Another bogus death due to poor mechanics...

[TWM]

My point is the argument for realism is for the game systems to reflect more like real life or conversely for the game-play argument is to be fun there needs to be a certain element of choice. In this case it is neither realistic or good gameplay when control to react is removed and the player is subjected to a death which isn't realistic wither.

Yet you do have control: you control how long you sleep. You control whether or not you make a fire and how long it will burn.

If you choose to sleep for 6 or 7 hours, instead of taking 1-2 hour naps, while being at freezing point, and not making a fire next to your bed roll, then you run the risk of sleeping through a blizzard and freezing to death. You could have napped in a number of 1-2 hour spurts, but instead you chose to gamble with you life. And the result is: you died.

Kind of how you chose to run around like a headless chicken a few weeks ago and then complained there was no way of escaping the wolves and how you needed a spear. Hmmm, I'm beginning to see a pattern here.... :mrgreen:

Now, as far as the argument from realism goes: if you found yourself in a cave with a generous supply of wood and you were cold, wouldn't you light a fire? And wouldn't you make sure that fire keeps going through the night? Isn't it completely unrealistic to have the means to get warm, good and proper, but deliberately not to use them? In real life, that would be practically begging for hypothermia.

And realistically, we shouldn't even be able to determine how long we sleep to begin with. If the game wanted to mimic realism, it would determine how long you sleep for you, depending on how exhausted you are, how comfortable you are, etcetera. With such a mechanic in place, I could see how waking up because of thirst or cold would make sense. But as it stands, it's merely a luxury.

[McGuffin]

To OP:

It's kind of funny on how you refuse to learn how to play the game ^^

You where not careful at all, the t° was very low (note the lantern give you a little heat bonus when it's on), your conditions were also very low , the weather can change at any time and still you choose to sleep 6 hours... ! damn, seriously, man, you deserved to die in that run.

What is actually incredible is that instead of learning something, you choose to accuse mechanics.

[ThresholdSeven]

Learning how to deal with the current freezing to death while sleeping is a learned skill, but waking up before death wouldn't mean it's a added luxury in my opinion. Is it a luxury that a bear leaves you at 8% and bleeding? To me it is more added suspense. You would still have to worry about the same things before sleeping and if you screw up I think a more suspenseful result than "you died" would be waking up at 8% and freezing.

You would still be pretty screwed if you weren't prepared, just like the proximity to shelter, fire and bandages in your inventory has a large effect on if you live or die after a bear attack. Would you rather that a bear attack results in instant death with no way out? Maybe for an extreme hardcore mode, but I think a more fun and challenging mechanic is the "one last chance" that a bear gives you which I think is just added excitement.

This is a game after all. It's supposed to be fun, challenging and suspenseful. "Whoops, you're dead" isn't a mechanic that many people find fun. A slow creep to death that is almost inevitable with a small chance to pull out of it is much more fulfilling whether you live or die in my opinion, just like almost every other mechanic in the game (bleeding, freezing while awake, infection, food poisoning). All those are fairly manageable unless you are stricken with it while you are already down to 8% condition or so or can't get the proper treatment in time.

I only play Stalker so I don't know what the current "waking while freezing mechanic" is exactly on lower difficulties. Does one wake up with only a few percent heath? Or do they have whatever health they started to freeze at? If it is the latter, I think the mechanic should let them freeze until they are at 8% or maybe even lower, so the player wakes up and thinks "oh shit, I'm gonna die" and then has a good chance of freezing to death still while trying to start a fire or get warm another way (find shelter, fix clothes) just like the "oh shit" moment when one realizes they are still alive but nearly dead after a bear attack.

[KD7BCH]

Why go with one suspenseful mechanic and not the other?

If you sleep in an environment barely above freezing, the suspense mechanic is and should be "not knowing if you wake up". Second chances are very rare in TLD and most of the times you have to work for them. Start a bear fight below 90% condition and you are dead. I don't know where this "if I just close my eyes all will be good" attitude comes from, that's not how I experience TLD. If you want to sleep sound and healthy, keep a fire going or choose a warm shelter, period.

Maybe you haven't played the latest build there is no suspense mechanic with wildlife. If you click or don't click against either predator it makes no difference, the game decides for you when the wolf runs off. The same with the bear, only with the bear you are completely out of the control scheme. For the bear attack I can understand that as this predator has a magnitude of order higher strength than a human, triple the speed, and quadruple the size.

