerful.
Atm, the best route is basically to:
- Save up parts until you can make your legendary of the thing
- At best, consider if you think it's likely you can afford to craft a tier upgrade, without sacrificing the Q6

If crafting progress slowed down a Lot (and looting weapons essentially disabled), you could land in a place where you get enough mats to make the costs trivial .. but they still wouldn't be big upgrades so skipping would still be tempting.

I don't think the midtiers can be made worth crafting with the current setup.

Couple ways I can see people crafting more tiers is to:
- make looted items different from crafted ones. So you'll make "survivor rifles" and loot "marksman rifles", pretty much the same in power, but some mechanical differences. You'll still "lose progress" from the looted sidegrade, but it feels a little different as the two don't compete.
- simply force the tiers. Pistol Q1 costs 1 handgun part, Pistol Q2 costs a Q1 Pistol and a handgun part (same total cost for Q2, and if you want the Q6, you'll have to obtain a Q5)

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

repeat if all traders are in it

Why not just write code to ensure all traders are in it in the first place? Prioritize the traders, iow. Then, there would be no need for re-rolling 30 times or more until you finally get a small map with all involved.

the minimal setting for flatness could be increased the smaller a map is to ensure more successes

Not a bad idea. Would probably prevent a lot of the weirdness I'm seeing in the 4096 rolled for testing.

Someone from TFP said a few years ago (AFAIK) that they are not sure how much of the story will also be added to RWG but they will try to add it.

One moderator has subsequently said it would definitely be Navezgane only. You're saying the plan is to add it, at least, partially to RWG. So, I gather no one but TFP really knows TFP's thinking on that.

It's been my impression some changes toward linear, including both Navezgane and RWG, have been to accommodate the story but I also get the impression TFP has realized that isn't necessary for the story as there has been discussion on the forums regarding keeping story mode separate, as in other survival games, given it would get very old, very quickly on RWG maps most of the playerbase appears to be playing back to back runs on. (Obviously, story mode and environmental storytelling are not one and the same.)

Some survival games do separate an overarching story; others don't, depending what kind of game it is. See Subnautica, for example. It's overarching story is incluced via PDAs accompanying the life pods, Degasi habitats, etc. littering the hand-crafted game world, but it's still an open world game world due to the fact that only a select few, carefully placed along a "route," trigger progression of the storyline and the player is led to them via radio -- should they choose to answer the radio. Players don't have to answer the radio, especially for long periods of time, while they just go off and do their own thing. Others, e.g. Green Hell, separate the story from a static, handcrafted map completely. I think it depends what kind of game (and map) it is which is appropriate.

Aside from locking down the traders, I'd think most of the linearization has to do with biome progression rather than story progression, e.g. TFP perhaps wants to present the biomes themselves one at a time in order of difficulty, expecting players to build "forward bases" in each to use while they're there, essentially. If that's the case, I honestly don't think that's necessary (or, even desirable*), either, and negates the "open world" feel. The traders were already introducing them in order of difficulty and that worked even when traders were randomized in RWG maps. Traders appear to have been locked down for story mode in both Navezgane and RWG as each would be affiliated with either the Duke or Noah depending where they appeared. If the plan now is to separate story mode from RWG, that obviously wouldn't be necessary.

*As for desirability, this game has something that makes putting up anything but a little storage, etc. in biomes other than the one chosen for the player's permanent base undesirable: horde night. I would think very few players, if any, are going to want to build permanent horde bases in every biome, but the game seems to be encouraging that.

I don't think any of the linearization elements of the RWG maps were necessary. Isn't the game supposed to be a "go wherever you want, do whatever you want" kind of open world? If biome difficulty is a concern, I'd honestly trust the players -- including new players -- to realize pretty quickly, "Hmm. Maybe I shouldn't go/have gone in there just yet." New players would obviously be severely underlevelled for it and face the consequences immediately. Meanwhile, veterans would go to whichever they like, knowing how to handle being underlevelled.

 

[meganoth]

Why not just write code to ensure all traders are in it in the first place? Prioritize the traders, iow. Then, there would be no need for re-rolling 30 times or more until you finally get a small map with all involved.

It was just a crude proof of concept showing that there exists a solution. 30 could be any number (if I could have presumed algebra knowledge from everyone here I would have just said "x" instead) and improvements would definitely have to be made if this was used as basis for actual production code.

Not a bad idea. Would probably prevent a lot of the weirdness I'm seeing in the 4096 rolled for testing.


One moderator has subsequently said it would definitely be Navezgane only. You're saying the plan is to add it, at least, partially to RWG. So, I gather no one but TFP really knows TFP's thinking on that.

