TALES FROM THE FAR TERRITORY, PART FOUR IS HERE!

[chrislacruz]

42 minutes ago, xanna said:

Yeah, it's not great, but it's the right decision. There are two choices:

 

Yes, I agree here, I guess the could have com eup woth some hybrid option, but it seems like a sensible solution to me.

We are on our second attempt at 500 day run... first one after 250+ had a corrupt save file, and our new character is at 350, so once we hit 500 we will open a new game and have fun with scruvy!

 

Edited December 6, 2023 by chrislacruz

[I_eat_only_wolf_meat]

50 minutes ago, xanna said:

There are two choices:

3.  Add it to saves with less than, say, 500 days play time.

4.  Add a renewable source of vitamin C.

[xanna]

38 minutes ago, Serenity said:

It looks like fish has vitamin C. So it's not an issue of having run out of resources to deal with it. A lot of people assumed that it only comes from finite stuff like plants. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

Hinterland said it is precisely an issue of running out of rescources:

21 hours ago, Admin said:

(NOTE: Scurvy is only enabled on new saves, to avoid the risk that players have already harvested most of the Vitamin-C rich foods in their game world.)

I take tham at their word that that is the rationale, and honestly they should know. No player outside of Hinterland has yet had a 500 day run with scurvy enabled and so we don't know what the long-term effects are and how to combat them. If Hinterland say it's a no-go then I believe them. More likely it is a possible no-go for some players, and they just don't want to allow for it because of "Hinterland killed my run"

[Laika Ivanova]

I don't think not adding a game mechanic because of lack of planning of other players justifies not adding a mechanic to existing saves. It isn't my fault other players waste resources. Besides, regarding scurvy there are enough renewable sources anyway so the whole lack of resource argument is irrelevant as is.

[ManicManiac]

It really seems to be a no-win scenario...

If they did add blanket scurvy to all saves (old & new) then the forum would be getting inundated with complaints about how unfair it is, and about how people lost their precious long run... how mad they are and how they want their money back and won't play again (and all that nonsense).

If they don't have scurvy affect old saves... then as we can see... we have folks disappointed/upset about that too.  

I for one appreciate the consideration and foresight on the part of Hinterland.

I think if Scurvy had been blanketed across all saves... so many people would have been blindsided and likely furious about it.  "Just woke up with advanced curvy and died... I quit... [expletive - expletive - expletive]"  

13 hours ago, ManicManiac said:

@Raphael van Lierop
I really appreciate the consideration and foresight.
Thank you very much.

Edited December 6, 2023 by ManicManiac

[Semple Fi]

[Enigmaecho]

1 hour ago, xanna said:

Re not having scurvy in existing saves:

Yeah, it's not great, but it's the right decision. There are two choices:

1) Add scurvy to existing saves: survivors with 500+ hours in game suddenly have a new way to die and not enough resources to deal with it. A player with a save like that might want to keep it going for 1000+ days and they can't. That save could well be over compared to what the player planned. "Hinterland killed my run." = very bad outcome.

2) Don't add scurvy to existing saves: survivors with 500+ hours in game can't experience every feature of the new release, but they still get to play their run for 1000 days  if they want. That save can continue as the player planned, just with the downside of missing out on one gameplay aspect. "I wish I could experience scurvy on my long run." = less bad outcome.

I'd rather have a less-than-full-featured run that I can play than a fully-featured run that is destined to kill me unfairly.

Maybe there's an option 3) where scurvy is included but needed resources are added in to the existing game, but we know that this never happens, it is presumably too difficult to add new items into a game where the world has already been looted (either technically or from a playing POV).

This isn’t the case though, it doesn’t seem to be the case that all runs are doomed to scurvy just that (all the high vit c) may have been used already which doesn’t doom a run it just makes it harder, 2 every time there is a world update all ton of harvestables respawn 3 a new region just dropped with a more harvestables 4 we have a trader coming in 2 updates that could just trade us high vit c, I’m in the they should reconsider camp, this game is a challenge someones poor planning is not the rest of the long save players faults. Another thought that keeps nagging me is when tales dropped we had the whole “this is the last save wipe” only for it to be “if you want the  new content you gotta save wipe yourself”, give everyone everything and stop making choose to throw away hundreds of hours or miss new content 🤷🏻‍♂️

Edited December 6, 2023 by Enigmaecho

[Leeanda]

Ummm... all my matches have vanished from my inventory...  I had about 80 regular ones and 60+ cardboard ones.. now I have none.. 

Pretty serious bug..

[chrislacruz]

28 minutes ago, ManicManiac said:

I think if Scurvy had been blanketed across all saves... so many people would have been blindsided and likely furious about it.  "Just woke up with advanced curvy and died... I quit... [expletive - expletive - expletive]"  

I think this is it, given how overly dramatic things can get on here when someone doesn't like a change, I suspect they just erred on the side of caution, and you can't bring a run back when they die!

