suggestion Challenges could start randomly inside Sandbox games.

[Kyopaxa]

Now that we have nice situational challenges, like the The Hunted and Whiteout, what about being able to start them randomly inside Sandbox games in different places? I believe it would give the Sandbox a lot of fun.

For example, lets say you decide to shoot a bear and it attacks you. There would be a small chance it could start "The Hunted" challenge:

• If you had a rifle, it'll become stuck and unusable, so you can't use it anymore.
• If you had a bow, it'll break during the bear fight, so you can't use it either.
• A message will appear saying you remember seeing a rifle in a different area, far away. The rifle will obviously spawn there. (Current bow and materials to build one could also be removed and spawned in the destination area, to make sure you don't craft a new bow or something but recover them later. Open to discussion).
• The bear will stubbornly follow you all the way to that area.

For the whiteout, you could randomly spawn a weather forecast paper while searching any container, or by just entering a building, not sure. The forecast will tell you there is a huge blizzard coming and you need to pack up supplies that will randomly spawn all around the whole game. The area where you have to stock supplies could also change, forcing you to do it in a different place.

Other challenges and ideas could start this way while playing a Sandbox game. What do you think?

[Rifleman]

47 minutes ago, Kyopaxa said:

Now that we have nice situational challenges, like the The Hunted and Whiteout, what about being able to start them randomly inside Sandbox games in different places? I believe it would give the Sandbox a lot of fun.

For example, lets say you decide to shoot a bear and it attacks you. There would be a small chance it could start "The Hunted" challenge:

• If you had a rifle, it'll become stuck and unusable, so you can't use it anymore.
• If you had a bow, it'll break during the bear fight, so you can't use it either.
• A message will appear saying you remember seeing a rifle in a different area, far away. The rifle will obviously spawn there. (Current bow and materials to build one could also be removed and spawned in the destination area, to make sure you don't craft a new bow or something but recover them later. Open to discussion).
• The bear will stubbornly follow you all the way to that area.

For the whiteout, you could randomly spawn a weather forecast paper while searching any container, or by just entering a building, not sure. The forecast will tell you there is a huge blizzard coming and you need to pack up supplies that will randomly spawn all around the whole game. The area where you have to stock supplies could also change, forcing you to do it in a different place.

Other challenges and ideas could start this way while playing a Sandbox game. What do you think?

No.

[Gaboris]

The idea is not bad. It could have potential, but it would out right DESTROY the game's pace and I'm pretty sure a lot of players' enjoyment of their current run since they didn't prep for a different challenge.

Sadly this just doesn't fit the game's overall feel, at least for me.

[EternityTide]

1 hour ago, Rifleman said:

No.

Are you going to expand on why you said that, or are you just going to revert to childishness?

@Kyopaxa I see some potential in this idea, but I don't like the idea of my plans suddenly being railroaded because a challenge decided to initiate.

[Rifleman]

11 minutes ago, EternityTide said:

Are you going to expand on why you said that, or are you just going to revert to childishness?

@Kyopaxa I see some potential in this idea, but I don't like the idea of my plans suddenly being railroaded because a challenge decided to initiate.

I don't think I need to expand on this idea but if your desperate for a answer I will tell you why.

Also if I was being "Childishness" I would say.

THIS IS A HORRIBLE IDEA WHY WOULD YOU SUGGEST SOMETHING LIKE THAT!!!!!!!!! DELEAT YOUR SUGGESTION 

[MarrowStone]

Id be up for it only if theres an option upon sandbox creation to opt out of it. 

I do like the hunted challenge starting, but maybe we can have it where it doesnt remove all weapons in the game and simply makes you have to get another. I suggest this because itd be a litlle harsh to remove every gun and bow youve stockpiled. 

Itd be sort of a mad dash back to camp.

[Rifleman]

15 minutes ago, MarrowStone said:

Id be up for it only if theres an option upon sandbox creation to opt out of it. 

I do like the hunted challenge starting, but maybe we can have it where it doesnt remove all weapons in the game and simply makes you have to get another. I suggest this because itd be a litlle harsh to remove every gun and bow youve stockpiled. 

Itd be sort of a mad dash back to camp.

+1 for that suggestion. I know a lot of people would get very annoyed when they are forced to do challenges they never wanted to do in the first place.

[EternityTide]

1 hour ago, Rifleman said:

I don't think I need to expand on this idea but if your desperate for a answer I will tell you why.

Also if I was being "Childishness" I would say.