Now that you remind me I seem to remember something like this as well

I was only saying I seem to remember someone from TFP said it. And that it seems to me a very good idea to add at least part of the story to RWG as well

It's been my impression some changes toward linear, including both Navezgane and RWG, have been to accommodate the story but I also get the impression TFP has realized that isn't necessary for the story as there has been discussion on the forums regarding keeping story mode separate, as in other survival games, given it would get very old, very quickly on RWG maps most of the playerbase appears to be playing back to back runs on. (Obviously, story mode and environmental storytelling are not one and the same.)

The story can have many separate parts, from the environmental storytelling to specific POIs and quests, topics can be telling the history or telling how the player makes the world better or at least different.
You can have a battle with the Duke without knowing anything about the start of the zombie plague. And since you give examples of games who have solved this as well I don't really need to tell you that for example a story told as quests one simply can ignore can't serioulsy "get old" to any player.

And the most basic story element that can easily be provided in RWG as well is that the player needs to choose one faction and eradicate the other, or their leader at least. And if he succeeds the game continues after a short notice that tells the player he won.

If not, bandits would be included in RWG but would have no real purpose except being slightly different enemies (unless they have something special thought up that I don*t see)

Some survival games do separate an overarching story; others don't, depending what kind of game it is. See Subnautica, for example. It's overarching story is incluced via PDAs accompanying the life pods, Degasi habitats, etc. littering the hand-crafted game world, but it's still an open world game world due to the fact that only a select few, carefully placed along a "route," trigger progression of the storyline and the player is led to them via radio -- should they choose to answer the radio. Players don't have to answer the radio, especially for long periods of time, while they just go off and do their own thing. Others, e.g. Green Hell, separate the story from a static, handcrafted map completely. I think it depends what kind of game (and map) it is which is appropriate.

Aside from locking down the traders, I'd think most of the linearization has to do with biome progression rather than story progression, e.g. TFP perhaps wants to present the biomes themselves one at a time in order of difficulty, expecting players to build "forward bases" in each to use while they're there, essentially. If that's the case, I honestly don't think that's necessary (or, even desirable*), either, and negates the "open world" feel. The traders were already introducing them in order of difficulty and that worked even when traders were randomized in RWG maps. Traders appear to have been locked down for story mode in both Navezgane and RWG as each would be affiliated with either the Duke or Noah depending where they appeared. If the plan now is to separate story mode from RWG, that obviously wouldn't be necessary.

*As for desirability, this game has something that makes putting up anything but a little storage, etc. in biomes other than the one chosen for the player's permanent base undesirable: horde night. I would think very few players, if any, are going to want to build permanent horde bases in every biome, but the game seems to be encouraging that.

I don't think any of the linearization elements of the RWG maps were necessary. Isn't the game supposed to be a "go wherever you want, do whatever you want" kind of open world? If biome difficulty is a concern, I'd honestly trust the players -- including new players -- to realize pretty quickly, "Hmm. Maybe I shouldn't go/have gone in there just yet." New players would obviously be severely underlevelled for it and face the consequences immediately. Meanwhile, veterans would go to whichever they like, knowing how to handle being underlevelled.

We'll see how much options and modes make the game more variable. For me the biome "quests" are just a trivial but different quest type that I have to do as part of progression, and they provide a bit of variety. For me a net positive and that means I can simply wait out until everything is in place in the game to ask myself whether it was necessary or not.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

The story can have many separate parts, from the environmental storytelling to specific POIs and quests, topics can be telling the history or telling how the player makes the world better or at least different.

Environmental storytelling generally tells the "story" of a specific POI, e.g. the construction site that used to be pristine, but was changed so that it looks like the backhoe destroyed the trailers. The player can infer anything from that, e.g. the backhoe operator was infected and lost control of the backhoe or what have you for flavor. Environmental storytelling has nothing to do with an overarching story and provides tiny bits of info (usually visual vignettes) as to what happened pre- or during event and/or what the game world was like before. Probably the best example elsewhere I can think of off the top of my head is the monorail system of FO76. It speaks volumes to what Appalachia was like prewar and there's not a single note or holotape or NPC associated with it. It's the route that tells you everything you need to know. Follows on to Tim Cain's excellent advice: show, don't tell. And that's why I disagree that...

it seems to me a very good idea to add at least part of the story to RWG as well

bandits would be included in RWG but would have no real purpose except being slightly different enemies

And there'd be nothing wrong with that. You'd expect there would be other survivors, up to and including the selfish, violent, unreasonable variety. They don't have to serve a purpose in RWG aside from that. They'd simply occupy the POIs obviously designed for them to occupy. (That would be those with bodies strung up out front, etc.)