[Laika Ivanova]

24 minutes ago, Enigmaecho said:

This isn’t the case though, it doesn’t seem to be the case that all runs are doomed to scurvy just that (all the high vit c) may have been used already which doesn’t doom a run it just makes it harder, 2 every time there is a world update all ton of harvestables respawn 3 a new region just dropped with a more harvestables 4 we have a trader coming in 2 updates that could just trade us high vit c, I’m in the they should reconsider camp, this game is a challenge someones poor planning is not the rest of the long save players faults. Another thought that keeps nagging me is when tales dropped we had the whole “this is the last save wipe” only for it to be “if you want the  new content you gotta save wipe yourself”, give everyone everything and stop making choose to throw away hundreds of hours or miss new content 🤷🏻‍♂️

That's actually a really good point with the save wipes...

[xanna]

38 minutes ago, Enigmaecho said:

2 every time there is a world update all ton of harvestables respawn

Do they?? I never experienced that. Is that intended?

[ManicManiac]

44 minutes ago, Enigmaecho said:

stop making choose to throw away hundreds of hours or miss new content

They are not really "making" anyone do anything... we can have more than one save.
Folks know that... right?  We don't "have to throw away" anything... we can still finish up our old runs.

Here's the story in my case... I'm right now still working on a personal challenge run.
When I'm done with the final region on my trip down Memory Lane... then I'll consider the challenge complete.
Before the update I was going to just continue on the same run and just lift all my previous restrictions.

So... now we have Scurvy for new runs... okay... cool. I'll finish up the run I've been working on for nearly a year, and when that's done... I'll start a new one to include scurvy.   Because it's not affecting old saves, I can still finish out my ongoing run as is.  I think that was a good choice.

So many folks say they love the early game struggle (or gripe about the imagined "late game problem" 😒)... so why is starting a new run something that people are bucking so hard about?  

Edited December 6, 2023 by ManicManiac

[xanna]

46 minutes ago, ManicManiac said:

It really seems to be a no-win scenario...

If they did add blanket scurvy to all saves (old & new) then the forum would be getting inundated with complaints about how unfair it is, and about how people lost their precious long run... how mad they are and how they want their money back and won't play again (and all that nonsense).

If they don't have scurvy affect old saves... then as we can see... we have folks disappointed/upset about that too.  

I for one appreciate the consideration and foresight on the part of Hinterland.

I think if Scurvy had been blanketed across all saves... so many people would have been blindsided and likely furious about it.  "Just woke up with advanced curvy and died... I quit... [expletive - expletive - expletive]"  

Exactly my point. I understand totally why people are questioning this decision, but I think the alternative would be a worse backlash.

[xanna]

43 minutes ago, Enigmaecho said:

someones poor planning is not the rest of the long save players faults

Using up all the harvestable resources in a game that doesn't have scurvy in it before scurvy was ever announced as a thing is not poor planning, it's just playing the game. But yes, if t's possible to avoid scurvy without the used-up harvestables, using only renewable sources, by being more diligent about your nutrition, then long-haulers are denied the opportunity to find that out for the sake of other players who might not be so careful and so succumb to scurvy.  Like I said, it's not great. Both options are bad. Option 1 might not be worse for you and your playstyle, but it's not hard to see how it might be worse for Hinterland or the more general player base, and therefore why they chose 2.

 

1 hour ago, I_eat_only_wolf_meat said:

3.  Add it to saves with less than, say, 500 days play time.

4.  Add a renewable source of vitamin C.

3 would be possible I guess, though not sure how that woul be implemented, and they'd have to pick an arbitrary timeframe as we've been doing in these discussions. I expect that that would also cause a LOT of arguments and pushback, too. Your 3 is just my 1 for some players and my 2 for other players, ie, still both bad options, and having different players affected differently would cause disagreement no matter where we put the line.

4 well, there are some renewable sources of vit C, but I don't know yet how to choose my nutrition to avoid scurvy long-term, and nor does anyone else except HTL. There is a mix of renewable (eg fish) and non-renewable (eg rosehips) sources in the game that was almost certainly very carefully balanced and thought-out to make this affliction something that affects long-haulers in an appropriately challenging way. Hinterland always excel at game balance, and it's something that they consider carefully and take seriously. I don't want them messing with that for the sake of this specific problem.

[thekillergreece]

As me and @Laika Ivanova said above, an opt-in feature is the best scenario for HL to implement. You want scurvy enabled in your save? Choose yes. No? Choose no.

But, I'm sure HL have thought of that idea in the past but couldn't get to do it for various unforeseen reasons.

[DarthCannabis1]

At least all of your games load.  I just want to play the new content and can’t get passed the disclaimer screen. @Admin any word when Xbox App PC versions will be playable again?

[Semple Fi]

52 minutes ago, Leeanda said:

Ummm... all my matches have vanished from my inventory...  I had about 80 regular ones and 60+ cardboard ones.. now I have none.. 

Pretty serious bug..

Did you submit a ticket already?