THIS IS A HORRIBLE IDEA WHY WOULD YOU SUGGEST SOMETHING LIKE THAT!!!!!!!!! DELEAT YOUR SUGGESTION 

@Kyopaxa is new around here, I'd suggest you be a little more courteous towards him/her. When you first arrived here, Not that long ago, I might add, we could just as well have rubbished your ideas with no rhyme or reason. Outright criticism such as "No." with no explanation behind it is not helpful.

@MarrowStone That would be the best way to do it, but overall, I think there is a reason why challenges are listed separately 

[Scyzara]

Just as a general reminder for everyone: Please remain respectful towards other users in general, even if you dislike their ideas.

In this specific context, respect BOTH includes not to be dismissive of other people's ideas without even saying why you dislike them (@Kyopaxa has obviously put both time and thought in his/her suggestion, hence simply writing "no" as an answer is definitely not particularly polite either) AND not to insult other users as childish (or whatever else).

If you find somebody's comments impolite or inaproppriate, please report their posts and don't attempt to do any backseat moderating yourself.

[akodo1]

It would have to be done very carefully, but I could see the interest.

The player would choose 'random challenge' option when starting, just like they could chose 'random map'.  But the challenge doesn't start right away so it keeps the player wondering.

I have some concerns about even once you choose 'random challenge' tying it too much to a specific activity like shooting a bear, because then it becomes less random...you can 'choose' one.  The game probably could be programmed to wait 10 days then a building 5% chance per day to have a challenge started, but it's chosen randomly from a list.  You could possibly have not all options being equal, bonus points for which one was chosen could be generated by in-game activity, but only influence it moderately so it's still a big surprise.

Then as the challenge runs it's course you have a 10 day window, and then the chances of another one start all over.

You'd have to tweak the challenges a little bit.  You'd not be able to rush to the trapper's cabin to get the gun and shoot the bear if you'd already grabbed the gun off the wall months ago.  Maybe once the challenge starts a loose board spawns on the cabin floor, and you have to show up with a crowbar to pull out the bear-killing rifle.  Your current weapons stay, but the are ineffectual, they may drive the bear back slightly but not kill it.

 

[Dirmagnos]

Unless its an on/off option upon new game creation, then its a "no thx".

3 hours ago, Scyzara said:

In this specific context, respect BOTH includes not to be dismissive of other people's ideas without even saying why you dislike them (@Kyopaxa has obviously put both time and thought in his/her suggestion, hence simply writing "no" as an answer is definitely not particularly polite either) AND not to insult other users as childish (or whatever else).

Im sorry, but are you friggin joking ? It has been specifically asked if other players like that idea or not. Saying simply "no" is as legitimate answer as any other, even if there is no reason provided.

Forum even has feature where players can anonymously "like" posts, WITHOUT providing any actual feedback(not even "no" or "yes") and its anonymous on top of that. It seems that from your point of view the only "proper" way to discuss or even react to other people posts/topics is by liking them. Anything else is rude and unacceptable.

Same goes for being polite, that is apparently somehow tied to length of the post in some mysterious way. Am i supposed to write 10 sentences in return is writers original post is 10 sentences long, or im being disrespectful ? Where exactly that "politeness border" is ? Is it perceptual(as response post must be at least 50% as long as post that response is written 2) or based on number of words, eg anything less that 5 words is impolite ?

 

[Kyopaxa]

Thanks for the constructive feedback.

So far I understand people are not happy in general with random challenges suddenly derailing their precious plans. But, isn't the game all about having to deal with unpredictable weather, wild animals, and for starters, a plain crash?

For me, the Hunted starting, or a huge blizzard approaching, it's kind of the same deal the game already offers, just a different flavor. I would get annoyed the same way as a dense fog messing up with my plans to find my way back home, or a wolf badly injuring me and breaking my clothes while a horrible blizzard just starts and I don't see anything. Because all those are random challenges too and the game would be so terribly boring without them.

Well I guess an opt-in/opt-out option would be the way to go. Fine by me. It could be enabled in the future as an experimental new experience mode to get feedback.

Anyone has other challenge ideas for this kind of mode?

[MarrowStone]

Im for both renditions of "the hunted" as long as which ever is chosen is done carefully...

For example. If we're allowed to use any weopon thats not currently on our person (due to them being ruined) i would agree that the bear would need more health than a regular one in order to use more resources.

If every "normal" weapon has limited effectiveness and only a bearkiller rifle that spawned would be the solution, the game would have to find some reason as to why our player knows of this rifle and where it is i suppose. It may also limit the amount of times this event can occur in the sandbox due to limited spawns.