Draw a distinction between overarching story and environmental storytelling and I think you'll understand better where I'm coming from. Duke and Noah's compounds aren't in the game yet. Whether they'll be added to RWG, in which there's no guarantee at present they'd even appear, I don't know, but there need be no overarching story just to enjoy the sandbox, especially one you're going to be exposed to over and over and over again when playing RWG maps. I'd think those compounds would be hand-placed on the Navezgane map to provide a measure of control over how the overarching story plays out. Green Hell's is like this. Just want to play survival sandbox? Boom. Set the parameters for your game world and have at it. Want to experience the...*ahem*...story, click Story Mode.

I can simply wait out until everything is in place in the game to ask myself whether it was necessary or not.

It harms no one and nothing to make observations and/or offer opinions and suggestions.

 

[theFlu]

Draw a distinction between overarching story and environmental storytelling and I think you'll understand better where I'm coming from.

You're refusing to mix the two, but I don't think that's entirely fair. Env storytelling is just a way to tell a story, whether that is part of the main story or something smaller/local is entirely up to the writer. It can be a funny, as in "haha, someone ran a car thru Mr. Drivesafe's residence", but it can also be the actual story while the exposition is showing something different..
- meet a new guy, he tells him to come to his headquarters; meet his crew and hear him boast of their great plans
- environmentally, the guy has brought you to a shack, he's talking with his crew of a boar, a chicken and a zombie dog, and the plan is a broken husk of a gyrocopter

Simple sample, but you get the idea; there's two styles of storytelling there, and only the environmental one is true. And could easily be a part of the "major" story arc.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

the actual story

Mm-hmm. The overarching story. I said a distinction between them -- in the mind -- not a mutually exclusive line in the sand in the game.

The overarching story and environmental storytelling would complement one another in a static map like Navezgane and there would be some measure of control over how that overarching, linear story plays out should TFP decide to restrict it to the Navezgane map. Noah and the Duke's compounds would be hand-placed in that map, ensuring they appear as well as providing a measure of control over how it unfolds to TFP. RWG maps would be completely free sandboxes in that event, which would not require any linearization whatsoever. Environmental storytelling would still be in all maps, static and RWG. (The "part of the story" to which meganoth refers, those little vignettes that inform you about the game world.)

That's just one scenario. It could be handled any number of other ways, for example as Subnautica handled it...on a static map.

RWG introduces variables galore. They're not static, handcrafted maps. So, there's very little control over what shows up where and/or if at all. Were I TFP, I wouldn't want to wrestle with that.

Now, some will say, "I want the overarching story -- Noah, Duke and all -- in RWG, too." I imagine it would grate on them very quickly when they were formerly accustomed to playing freely on RWG maps, but I'm sure some would. A separate (overarching) story mode, however TFP chooses to implement it would not only be easier and cheaper, but would avoid stepping on any sandbox toes.

A lot of people already feel it's cramping freeplay on RWG maps. You've heard the complaints: locked down traders; no large cities in the forest biome; move from A to B to C to D biome, etc. That's where people are coming by the impression, erroneously or not, TFP are forcing them down a specific path, even on RWG maps. As I said, I think most of the linearization has to do with biome progression rather than story progression, but there we are. It's up to TFP what they choose to do.

 

[theFlu]

So, there's very little control over what shows up where and/or if at all.

Hmm. I don't see any functional reason why an RWG wouldn't be able to produce whatever TFP is going to require for the story. Partly because I don't believe they're going to make Navezgane conform to the story in any strict sense, I expect the story to be told within the confines of select few POIs. A lots of "go to POI X, meet/kill" -type of things, with some "go to a diggable/scoutable location in the open world", and practically none of "you need to take this road to go thru this canyon (to get ambushed in there)" .. Nothing stopping them from making sure that every map has the minimum necessary POIs, they're the ones writing the RWG.

They might want to write an on rails -quest like that, but their existing engine doesn't really support it. They could prolly even do an "escort between POIs" on RWG maps if they want to, such a thing would allow for an ambush event .. Leaving one end of an escort 'open' would ofc be easier with RWG ("help me fight out of here, and meet me at X,Y to go and attack the next site"). (That already sounds way too complex for what I'm expecting ... )

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

I don't see any functional reason why an RWG wouldn't be able to produce whatever TFP is going to require for the story.

See: other thread regarding RWG maps missing traders. If they're missing traders, it's pretty easy to imagine them missing Duke and Noah's compounds, too. Roll a RWG map and you don't know what you're going get, POIs and otherwise. Some I haven't seen since A21. That's why I wouldn't want to wrestle with it were I TFP.

