Encumbrance, perceived temp and other issues

[themole4]

Greetings to all.

I'm sorry I didn't have the time to check the forums carefully, so I don't know if these have already been suggested (or even in someway implemented!).

If you are running, or climbing (even going downwards is tiresome in real life), or carrying a lot, maybe your perceived temperature should rise, along with calorie consumption. The fact is, in the real world, when you exert yourself, you feel warmer (I think it's a thermodynamic thing: when you employ more energy, you produce more heat). I couldn't tell if this effect is implemented in the current game sandbox. Of course, this could entail more effects: for example, you could begin sweating under physical effort, which would turn the perceived temperature to a much lower one when you stop moving, especially when the winds are strong.

*****

Another thing that has been already brought up: eating human flesh. As I see it, it shouldn't even cross the mind of a sane person, but, if you are severely undernourished and starving for a long time, the option to collect human flesh could suddenly pop up to be available to you when you click on a human corpse. As everyone knows, it has really happened in real extreme survival situations.

EDIT: ignore the following, it seems like I requested something that has already been implemented.

Another thing I'd like to discuss it's ice. The first time I had to step on frozen ice in the game I was really scared it could break. It really added to the experience, until I figured out all ice was safe to step on. That's probably true at the temperatures simulated in the game. I don't know, I live in a place where it snows once in a blue moon, however, that would have been a great paranoia factor when going around.

[TarjaS]

Don't know where you got the idea that all ice is safe to step on, because it definitely isn't as many whose game has ended in falling through ice can testify. Make sure to listen carefully when going to ice and be ready to turn back and run.

IRL, ice is usually safe in temperatures like in the game, but even then some caution is required as ice is always thinner in places with flowing water. The stronger the flow, the thinner the ice.

[themole4]

Uh, it seems like I didn't play the game long enough (I've played 16 hours according to the Steam client). After the initial cautious approach to frozen water bodies, I have assumed that ice was safe, and carelessly went on it without ever having an incident.

Thank you for pointing this out.

[elloco999]

I have never gone through the ice so far and I've played for many hours. But I think most of the ice is safe, but certain locations are not. And I also think that those locations are all on the Coastal Highway map. But I could be wrong...

[TarjaS]

I haven't been at Mystery Lake since the big update, so I don't know about that, but the ice at Coastal Highway is certainly thin at places. You can hear when it starts to crack and the color of the ice also shows you what's safe and what's not. The river there seems quite safe, though.

[Dark]

Mystery Lake ice is safe, because it is a lake with standing water, and normally a ice thickness of 5 to 7 cm should hold a person. In the Coastal map i have died in my first playthrough, because i broke through the ice (wanted to test if the devs implemented it, therefore it was a nice surprise).

[elloco999]

Here in the Netherlands we have a traditional ice skating tour when the ice is thick enough. The last 3 times it was held there were over 15000 people participating. The tour is about 200km long. The minimum required ice thickness for the tour to start is 15cm...

The canadian red cross says 20cm for walking/ skating in parties and 25cm for snowmobiles... 1m of ice is supposedly capable of supporting 110tons of weight safely.

In the middle of the canadian winter, standing water should be frozen to a thickness that's quite safe to walk on. Only fast flowing water may not freeze thick enough and could possibly have weak spots.

That said, I do think going through the ice should be possible in TLD.

[Dark]

Minessota Departement of Ressources:

Since with ice fishing you make a hole in the ice, which creates a weakness in the ice shield, naturally more thickness is required. But under 5cm it is really dangerous to step on ice.

[RedNanaki]

Aye. With over a meter of thickness it should be safe for small planes to land on lakes. So I don't think there should be any chance at all of falling through the ice on a small lake like Mystery Lake. Maybe the river could have a chance, although it looks like the river is completely flat, so it shouldn't really be an issue either. Plus, the river is already a risky path because of wolves in narrow corridors.

The coast is always more iffy, so it's not unrealistic that there are some unsafe areas, especially the outer area behind the islands.

The small river in Coastal Highway is precisely the kind of river the would be dangerous during mild winters, but it looks small enough that it might actually be completely frozen with the in-game temperatures.

[TarjaS]

The small river in Coastal Highway is precisely the kind of river the would be dangerous during mild winters, but it looks small enough that it might actually be completely frozen with the in-game temperatures.

There's actually a problem with that river. It's so small that it probably is frozen completely, but where does the water falling from the rocks above the railway go? Certainly not to the river, considering how much water is coming down compared to the size of the river.