For wolves, the human outweighs or is evenly weighed with a wolf and while they are stronger, the human is smarter, and the human has thumbs and dexterity. A bladed weapon against a wolf would be disastrous for the wolf but that isn't "good gameplay" so they have to be the villain and challenge because this isn't a zombie simulator right?

Well it isn't a survival simulator against an animal attack either because against wolves you would fare much better going on the attack once they try to attack you. The clickfest that is the current mechanic is completely misleading in its implementation too. While against an already injured wolf you have a chance after some 80 clicks or so to kill the wolf or should this wolf be coming around for a second attack, it makes no difference if you attack if or if you don't click at all. The wolf is going to do a certain amount of "condition damage" along with the other modifiers and then it is going to move on. So click, don't click, the Devs have abandoned, evidently, improving the combat interaction system and also removed the "gameplay" of actually clicking yourself out of a bad situation. So far as I can tell from my experimentation which has been extensive.

Also note, from my research of why people who negatively rate the game and the overwhelming majority of those who do with more than 20 hours played, it is WOLVES WOLVES WOLVES and Wolf interactions, Wolf Implementation, Wolf Annoyances and Wolf reasons are given as the primary factor. I have posted this in the past without comment from the devs.

A year ago a buddy of mine also initiated some "community surveys" of which he was asked to stop by a certain Ryan CM who I doubt still works at Hinterland because he was going to do his own. However as we know there has never been a community survey since on the forums by the devs and well feedback on the wolves is of course always mixed. However the facts remain of those folks who rate the game negatively on Steam with the hours to back the fact they've actually played the game the biggest detriment is not the challenge of the game or the complexity or lack thereof but WOLVES.

[KD7BCH]

My point is the argument for realism is for the game systems to reflect more like real life or conversely for the game-play argument is to be fun there needs to be a certain element of choice. In this case it is neither realistic or good gameplay when control to react is removed and the player is subjected to a death which isn't realistic wither.

Yet you do have control: you control how long you sleep. You control whether or not you make a fire and how long it will burn.

If you choose to sleep for 6 or 7 hours, instead of taking 1-2 hour naps, while being at freezing point, and not making a fire next to your bed roll, then you run the risk of sleeping through a blizzard and freezing to death. You could have napped in a number of 1-2 hour spurts, but instead you chose to gamble with you life. And the result is: you died.

Kind of how you chose to run around like a headless chicken a few weeks ago and then complained there was no way of escaping the wolves and how you needed a spear. Hmmm, I'm beginning to see a pattern here.... :mrgreen:

Now, as far as the argument from realism goes: if you found yourself in a cave with a generous supply of wood and you were cold, wouldn't you light a fire? And wouldn't you make sure that fire keeps going through the night? Isn't it completely unrealistic to have the means to get warm, good and proper, but deliberately not to use them? In real life, that would be practically begging for hypothermia.

And realistically, we shouldn't even be able to determine how long we sleep to begin with. If the game wanted to mimic realism, it would determine how long you sleep for you, depending on how exhausted you are, how comfortable you are, etcetera. With such a mechanic in place, I could see how waking up because of thirst or cold would make sense. But as it stands, it's merely a luxury.

Points taken. Yes the sleep timer is unrealistic. Im ok with the devs changing that at any time. However they have chosen to allow you to manage your condition this way.

I further agree that not building a fire while in a cave has risks. However I disagree that if you have indications that you have good weather and you have positive heat and you have all other conditions secure that you should not wake up in the event you drop into negative heat and start to freeze. Shivering is a very pronounced mechanic which is involuntary and designed by the body to override unconscious brain function and wake you up. Choosing to go back to sleep in that condition would be stupid if you had no fire. Having no wood or fire-making supplies or ability to make fire would be an acceptable cause of the effect. In many days to come you will eventually encounter the inability to make fire but this was day 1.

The reason I didn't make fire was I was conserving the materials and all indicators were pointing to the fact that I had sufficient heat and good weather.

You can't stop sleeping at either the I am cold point, or the I am shivering point or the I am so fucking cold and shivering so hard I'm unable to sleep because I am so uncomfortable point, but yeah let me try some reverse psychology and agree with you guys and say the game would not be improved if these functions were modeled. I agree with that because rather than this happening on day 1 if it happened on day 362 it would be so much less costly.

Except it wouldnt, and I don't agree.