They might want to write an on rails -quest like that

The overarching story is "on rails" by sheer virtue of the fact that it's a story with a beginning, a middle and an end. Where parts of it occur is what makes wrestling with RWG to ensure triggers (of story progression) are in place a daunting task. It's not about sending players through a canyon, but the very nature of a story. That's where the linearization has come in along with "biome progression" in the sense I noted above, whether the biome progression setting is turned on or off: introducing the biomes one at a time according to level of difficulty. Traders already do that and were doing that before they were locked down in RWG.

Games like Subnautica, Green Hell, FO76 have procedurally generated maps with hand-crafted content carefully placed throughout, but they're still static maps, not randomly generated. You're never going to find Vault 76 in the Mire or the city of Watoga in the Ash Heap. They're always going to be precisely where they were put by hand. With RWG, there's no such guarantee. TFP can't hand place the POIs necessary to complete the overarching story in RWG. See the dilemma?

 

[theFlu]

That's why I wouldn't want to wrestle with it were I TFP.

Instead of fixing the bugs, just eff it? RWG placing specific things on a map is peanuts compared to their AI aspirations ...

How would TFP hand place the POIs necessary to complete the overarching story in RWG? See the dilemma?

No, I don't. RWG will place exactly what you program it to, there's no need for hand placing anything to enable pretty much any story. Even stories with tons of branches, as long as you either have plenty of POIs or reset the POIs to a suitable type (I chose to delete this faction => their POIs are abandoned wrecks from now on).

The current RWG isn't in a perfect state, but the problem itself is in no way unsolvable. Just because the current version fails at placing things 1-5 on a map, doesn't mean it can't be fixed to do exactly that, and much more complex things. And it absolutely should be at least fixed.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

RWG placing specific things on a map is peanuts

Apparently not.

 

[meganoth]

Environmental storytelling generally tells the "story" of a specific POI, e.g. the construction site that used to be pristine, but was changed so that it looks like the backhoe destroyed the trailers.

Are notes or books or newspaper clips the player can read environmental storytelling, i.e. how fallout does it? If not, how should I be calling this type of story telling? Anyway I have included them in env.st. at the moment because they share a lot of the characteristics, i.e. they are location bound and it is not guaranteed the player reads them.

It is entirely possible to tell an overaching story with them. You will get the complete story only if you read enough of them, but not necessarily all.
TFP could just add them as random loot and add it even in RWG but I don't think they will do that. I assume they will place them in specific POIs. I think they will also include POIs that tell part of the story just by showing, Higaschi with its laboratory may be one of them.

And if I am right, this is a part that only fits well in Navezgane. Making a few POIs mandatory is quite possible to do, making dozen of POIs mandatory would likely be too limiting in an RWG that already has much less variety than a few years ago.

The player can infer anything from that, e.g. the backhoe operator was infected and lost control of the backhoe or what have you for flavor. Environmental storytelling has nothing to do with an overarching story and provides tiny bits of info (usually visual vignettes) as to what happened pre- or during event and/or what the game world was like before. Probably the best example elsewhere I can think of off the top of my head is the monorail system of FO76. It speaks volumes to what Appalachia was like prewar and there's not a single note or holotape or NPC associated with it. It's the route that tells you everything you need to know. Follows on to Tim Cain's excellent advice: show, don't tell. And that's why I disagree that...

I think I made it clear that I think only the bandit-white river rivalry will likely appear in RWG. So I agree completely to your conclusion here that the environmental storytelling of the history of the world will be confined to Navezgane, adding it to RWG would be difficult.

And there'd be nothing wrong with that. You'd expect there would be other survivors, up to and including the selfish, violent, unreasonable variety. They don't have to serve a purpose in RWG aside from that. They'd simply occupy the POIs obviously designed for them to occupy. (That would be those with bodies strung up out front, etc.)

Draw a distinction between overarching story and environmental storytelling and I think you'll understand better where I'm coming from. Duke and Noah's compounds aren't in the game yet. Whether they'll be added to RWG, in which there's no guarantee at present they'd even appear, I don't know, but there need be no overarching story just to enjoy the sandbox, especially one you're going to be exposed to over and over and over again when playing RWG maps. I'd think those compounds would be hand-placed on the Navezgane map to provide a measure of control over how the overarching story plays out. Green Hell's is like this. Just want to play survival sandbox? Boom. Set the parameters for your game world and have at it. Want to experience the...*ahem*...story, click Story Mode.