Both are good ideas. But both have some rough edges, anyone have any ideas or polish for these ones?

I think the bear attack should only occur if you get yourself into one, that way an rng event of a crazy bear wouldnt so happen to kill you on your 50 day run when you were freezing unless you got yourself into the misfortune of being attacked in the first place. 

What do you think.?

[Patrick Carlson]

Hi everyone, 

Our guidelines are pretty clear and straightforward around here--be mature and respectful in how you relate to each other. Period. You are a passionate group(we love that!) but things often get too personal too quickly. The moderators are here to help elevate the discourse, and point some of these things out to us. So please do not argue with them. 

And yes, all things being equal, responding with something more than a block quote and "No" would be ideal. There isn't a word count required for posting, obviously, but @Scyzara was simply reminding us all to be as thoughtful as possible. 

On-topic: It's a fascinating idea. I'm not sure about the technical challenges involved with what the OP is proposing, but I would guess they are substantial. Certainly the Challenge Modes themselves are each in their own way a "version" of the Sandbox. You can simply run from the Old Bear in The Hunted Part One for example and avoid the goal entirely if you wish (and you can live that long). 

[Kyopaxa]

16 minutes ago, MarrowStone said:

If we're allowed to use any wepon thats not currently on our person (due to them being ruined) i would agree that the bear would need more health than a regular one in order to use more resources.

If every "normal" weapon has limited effectiveness and only a bearkiller rifle that spawned would be the solution, the game would have to find some reason as to why our player knows of this rifle and where it is i suppose. It may also limit the amount of times this event can occur in the sandbox due to limited spawns.

Both are good ideas. But both have some rough edges, anyone have any ideas or polish for these ones?

The first option could depend too much in luck to find other weapons around, it can be too challenging if there are none or were already ruined. Then the second option eliminates the possible lack of resources at any given time as a rifle is guaranteed to spawn, but indeed there is no explanation about why we knew about that rifle in the first place.

I personally like the first option, the bear being really stubborn and having a lot of health but then, we can still use our weapons. It would be less annoying and would not force us to move to a different place in search of an unexplainable rifle spawn. Also, limiting the time the bear follows us from far away, maybe for 2 - 4 days and past that point it dies from injuries or just leaves us alone and behaves again normally. So it would be like a light version of "The Hunted".

The Whiteout is more straightforward, maybe the blizzard could be not that long (2 - 3 days?) but really intense, lowering the temperature even inside our base. The required supplies are not that complicated, but still you have to be ready to survive it. Cabin fever should not arise during this events of course.

15 minutes ago, MarrowStone said:

I think the bear attack should only occur if you get yourself into one, that way an rng event of a crazy bear wouldnt so happen to kill you on your 50 day run when you were freezing unless you got yourself into the misfortune of being attacked in the first place. 

What do you think.?

I agree too. This should only happen if you attack the bear.

[MarrowStone]

@Kyopaxa, I really like your ideas. If you can avoid the bear for a week it will grow tired of hunting you and move on, so you dont actually have to kill the bear. Its a simple way to adress even the lack of weapons. 

Another thing id like to see is the ability for the bear to traverse transition zones. 

The blizzard would be great too, that sense of impending danger ahead while you frantically stockpile wood and food is amazing , but I still question how an almanac can be accurate after a geomagnetic disaster, but Ill write it off as the dev's  creative license .

[ElvisHunter]

I like most of this idea. I wouldn't add them randomly though. 

What if the in-game challenge was triggered by the player maybe in map specific areas? i.e. the sandbox version of "The Hunted" begins when the player enters a cave that is absolutely littered with bones and are also prompted with a zone change type cursor that says "Enter home of the blood thirsty old Grunty" or something. This would avoid people having random challenges ruin their day, but provide us an opportunity to play out scenarios inside the sandbox.   

[akodo1]

6 hours ago, MarrowStone said:

If every "normal" weapon has limited effectiveness and only a bearkiller rifle that spawned would be the solution, the game would have to find some reason as to why our player knows of this rifle and where it is i suppose. It may also limit the amount of times this event can occur in the sandbox due to limited spawns.

Both are good ideas. But both have some rough edges, anyone have any ideas or polish for these ones?

I was thinking about that, how would you know to go get the special rifle?

You could recall reading a note you saw jotted down on your travels about an old timer who killed a giant bear in his youth, who said he still had the rifle tucked away under his cabin.