[KD7BCH]

To OP:

It's kind of funny on how you refuse to learn how to play the game ^^

You where not careful at all, the t° was very low (note the lantern give you a little heat bonus when it's on), your conditions were also very low , the weather can change at any time and still you choose to sleep 6 hours... ! damn, seriously, man, you deserved to die in that run.

What is actually incredible is that instead of learning something, you choose to accuse mechanics.

I do I present the mechanics for discussion. I was using the lantern to simulate the effect of the sleeping bag. However watch the video again. By my math the sleeping bag has a better amount of heat generation than the lantern and so sleeping longer should increase warmth even more, except the weather changed. However, under the current mechanics there is no sleep stoppage either directly or indirectly under the control of the player. So we have an unrealistic mechanic in that you can set the exact amount of time you will sleep, and another unrealistic mechanic in that you don't wake up if you get freezing cold, the point where you develop hypothermia bypassing shivering which would wake you up.

Im not asking them to model sleep walking, I'm simply saying for both realism and game-play it might be worth look at modeling shivering and a waking mechanic.

Of course my character deserved to die when it continued to be out in the cold without warming up. The question is why did it not warm up? When all indicators were pointing to the fact that I had sufficient heat in the bag it was due to a change in the weather. Fair. However when you execute a sleep order nothing can interrupt it except for an animal attack. Not fair, anything that is going to be a game ender should not be a one-shot type bs death. It is the same argument as the one shot wolf attacks we faced around v.200. Should the game be harder. Sure. I have consistently argued in favor of more challenges, however not cheap. It should not be more cheap. This is cheap.

[KD7BCH]

My point is the argument for realism is for the game systems to reflect more like real life or conversely for the game-play argument is to be fun there needs to be a certain element of choice. In this case it is neither realistic or good gameplay when control to react is removed and the player is subjected to a death which isn't realistic wither.

Yet you do have control: you control how long you sleep. You control whether or not you make a fire and how long it will burn.

If you choose to sleep for 6 or 7 hours, instead of taking 1-2 hour naps, while being at freezing point, and not making a fire next to your bed roll, then you run the risk of sleeping through a blizzard and freezing to death. You could have napped in a number of 1-2 hour spurts, but instead you chose to gamble with you life. And the result is: you died.

Kind of how you chose to run around like a headless chicken a few weeks ago and then complained there was no way of escaping the wolves and how you needed a spear. Hmmm, I'm beginning to see a pattern here.... :mrgreen:

Now, as far as the argument from realism goes: if you found yourself in a cave with a generous supply of wood and you were cold, wouldn't you light a fire? And wouldn't you make sure that fire keeps going through the night? Isn't it completely unrealistic to have the means to get warm, good and proper, but deliberately not to use them? In real life, that would be practically begging for hypothermia.

And realistically, we shouldn't even be able to determine how long we sleep to begin with. If the game wanted to mimic realism, it would determine how long you sleep for you, depending on how exhausted you are, how comfortable you are, etcetera. With such a mechanic in place, I could see how waking up because of thirst or cold would make sense. But as it stands, it's merely a luxury.

Hunger does not wake you up. You can die of starvation in your sleep.

Thirst does not wake you up. You can die of thirst in your sleep.

Exhaustion is moot since this is the direct mechanic which by which exhaustion is combated.

Cold does not wake you up. Of course you can die of Freezing in your sleep as we have well learned. However cold is mechanic which you can lose 30% condition per hour which is much faster than the other two conditions which will affect you over the course of days and not hours. The body also shivers to alert you to the fact that you are in danger. (Not modeled)

As far as spears, we have wolf combat which is click/don'tclick as it doesn't really matter. Also spears have been a highly requested weapon. They are also an hour one craft item. If you are going to make an argument for me as to why I wouldn't light a fire in a cave at nite to survive I'd ask you why you'd walk around in this environment without a spear, with wolf densities 100X what they are in nature, and with a click/don'tclick = it doesn't matter, I think the community is onto the fact that development is trending towards gamey a bit more than players would like.

Everytime a change towards more realism is made it is well received. I think in the case of forging arrows if this is an exception it is because this was a blatant attempt to justify the forge and also more distance traveling and players like to play how they like to play and liked the previous mechanic better because it made more sense.