I give you an example how the present time part of the story (the duke against white river) could be handled in the game and how it would work in RWG and not bother anyone who doesn't want to do them:

There is a quest line. The first quest is offered by Rekt and is a simple fetch quest in any POI. The next one is offered by Jen and is your chance to either go white river (if you accept it) or stay with the duke. Again a fetch quest in a POI. If you never accept Rekts quest or drop any part of the quest line you will not be exposed to that story.

At the end the quest line normally needs 2 specific POIs in the wasteland for the 2 camps.
If they can switch it around by spawning just the right boss in the same POI it could be only 1, but that is not likely since I they said they had planned to allow the option to kill both leaders.
If they can switch a POI from zombie to bandit population simply by having some 1-1 replacement they could even use random high-tier POIs. But I am not sure if that would work well, so likely not the way they will go.

I think it is almost safe to predict that this main story will be told in quests. Quests you can easily ignore in RWG once you have seen it or play even though you have played it already, since you also raid many of the same POIs in every playthrough and it does seem to work out for most players, right?

Does RWG need that part of the story included? No. Would it be beneficial? I think yes. And if you need another game as example: I know Factorio has a game win condition (starting the rocket) that is always there but can be completely ignored. Factorio has hundreds of options but none to turn of the ability to start the rocket.

It harms no one and nothing to make observations and/or offer opinions and suggestions.

 

[theFlu]

Are notes or books or newspaper clips the player can read environmental storytelling, i.e. how fallout does it? If not, how should I be calling this type of story telling?

At face value, text on a note isn't really environmental.. barricades and spike traps are. Holes in the wall next to them. A note on the floor next to a corpse, saying "Love you, Pumpkin. Get to Mom's, it isn't safe in town! -K" ... yeh, maybe. (Up to you to decide if the note changes meaning if we are in town in an apartment building, or on the outskirts at an old lady's cute little hut. With a big momma sleeping in the corner )

But a note in random trashbag loot, describing the creation/history of an irradiated zombie.. not really environmental in the same way; just drip fed exposition.

(I'm not IW, so can't speak for her; but if environmental storytelling is to mean something, it kinda has to mean the actual environment plays a part in the story being told...)

 

[meganoth]

At face value, text on a note isn't really environmental.. barricades and spike traps are. Holes in the wall next to them. A note on the floor next to a corpse, saying "Love you, Pumpkin. Get to Mom's, it isn't safe in town! -K" ... yeh, maybe. (Up to you to decide if the note changes meaning if we are in town in an apartment building, or on the outskirts at an old lady's cute little hut. With a big momma sleeping in the corner )

But a note in random trashbag loot, describing the creation/history of an irradiated zombie.. not really environmental in the same way; just drip fed exposition.

(I'm not IW, so can't speak for her; but if environmental storytelling is to mean something, it kinda has to mean the actual environment plays a part in the story being told...)

I am pretty flexible here which definition we should use. But whatever we use, TFP never said much about how exactly they want to show each part of story, meaning they could use notes for example even if we don't include them in a definition of environmental storytelling.

And we know there were two parts planned, a history lesson of how the zombies came about, and a present day story where the player is involved in. And that both would be quite small and not at all comparable to Fallout/Skyrim levels

 

[theFlu]

But whatever we use, TFP never said much about how exactly they want to show each part of story, meaning they could use notes for example even if we don't include them in a definition of environmental storytelling.

Yeh; and it's not like "environmental" is a quality definition. Just a type. A story can be great, or terrible, no matter how it's told. The story here will undoubtedly have plenty of POIs involved, doing plenty of lifting for storytelling.. but as a map thread, the only thing we need for those to be RWG, is to fix the RWG to support ...

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

I think I made it clear that I think only the bandit-white river rivalry will likely appear in RWG. So I agree completely to your conclusion here that the environmental storytelling of the history of the world will be confined to Navezgane, adding it to RWG would be difficult.

You're not agreeing with me because that's not what I said. What I said was that (in a Green Hell-type scenario) the environmental storytelling would be included in all maps, static Navezgane and RWG, because they wouldn't be dependent on the overarching White River rivalry, which would not be in RWG maps, but confined to Navezgane and accessed via a Story Mode option.

It is entirely possible to tell an overaching story with them. You will get the complete story only if you read enough of them, but not necessarily all.
TFP could just add them as random loot and add it even in RWG but I don't think they will do that. I assume they will place them in specific POIs. I think they will also include POIs that tell part of the story just by showing, Higaschi with its laboratory may be one of them.

And if I am right, this is a part that only fits well in Navezgane.