[themole4]

I'm glad that my wrong assumption in the opening post about ice not breaking anywhere sparked what seems like a fruitful discussion.

The reason of my assumption is that I've not visited the Coastal Highway region yet. I was more focused on trying out the new gameplay adjustments (tools and clothing durability and availability, new wildlife and wildlife behaviour etc.) in a known area (I don't have much time to play the game right now).

Once I noticed that I kept "Freezing" even if I was running uphill to the lookout tower (or whatever it's called in-game) with a full load (slightly less than 30 kg) and calm winds. I thought the exertion should have warmed me up at least a little, at least as long as I kept moving.

However, I see that the .154 HOTFIX release added

* Reduced Fatigue modifiers for Running, to avoid penalizing players for exploring.

which makes sense, but renders a "warmth" bonus for running (if it makes any sense at all) less likely to be introduced.

[elloco999]

Warming up when running has been suggested many times already. Probably because it makes sense to everyone who has ever ran. But then there's the discussion of whether you should also start to sweat etc.

[AAA05]

Perceived temperature is an AMAZING idea!! I completely agree. I think the developers should add this if they haven't already.

[themole4]

There is a "Feels Like" temperature, which is another way of saying "percerived temperature". Only, I can't tell if it is affected by exertion, as I think it should (I think it isn't currently affected).

[themole4]

I confirm that running while encumbered (more than 30 kg) with negligible winds doesn't seem to raise my "Feels Like" temp stat, also, my "Cold" condition keeps increasing. The Main Menu shows my game version as .156 (shouldn't it be .154? Who knows). I understand that things such as sweating would be messy (to say the least) to model. In my case, I should have had a "warmth" bonus for my exertion, but that should also make me sweat, and as soon as I stopped, my being sweaty would drop my perceived temperature dramatically - as I suggested in the opening post. And then the game should go on determining if some of my clothing became wet with sweat, et cetera, so I know it's messy, but nonetheless it feels sligthly wrong to keep getting colder and colder while running uphill with a full load.

Another thing I discussed in the OP was eating human flesh. I know others brought this up. People did survive extreme conditions by eating human flesh (we all know of the airliner crashed in the Andes). I think it should be an option if you are really desperate (starving and nearing death).

[elloco999]

The current version of the game is v.156.

The problem with sweating is even more complex. In RL, when you are exerting yourself in very cold weather, you take of layers of clothing when you are getting warmer. This way you can prevent sweating (to a degree). But doing this in the game is very cumbersome right now. If I start to sweat when running and being sweaty will impact me negatively, I also want to be able to minimize the sweating.

Eating human flesh well not be implemented for one very simple reason. It will make the age rating of the game skyrocket and possibly lead to the game getting banned in some countries. And possible the devs just think this is going to far.

[themole4]

I understand the practical, commercial problem of age rating, even if I think it would hypocritical of rating bodies to raise the rating for this reason: eating human flesh would be a feature implemented for the sake of realism, not with exploitative intentions (i.e., making the game "gorier" or more "hard-core" or such nonsense). According to ImDb, the movie Alive was "Rated R for crash scenes too intense for unaccompanied children", not for the main movie issue.

And regarding the devs: you shouldn't step back when you choose "How far will you go to survive?" as your game's tagline! .

Jokes aside, I think refusing to share your food with someone who is starving to death (the kind of situation you would encouter in the game episodes?) would be much worse than eating the flesh of someone who's already dead to save your life. I'd be glad if people survived eating my already dead body (NOT if they killed me). What's the difference with organ donors? You give your dead body to save someone else's life.

[Burning Bridges]

Many people would be offended. Especially since this is a game that that could be played with children (10 and up) as it is now. There are a few problematic things but the educational benefit far outweighs them. I think we can do without cannibalism, although it would fit into the setting.

[Dark]

It is rational to eat a dead person, if one is starving, but others are more emotional about it.

The Questions is that everybody should ask himself: Am i willing to kill a human to eat this person, for my own survival?

I don't know if Hinterland wants this question explored, because .... it is difficult, especially for this medium, which also children have access.

I see also no difference in organ or meat donor / doner, from a certain perspective, both are about survival of a human. But to what expense...

For me the answer to the Question is simple, at least currently under given circumstances: the evil begins if you hunt and kill humans, for their meat. That i why i would say that i understand why the people in some plane crashes in the mountains, have eaten the dead.