I am frankly puzzled by your supposition of how I'm refusing to learn to play. I have 300 hours into the Alpha on just this one account and I am playing how the game wants it to be played most times. There are some real outliers of realism as well as gameplay and I'm making light of them in hopes they get a review and improvement.

If you are satisfied with how it plays today that is great I'm happy for you.

[ChillPlayer]

I am frankly puzzled by your supposition of how I'm refusing to learn to play. I have 300 hours into the Alpha on just this one account and I am playing how the game wants it to be played most times.

and yet you still didn't have the foresight to have a fire burning as everyone with +300h would do? I learned that about 10 hours into the game :?

Then for some reasons you bring up wolves - which have been discussed in overabundance on every channel you can imagine. I am not satisfied either with the current wolf mechanic but this has absolutely nothing todo with you thinking the weather will hold while you sleep. But now that you brought it up it's a prefect metaphor for your mistake of sleeping without a fire: it's like going into a wolf fight with your starting cloths at 60% condition, thoughtless, well wishing and hoping for the best. If TLD wouldn't punish such behaviour it would not be TLD but another one of the countless and mostly handholding survival games out there. TLD has one catch that makes it work and one only: mistakes are fatal in most situations.

Now you made a mistake but instead of acknowledging it you blame it on the mechanics so not only did your mistake end your run, you died all for nothing because appearently you resufe to learn your lesson. Reading through your last responses in this thread one thing becomes clear to me: you belong to the category of players who want to force their playstyle on TLD and this does simply not work, you do not have the freedom to not-think in TLD, ever. Sleeping outside without a fire is not-thinking but wishing or hoping and it points to a severe lack of understanding the game mechanics (300h? seriously??).

[KD7BCH]

I am frankly puzzled by your supposition of how I'm refusing to learn to play. I have 300 hours into the Alpha on just this one account and I am playing how the game wants it to be played most times.

and yet you still didn't have the foresight to have a fire burning as everyone with +300h would do? I learned that about 10 hours into the game :?

Then for some reasons you bring up wolves - which have been discussed in overabundance on every channel you can imagine. I am not satisfied either with the current wolf mechanic but this has absolutely nothing todo with you thinking the weather will hold while you sleep. But now that you brought it up it's a prefect metaphor for your mistake of sleeping without a fire: it's like going into a wolf fight with your starting cloths at 60% condition, thoughtless, well wishing and hoping for the best. If TLD wouldn't punish such behaviour it would not be TLD but another one of the countless and mostly handholding survival games out there. TLD has one catch that makes it work and one only: mistakes are fatal in most situations.

Now you made a mistake but instead of acknowledging it you blame it on the mechanics so not only did your mistake end your run, you died all for nothing because appearently you resufe to learn your lesson. Reading through your last responses in this thread one thing becomes clear to me: you belong to the category of players who want to force their playstyle on TLD and this does simply not work, you do not have the freedom to not-think in TLD, ever. Sleeping outside without a fire is not-thinking but wishing or hoping and it points to a severe lack of understanding the game mechanics (300h? seriously??).

323 hours.

Wolves, I didn't bring it up the guy I was responding did.

I have made mention to how gamey wolves are numerous times because it is an area of the game which is not improving. Since v.212 Wolves haven't changed much at all. March 31st.2015

As far as deaths to cold weather. Absolutely plausible and absolutely part of the challenge that should exist in game. However this isn't what I'm forwarding as the issue. The issue is the lack of control of your character, while sleeping you have zero control. It is the similar issue that we are faced with during wolf assaults. Click don't click, it matters not because you will essentially take the same damage in either sitaution. Try it for yourself and let me know if you think that is good gameplay, it sure as hell is not realistic.

Once you hit the sleep button there is no stop regardless of what is going on around you except with a wolf attack. You either live of die based on the based on conditions outside your control and not sleeping long enough for it to potential kill you should the temperature drop. The causes are all acceptable, the effects acceptable, the lack of control during the process is not. However the argument here is... Is this good gameplay? I argue it is not, because I argue I believe it is poor gameplay.

It is a mistake however to assert this is just like the wolf argument. Dying in your sleep isn't realistic because if it was you would shiver and shivering wakes you up. Choosing to go back to sleep once hypothermic and after shivering would be a death at your own hands, however that is not what I did. I went to sleep cozy in my sleeping back gradually warming up.