It's on that we partially agree in the Green Hell-type scenario. It's the White River rivalry -- the overarching story or main quest, if you will, revolving around the Duke and Noah -- that would be difficult to pull off in RWG while environmental storytelling, e.g. what was going on in the Higashi residence (POI), is not dependent on that. The environmental storytelling would be about that POI and what was going on that POI. Clicking Story Mode to go through the White River rivalry stuff wouldn't affect that. (Obviously, something would have to be added to Higashi labs that says a little more than "experimentation was going on here." Yeah? What kind of experimentation. Why?)

It's the Subnautica scenario that would add both the White River rivalry story and incidental envrionmental storytelling, e.g. Higashi labs, to both Navezgane and RWG as you are imagining it. Strip FO76 back to what it was at launch -- overarching main story contained in a breadcrumb trail of Overseer holotapes -- and that would be the scenario in that case of overarching main story implementation.

I think that would be incredibly difficult to pull off in RWG, given all the variables -- ensuring all pieces of the breadcrumb trail appear; etc. -- but I'm not familiar with the coding of RWG, as faatal is. So, it may or may not be as difficult as I think.

Either way, if it's something that can be skipped and not in your face, e.g. quests that have to be picked up from a NPC would be, I can't imagine sandbox afficionados getting up in arms in about it.... Actually, I can, but that would be for the same reasons they're getting upset about locking down traders; no large cities in the forest biome; etc., in RWG: that feeling of being railroaded along a path through the biomes. It is just a feeling and not actuality. They don't have to follow that path, even now, but it's the biome progression, not story progression, that is making them feel that way. Those are restrictions that have been added to RWG, as I said, likely (if not definitely) for the purposes of biome progression, i.e. introducing them one at a time according to difficulty. I'm assuming, whether correctly or not, that TFP mixed those up in the formula.

If the overarching main story (the White River rivalry) is confined to Navezgane, none of those restrictions on RWG would be necessary and environmental storytelling, e.g. the "story" of the Higashi labs, would still be in place in RWG along with Navezgane because they'd be confined to those POIs. (The Green Hell scenario.) Sandbox afficionados wouldn't feel cramped because those restrictions wouldn't exist in RWG, but only in Navezgane. If the overarching main story and biome progression continue to be added to both Navezgane and RWG (the Subnautica/FO76 scenario), I'd expect those complaints to continue, not because the story is there, but because the restrictions on RWG -- locked down traders; no large cities in the forest biome; the encouragment to move from A to B to C to D biome, etc. -- are there.

 

[meganoth]

You're not agreeing with me because that's not what I said. What I said was that (in a Green Hell-type scenario) the environmental storytelling would be included in all maps, static Navezgane and RWG, because they wouldn't be dependent on the overarching White River rivalry, which would not be in RWG maps, but confined to Navezgane and accessed via a Story Mode option.


It's on that we partially agree in the Green Hell-type scenario. It's the White River rivalry -- the overarching story or main quest, if you will, revolving around the Duke and Noah -- that would be difficult to pull off in RWG while environmental storytelling, e.g. what was going on in the Higashi residence (POI), is not dependent on that. The environmental storytelling would be about that POI and what was going on that POI. Clicking Story Mode to go through the White River rivalry stuff wouldn't affect that. (Obviously, something would have to be added to Higashi labs that says a little more than "experimentation was going on here." Yeah? What kind of experimentation. Why?)

It's the Subnautica scenario that would add both the White River rivalry story and incidental envrionmental storytelling, e.g. Higashi labs, to both Navezgane and RWG as you are imagining it. Strip FO76 back to what it was at launch -- overarching main story contained in a breadcrumb trail of Overseer holotapes -- and that would be the scenario in that case of overarching main story implementation.

I think that would be incredibly difficult to pull off in RWG, given all the variables -- ensuring all pieces of the breadcrumb trail appear; etc. -- but I'm not familiar with the coding of RWG, as faatal is. So, it may or may not be as difficult as I think.

Either way, if it's something that can be skipped and not in your face, e.g. quests that have to be picked up from a NPC would be, I can't imagine sandbox afficionados getting up in arms in about it.... Actually, I can, but that would be for the same reasons they're getting upset about locking down traders; no large cities in the forest biome; etc., in RWG: that feeling of being railroaded along a path through the biomes. It is just a feeling and not actuality. They don't have to follow that path, even now, but it's the biome progression, not story progression, that is making them feel that way. Those are restrictions that have been added to RWG, as I said, likely (if not definitely) for the purposes of biome progression, i.e. introducing them one at a time according to difficulty. I'm assuming, whether correctly or not, that TFP mixed those up in the formula.