[Burning Bridges]

Not all of them, some prefered to die. And no one ever ate meat from on of their their relatives, that's a reported fact.

[Dark]

Yes some prefered to die, which makes them noble, but also dead. I don't judge neither the living nor the dead.

In the great Hunger times in Ukraine (Holodomor) and China, the people didn't ate their own relatives, but in Papua-Neuguinea their kind of cannibalism is different, for them it was a honorable deed too eat their relatives after they died.

In Ukraine the families gave their dead children to other families. What a cruel time, makes me very sad to even think about this. And there are still stupid people who worship Stalin and Mao.

[themole4]

IF the comparison to organ donations stands, then killing someone for their meat would be like killing someone to forcibly explant their organs. Utterly monstrous. (But would that be really worse than killing them for their food rations, or for their gear? I don't think so, I think it's more a matter of ancestral and, so-to-speak, internally "hardwired" irrational taboos than fully informed moral choices.)

This said, there are very free sandbox-style games (NetHack comes to mind) where freedom and openness are the priority. In NetHack you could do almost anything, including eating the meat of your likes, but various penalties came with it. However, it was a choice one pondered if starving and nearing death.

That said, I want to make it clear that I have no interest (or the slightest entitlement) in pushing the matter - if the devs feel that cannibalism is too much, then it is too much.

However I ask myself what kind of "morally challenging scenarios that push players to answer the question: <” or "mature post-disaster storyline inspired by the creative risk-taking seen in many of today’s exciting television series" can be put in a game if it's supposed to be played by unaccompanied kids.

Maybe this game should target only more mature audiences?

[Burning Bridges]

@themole Ok I made up my mind, I am against cannibalism of any kind in this game. Reason: I am already getting tired to hear a rational argument between people who know such horrors only from TV. We have not been in the Andes crash and can not judge the many stages people went through before made their decision.

Yes, I know the stories of the Andes disaster, and I even knew someone, who knew someone who ate human meat without knowing it. It was illegally sold in Lithuania post WW1. And yes, someone had murdered and butchered people and sold them on the black market as minced meat. This kind of discussion between people who have never been anywhere near such situations must be very indecent for someone who has seen it first hand. We should leave that to those people who have been faced with such dilemmas.

Putting it in the game would be like putting a target on your chest, and really stupid because it invites indecent, immature people and discussion. There are things which are just revolting, and which must be left out. So you want cannibalism, what if then someone comes and says they also want to rape corpses? And that it would be realistic because there is no other way to have sexual intercourse, and the body of a dead person does not mind? Or you know, all kinds of crazy people will come and say they play the game only because it has cannibalism and they can eat people, or cut off their heads and use them as bowling balls. It's like inviting the most perverse people you can think of and say that you want them to come and all play your game.

Sorry if that was offending but I hope that makes it clearer why I am so against it now. I hope we're in the same boat that we want this to become the game known to be the best survival game of all times, not "that game where you can eat people".

[themole4]

@Burning Bridges

I think you missed the part where I wrote

"I want to make it clear that I have no interest (or the slightest entitlement) in pushing the matter - if the devs feel that cannibalism is too much, then it is too much."

However, in videogames you can do a lot of viler things (think of the venerable Elite: you could kill people to steal their cargo, or even engage in slave trade - and rest assured that both things are horrible and really happened - and sadly still happen - in real history, yet Elite it's just a game, and it didn't became known as "the game where you can buy and sell slaves", it became known as one of the best games in history as "the game where you can do anything"). But this is just for the sake of discussion, as I have already stated, if the devs think that eating human flesh is too much, then IT IS too much.

I'm sincerely sorry if my reasoning hurted your sensitivity.

Best regards,

themole4

[Burning Bridges]

@Burning Bridges

I think you missed the part where I wrote

"I want to make it clear that I have no interest (or the slightest entitlement) in pushing the matter - if the devs feel that cannibalism is too much, then it is too much."

I don't think I missed it. And you did not hurt my sensitivity, that was not the issue.

I just ignored that statement because it is contradicting the gist of your posts. Which was a rather naive discussion of why canibalism is the logical thing to do, and then you backpaddle and say, But I am not pushing the matter. Ok you just want to discuss it. That's fine.

But I tell you something, it won't be in the game anyway. If it was not clear what I was saying before, I will spell it out simply: Cannibalism in the game is a very stupid idea.

Elite is irelevant that was 1986 and mass media didn't even know that video games existed.