Regarding wolves, is it good gameplay really? Well is it good gameplay to offer 100X the concentration of wolves but then provide the player with a small handful of options to deal with them primary avoidance of an unrealistic range sensory range by the animals? None of the options include a spear which would be the first tool you, I or any sensible person would create in a world with that number of wolves, in that proximity, with the number of wolf encounters that exist on a daily basis.

You agree in part on Wolf implementation but I don't get excited about gamey AI wolves and their likelyhood to even be involved in a survival situation if you aren't seriously hurt isn't even a thing.

Additionally I am backed by facts regarding wolves and how much they are not liked by players who quit the game who have experienced more than a small amount of time playing the game.

Categorize me if you want as a player. I thoroughly enjoy the challenge of the weather, hunger, and fatigue mechanics as well as cold and the overall complexity of the condition and sub conditions system. I want to see more of this. You want the game harder I'm all for that, if it isn't harder by design in that it makes sense that it is harder. Being cheaper and likely to drive players away by being super cheap is not what I'm after or all about. I'm pretty sure having purchased the game I'm entitled to offer a discussion and opinion here too without being categorized by you just because you don't agree, in fact when you agree in part I find it somewhat insulting.

[TWM]

Wolves, I didn't bring it up the guy I was responding did.

Yup, because it's quite instructiveon the way you tend to frame your critique and (faux) solutions:

1. You claim something is seriously wrong with the game mechanics.

2. You offer a video as illustration.

3. Then you offer some technical solution (spear, waking up mechanic), adding 'real life' as an argument.

4. People point out you're playing like a n00b in the video, resulting in your quick demise.

5. You try to rebuff by offering endless, stubborn defenses of your initial criticism and your solution, claiming the video was just for demonstration purposes and you don't normally play this way (so then what does it actually manage to demonstrate, really?)

6. During these discussions it turns out your actual, underlying criticism revolves around something other than your original point/solution suggested.

7. You don't realise #6 and stay firm on the original solution: I want a spear/wake up mechanic!

All this provides comic relief, for sure; but it also makes having a fruitful conversation about certain core elements of the game that could really use improvement and the direction in which those improvements should be sought a rather arduous task.

[Spottdrossel]

Wolves, I didn't bring it up the guy I was responding did.

6. During these discussions it turns out your actual, underlying criticism revolves around something other than your original point/solution suggested.

Except that you started to sidetrack this thread with wolves by attacking the OP with something that has nothing to do with the topic at hand:

Kind of how you chose to run around like a headless chicken a few weeks ago and then complained there was no way of escaping the wolves and how you needed a spear. Hmmm, I'm beginning to see a pattern here.... :mrgreen:

Attacking someone with a different topic, waiting for them to defend against this attack and then complaining that they changed the subject is rather cheap. And obvious.

All this provides comic relief, for sure; but it also makes having a fruitful conversation about certain core elements of the game that could really use improvement and the direction in which those improvements should be sought a rather arduous task.

So you do agree that this should be improved?!

So far your only contributions to this thread have been to demonstrate us how stupid you think the OP was/is.

[KD7BCH]

Wolves, I didn't bring it up the guy I was responding did.

Yup, because it's quite instructiveon the way you tend to frame your critique and (faux) solutions:

1. You claim something is seriously wrong with the game mechanics.

2. You offer a video as illustration.

3. Then you offer some technical solution (spear, waking up mechanic), adding 'real life' as an argument.

4. People point out you're playing like a n00b in the video, resulting in your quick demise.

5. You try to rebuff by offering endless, stubborn defenses of your initial criticism and your solution, claiming the video was just for demonstration purposes and you don't normally play this way (so then what does it actually manage to demonstrate, really?)

6. During these discussions it turns out your actual, underlying criticism revolves around something other than your original point/solution suggested.

7. You don't realise #6 and stay firm on the original solution: I want a spear/wake up mechanic!

All this provides comic relief, for sure; but it also makes having a fruitful conversation about certain core elements of the game that could really use improvement and the direction in which those improvements should be sought a rather arduous task.

So should I just stop and join the club of ppl who have quit playing until the next patch since nobody seems interested in the feedback?

The dynamics of the wolves have been hotly debated since they ended their changes in 212, they lack of realism in the game is a critique. It is the primary critique by Steam players who have negatively rated the game and played more than 20 hours and who no longer play.

On most of the issues discussed/debated players have taken to the camps of either gameplay or realism, so when characteristics don't really work for either I feel they are worth talking about.