Personal inventory or across the entire game?

[xanna]

3 minutes ago, thekillergreece said:

As me and @Laika Ivanova said above, an opt-in feature is the best scenario for HL to implement. You want scurvy enabled in your save? Choose yes. No? Choose no.

But, I'm sure HL have thought of that idea in the past but couldn't get to do it for various unforeseen reasons.

As a custom option? That will be coming, apparently (yay!) but custom options can't be changed on existing runs so it wouldn't solve this problem. If you mean as a one-off option "The game was updated, please choose now whether you want scurvy or not for this save" that would be cool. But I guess we try to keep all eg Interloper games to be the same settings, and we don't want an Interloper run to convert to a custom run as that might cause other issues (like feat progression). And as you say probably other issues that we can't guess at.

[Leeanda]

1 minute ago, Semple Fi said:

Did you submit a ticket already?

Personal inventory or across the entire game?

No I haven't.. yet..

It seems to be just what I'm carrying..  I'm still finding them in my base cupboards luckily..

And they're not stacking any more either.. 

It could just be one of my weird bugs again considering no one else has mentioned it.

[thekillergreece]

6 minutes ago, xanna said:

If you mean as a one-off option "The game was updated, please choose now whether you want scurvy or not for this save" that would be cool.

That.

[Semple Fi]

 

Anyone find "signs of life" yet?

 

 

[Leeanda]

Love the hand coverings ..I feel like a werewolf on the prowl😁

[Laika Ivanova]

14 minutes ago, xanna said:

As a custom option? That will be coming, apparently (yay!) but custom options can't be changed on existing runs so it wouldn't solve this problem. If you mean as a one-off option "The game was updated, please choose now whether you want scurvy or not for this save" that would be cool. But I guess we try to keep all eg Interloper games to be the same settings, and we don't want an Interloper run to convert to a custom run as that might cause other issues (like feat progression). And as you say probably other issues that we can't guess at.

According to some people on our server, Scurvy only does 1% condition damage per hour. If that is true it is almost laughable that it isn't part of existing saves already, especially not for long save players that clearly know how to play around these things. 

 

If it would be my own decision, I'd just implement it into every save except Pilgrim because of how minor the affliction is. But I get why Hinterland was careful with this one. Best they can do now is making it a one time opt in decision.

 

I also don't care how others play the game, but for me a survival game has no purpose if I have to start another save to experience everything it has to offer (besides they already wiped saves once and said they wanted to avoid that in the future which now clearly isn't the case with how Scurvy was handled). Giving up a save is giving up survival in my eyes. But to each their own. It should at least be an option to get it in existent saves so one doesn't have to start over. 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Laika Ivanova

[dave1122]

FYI @Admin just in case it hasnt been mentioned I did notice that hand coverings were not applied to the fixing of the relay towers.  I am not sure if this was intended or just an oversight.  

Edited December 6, 2023 by dave1122

[Enigmaecho]

1 hour ago, xanna said:

Do they?? I never experienced that. Is that intended?

Not sure if intended or just incidental from changing the build? but it definitely occurs I try and carry a run indefinitely and so many times a new region comes out and suddenly all the cattails are back on a pond i know I cleared hundreds of days prior same with rose hips, of the things listed that’s the least reliable but still worth mentioning 👍

 

1 hour ago, ManicManiac said:

They are not really "making" anyone do anything... we can have more than one save.
Folks know that... right?  We don't "have to throw away" anything... we can still finish up our old runs.

Here's the story in my case... I'm right now still working on a personal challenge run.
When I'm done with the final region on my trip down Memory Lane... then I'll consider the challenge complete.
Before the update I was going to just continue on the same run and just lift all my previous restrictions.

So... now we have Scurvy for new runs... okay... cool. I'll finish up the run I've been working on for nearly a year, and when that's done... I'll start a new one to include scurvy.   Because it's not affecting old saves, I can still finish out my ongoing run as is.  I think that was a good choice.

So many folks say they love the early game struggle (or gripe about the imagined "late game problem" 😒)... so why is starting a new run something that people are bucking so hard about?  

For the other side, I’ve done all the badges I’ve done all the challenges I’ve mastered up to feeling chill on interloper and nogoa when I was younger I had a lot more free time so having a few runs was no big now I have 3-5 hours a week to play and getting a run up to 500days can take up to a year the “challenge” I am going for is longest possible personal best and collecting everything in a single run, after 10 years and two save wipes of 1000+ day saves I finally achieved 100% collectibles on this run that’s been going 400 days over 9 months and I was planning to carry it through the end of the dlc and story region updates then as many days until I faded or new dlc came but now it’s toss that or never get scurvy unless I die and that’s for this update what’s it going to be next one or the last what features or content are going to be arbitrarily omitted from existing saves next and on that thought is there even a point to doing long runs until all the dlc is out? There’s a lot of “I” statements but I feel like this is a similar situation for the chunk of folks that disagree with the decision