If the overarching main story (the White River rivalry) is confined to Navezgane, none of those restrictions on RWG would be necessary and environmental storytelling, e.g. the "story" of the Higashi labs, would still be in place in RWG along with Navezgane because they'd be confined to those POIs. (The Green Hell scenario.) Sandbox afficionados wouldn't feel cramped because those restrictions wouldn't exist in RWG, but only in Navezgane. If the overarching main story and biome progression continue to be added to both Navezgane and RWG (the Subnautica/FO76 scenario), I'd expect those complaints to continue, not because the story is there, but because the restrictions on RWG -- locked down traders; no large cities in the forest biome; the encouragment to move from A to B to C to D biome, etc. -- are there.

For me the enivronmental storytelling is not a good fit with RWG because to tell a full story with it you would need at least a few key POIs in every RWG. Imagine an RWG map without Higashi, and Higashi playing a big part in the story, maybe pointed to in documents found in other POIs.

Sure, instead of telling a big story of how the zombie plague started they could use environmental storytelling to simply tell separate small stories like the vaults in Fallout or small stories of few survivors last combat. But those little separate stories could have been implemented a long time ago simply when creating new POIs, and there are a few POIs with it. But I never heard TFP say "We have x% of the historical part of the story already finished, ..." when critizised about missing story. The few POIs with small stories seem more like unconnected ideas of POI designers than a planned effort from a story board by Madmole.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

For me the enivronmental storytelling is not a good fit with RWG... those little separate stories could have been implemented a long time ago

I was under the impression they largely have been. Aside from the construction site, a little self-contained vignette about what happened there specifically, there is environmental storytelling in all the Higashi labs passively picked up on by the player. (Some kind of experimentation was going on there. What were they doing? Did it start the zombie apocalypse? Were they trying to produce a cure?) Only thing that would make them not a good fit for RWG would be if they were strongly connected by a smaller overarching story than the "main quest" (which they may very well turn out to be) and you had to take an active role and go to multiple POIs to piece together the story, i.e. a faction questline. They can easily be modified to answer those questions satisfactorily or the player can be left to wonder what they were up to and fill in the blanks with their own imaginations. Some really good environmental storytelling going on there.

The Duke and Noah rivalry would be a monumentally strongly connected questline in comparison because it would be the main questline in which the player definitely has to take an active role, which is why the task of including it in RWG seems pretty daunting to me. Looks to be about as simple as it can get: pick a faction, make peace between them or what have you, but you'd have to ensure that all the triggers required to progress the main questline are included in every RWG map that could possibly be rolled. That's obviously a piece of cake in a static map. The Overseer's tapes are going to be in the same places all the time in FO76. Those places aren't going anywhere as in my example of Vault 76 never appearing in the Mire or Watoga never appearing the Ash Heap. They're always going to be in the forest and Cranberry Bog biomes, respectively. All Beth had to do was sprinkle the triggers in there. In 7DTD's case, a RWG map would have to ensure that every POI containing a trigger (NPC, note, whatever) is rendered. It'd obviously be much easier to confine the main questline to the static Navezgane map accessed via a separate Story Mode, but it might be possible to include it in RWG. I imagine faatal would know. I wouldn't. If it is included in RWG, I'd be darn sure to make sure it's not in your face because it would get very old, very quickly otherwise. It could be as in your face (i.e. having to pick up the quest from a specific NPC or some other complication) as you like in a static map.

 

[theFlu]

but you'd have to ensure that all the triggers required to progress the main questline are included in every RWG map that could possibly be rolled.

How complicated are you expecting the quest lines to be? Atm, I'm predicting something like half of what the current quest system does; 4-5 stages with 3-5 quests per stage.. much like biome progression vs traders. But that doesn't mean 5x5 quest-unique locations; some of it may happen in the open, some might happen in "any T3 POI" (pre-selected subset of suitably modified and tagged POIs). And even the parts happening in a unique POI could be implemented to have a backup branch, to take place in the open if the necessary POI doesn't exist, or a suitable POI could be hot-loaded into some suitable flat part of the map. A "bandit hideout" doesn't have to have a dirt road.

And while that might sound like a lot of work, even the static map version is going to have issues that need solving. Exactly the same issues as the current quest system, players may interact with the target before the quest takes them there. Bedrolls, land claims, other players in the POI .. even the main quest needs to be robust to all the dynamic issues players can cause. Everything needs to be reset for the quests to work, and thus be "generateable".

If those are covered, making sure that a bag of M&Ms has at least 2 greens in it isn't all that challenging.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

For me the enivronmental storytelling is not a good fit with RWG because to tell a full story with it you would need at least a few key POIs in every RWG. Imagine an RWG map without Higashi, and Higashi playing a big part in the story, maybe pointed to in documents found in other POIs.