I clearly do test certain conditions in some extreme ways to indicate that certain changes should exist and would benefit the game. If that concerns you and you feel the need to attack me well feel free.

The forums are a place for discussion of the way the game works in the hopes of improving it and providing the developers with feedback on what is working and what is not working.

Real life is a completely valid strategy for attacking the problems simulated in the game. If you were surrounded by wolves you would attempt to equip yourself with a weapon immediately. Not walk for a dozen miles or more on the hope you'll find both bullets and a rifle, and certainly not work for the better part of a week crafting a bow and arrow. Both of these weapons are of opportunity limited weapons too and run out of ammunition after awhile. The flares are also exhaustible and torches while essentially inexhaustible do not offer perfect protection or even good protection in some circumstances. Yhe protection they provide is also unreliable. If there is wind you are fucked too.

This is a gap on day one and on day 500 or 5000 where you would want a spear. 100,000 years ago you'd want and you'd make a spear, pushing the world back to the time of 100,000 years ago as the concept of the game effectively does, eliminating electricity and fuel it makes sense both realism wise to have that as an option. It is also something that has long been requested by players both present and quit in dealing with the wolves for the gameplay aspect. Since I'm in both camps but lean towards realism I'm still covered.

I believe if you start freezing you should wake up from that and be able to address it and again be forced with the decision to build a fire, set out in the storm, or go back to sleep hoping the storm will break. I am not alone in this thread saying that would be an improvement to gameplay.

My argument is that it is cheap to die uncontrolled deaths. I also argued against the insta-death we used to have when falling through ice, now you get hypothermia and soaked clothes which offer no protection but offer you the time to get to shelter and or to make fire and stave off the impending cold. This is a better way and players favorably received it. I believe it should at least get reviewed by the developers and at least be commented on as to whether the lack of consistency between Stalker and Voyageur is by design or should be evaluated.

What is your problem with that?

I also have not said in this thread anywhere that the game is seriously wrong in it's mechanics. I've made points and supported them which I think is very reasonable.

Movie Quest for Fire, Atlatal was used, and spear, in every scene, there were spears. If you research cave drawings the first weapons were spears. Wood was plentiful in areas where civilization settled. Stone tools were harder and sharper than wood and so spears were created.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... years.html

Not only would a bow require some sophistication in manufacture, but the concepts of its design and use would also need to understood, the physics of tension and aiming with offset. None of that applies with spears. You can make a spear in under a half hour with any piece of wood long enough and wood is laying around all over all of the maps.

[Doc Gonzo]

KD7BCH,

Discussions about wolves and spears aside I did watch the video, per your instructions, in your opening post.

You took a huge gamble. If you've really invested +300 into this game then you knew it was a risk. Ultimately it was a bet that didn't pay off.

Given the games current mechanics I cannot imagine sleeping outside, at night, with less than 100% health, for six hours, while having the means to start a fire and yet not, inexplicably, making a fire. You loaded the dice on that particular play but, unfortunately for you, you loaded them in favor of the house.

Argue that the mechanics are off all you'd like. You performed those particular actions while, presumably, understanding the mechanics of that risk.

I don’t know if there should be a chance of waking up while freezing to death or not (I’m inclined to say there shouldn’t be) but that move was a rookie mistake plain and simple.

[TWM]

Attacking someone with a different topic, waiting for them to defend against this attack and then complaining that they changed the subject is rather cheap. And obvious.

Seriously, bro? I took one swipe at him earlier, because this thread is eerily similar to that previous, rather frustrating discussion with the same bloke in which he argued his case in almost the exact fashion, with more or less the same result.

Furthermore, you misunderstand my point #6 entirely: it's not about venturing off-topic, as you presume. It's about not thinking one's own analysis of the problem through, misdiagnosing the problem initially, coming up with a cheap solution to fix the perceived problem and then sticking to that solution no matter what. It doesn't make for good conversation.

The OP starts out by saying we need a waking-up/shivering mechanic because when you do so-and-so in the game, you run the risk of sudden death; people point out there are multiple easy and obvious ways to prevent that; then the OP retorts: yes, but the weather shouldn't be so unpredictable.

Oh, so the actual, underlying problem the OP seems to have with the game then, is that the weather can turn in a few hours, and one has no way of plotting half a day ahead. Well, if only we had a shivering/wake up-mechanic, that would take care of that!