Sure, instead of telling a big story of how the zombie plague started they could use environmental storytelling to simply tell separate small stories like the vaults in Fallout or small stories of few survivors last combat. But those little separate stories could have been implemented a long time ago simply when creating new POIs, and there are a few POIs with it. But I never heard TFP say "We have x% of the historical part of the story already finished, ..." when critizised about missing story. The few POIs with small stories seem more like unconnected ideas of POI designers than a planned effort from a story board by Madmole.

It occurred to me after posting last that I draw a distinction between lore (game world history, etc.) and story (the story the player actually plays through). Most "RPGs" today are dispensing with or not concerning themselves overmuch with story, i.e. the present day stories the player actually plays through, e.g. main questlines, faction questlines, interacting with NPCs, etc.) and they don't qualify as RPGs in my book despite that they're usually called "Action RPGs". They don't qualify because they do so dispense with the story the player actively takes a role in. The Overseer's holotapes are a good example of this. Obviously, the primary complaint about FO76 at launch was that it had no "human" NPCs. I gather Beth took that to mean that they should just add uninteresting NPCs in bulk. Honestly not sure it wouldn't be better off if they'd not added them, they're so annoying and the story is so...uh, unmemorable.

The Souls games are like this also. The game worlds are rich in lore (now being modified and regurgitated as they're largely linked to item descriptions and the like), but you're not taking a particularly active role in the main story because there's frankly very little of one. No dilemmas to resolve, no decisions to make affecting the game world along the way. Regardless of class, you're playing the murder hobo -- just killing everything in your path -- until the end, when you might be called upon to make a choice that determines the ending you get. "Go and become Elden Lord," is your only objective in Elden Ring, for example. (Why you'd want to do that is beyond me.)

So, maybe thinking of the separate elements as lore and story, background and foreground would help bridge our imaginations.

 

[meganoth]

I was under the impression they largely have been. Aside from the construction site, a little self-contained vignette about what happened there specifically, there is environmental storytelling in all the Higashi labs passively picked up on by the player. (Some kind of experimentation was going on there. What were they doing? Did it start the zombie apocalypse? Were they trying to produce a cure?)

Well, that is exactly the problem. Current higashi suggests ... something, but doesn't answer any questions. I may be totally wrong here but I think that FTP wanted the player to find out how the zombie plague came about. Filling in the blanks needs a lot more, and probably a lot more in-your-face explanations for the typical player to see that story emerge. And I also got the impression the complete story would be distributed over multiple POIs, i.e. there is also this POI with an underground lab that might have something to do with it as well.

Only thing that would make them not a good fit for RWG would be if they were strongly connected by a smaller overarching story than the "main quest" (which they may very well turn out to be) and you had to take an active role and go to multiple POIs to piece together the story, i.e. a faction questline. They can easily be modified to answer those questions satisfactorily or the player can be left to wonder what they were up to and fill in the blanks with their own imaginations. Some really good environmental storytelling going on there.

The Duke and Noah rivalry would be a monumentally strongly connected questline in comparison because it would be the main questline in which the player definitely has to take an active role, which is why the task of including it in RWG seems pretty daunting to me. Looks to be about as simple as it can get: pick a faction, make peace between them or what have you, but you'd have to ensure that all the triggers required to progress the main questline are included in every RWG map that could possibly be rolled. That's obviously a piece of cake in a static map. The Overseer's tapes are going to be in the same places all the time in FO76. Those places aren't going anywhere as in my example of Vault 76 never appearing in the Mire or Watoga never appearing the Ash Heap. They're always going to be in the forest and Cranberry Bog biomes, respectively. All Beth had to do was sprinkle the triggers in there. In 7DTD's case, a RWG map would have to ensure that every POI containing a trigger (NPC, note, whatever) is rendered. It'd obviously be much easier to confine the main questline to the static Navezgane map accessed via a separate Story Mode, but it might be possible to include it in RWG. I imagine faatal would know. I wouldn't. If it is included in RWG, I'd be darn sure to make sure it's not in your face because it would get very old, very quickly otherwise. It could be as in your face (i.e. having to pick up the quest from a specific NPC or some other complication) as you like in a static map.

I assumed the main quest would be completely told in a few linked quests, with quest types we already have. Especially the fetch quests could be used a lot, which don't need a particular POI. What you find will then be explained by the trader. And naturally a final clear quest which probably needs a specific POI

Making peace? Madmole once said you will have 3 choices: Kill the duke for white river, kill the white river leader for the duke, or kill both to be the new king.