See how that's an entirely different issue than "bogus death due to poor mechanics"? Because it's not the mechanics that got him killed; it's refusing to use the mechanics not to get killed that got him killed.

[TWM]

So should I just stop and join the club of ppl who have quit playing until the next patch since nobody seems interested in the feedback?

No, I'm saying you should think your criticisms and proposals for solutions through a lot more carefully and be somewhat more receptive of other people's counterpoints.

Oh, and repeating yourself over and over again doesn't make your point come across.

[Doc Gonzo]

See how that's an entirely different issue than "bogus death due to poor mechanics"? Because it's not the mechanics that got him killed; it's refusing to use the mechanics not to get killed that got him killed.

I couldn't agree with this more. In my mind there were three different ways to mitigate the risk in the video.

Prudence dictates that you either, build a fire and not sleep longer than its duration, sleep in very short one hour increments in order to stay cognizant of the temperature or risk moving out of the cave in search of a warmer shelter. Now of those obviously the third carries with it the most risk but it still a safer bet then sleeping for six hours straight, outside, at night, while wounded, without a fire and while playing on Stalker mode.

This death was due to poor decision making not poor game mechanics.

[ChillPlayer]

So should I just stop and join the club of ppl who have quit playing until the next patch since nobody seems interested in the feedback?

No, I'm saying you should think your criticisms and proposals for solutions through a lot more carefully and be somewhat more receptive of other people's counterpoints.

Or maybe just take a break from the forums for a while and in particual this thread and play the game more, acknowledging it the way it is and prepare yourself for it. I know how a bad forum experience can totally ruin a game for you, which would be sad. You stated your feedback, you got 5 pages of answers, most of them pointing to a failure in your approach towards the game and not the mechanics, so what else do you hope from defending your point of view? It can only get worse.

[Doc Gonzo]

So should I just stop and join the club of ppl who have quit playing until the next patch since nobody seems interested in the feedback?

No, I'm saying you should think your criticisms and proposals for solutions through a lot more carefully and be somewhat more receptive of other people's counterpoints.

Or maybe just take a break from the forums for a while and in particual this thread and play the game more, acknowledging it the way it is and prepare yourself for it. I know how a bad forum experience can totally ruin a game for you, which would be sad. You stated your feedback, you got 5 pages of answers, most of them pointing to a failure in your approach towards the game and not the mechanics, so what else do you hope from defending your point of view? It can only get worse.

If it’s any consolation I'm sure many, if not all, of us have died in similar ways while playing. Lord knows I have.

[KD7BCH]

KD7BCH,

Discussions about wolves and spears aside I did watch the video, per your instructions, in your opening post.

You took a huge gamble. If you've really invested +300 into this game then you knew it was a risk. Ultimately it was a bet that didn't pay off.

Given the games current mechanics I cannot imagine sleeping outside, at night, with less than 100% health, for six hours, while having the means to start a fire and yet not, inexplicably, making a fire. You loaded the dice on that particular play but, unfortunately for you, you loaded them in favor of the house.

Argue that the mechanics are off all you'd like. You performed those particular actions while, presumably, understanding the mechanics of that risk.

I don’t know if there should be a chance of waking up while freezing to death or not (I’m inclined to say there shouldn’t be) but that move was a rookie mistake plain and simple.

At 30% per hour you still die even if you are at 100%. This isn't the issue. The issue is should there be a shivering mechanic?

There is one in Voyageur is it intended for Stalker that there be? If not why not?

Also is the gameplay better with the control out of the players hands?

I completely agree the death is fair and should be expected under the current build, the question is should the build evolve? the question is should all of your indicators point towards safety but then result in your uncontrolled death simply because that is the way it is?

[KD7BCH]

So should I just stop and join the club of ppl who have quit playing until the next patch since nobody seems interested in the feedback?

No, I'm saying you should think your criticisms and proposals for solutions through a lot more carefully and be somewhat more receptive of other people's counterpoints.

Or maybe just take a break from the forums for a while and in particual this thread and play the game more, acknowledging it the way it is and prepare yourself for it. I know how a bad forum experience can totally ruin a game for you, which would be sad. You stated your feedback, you got 5 pages of answers, most of them pointing to a failure in your approach towards the game and not the mechanics, so what else do you hope from defending your point of view? It can only get worse.

So take a break from the forums? I'm the OP and I'm fielding discussion. Just because what I hold may be a minority opinion in this case it doesn't make the questions irrelevant. As far as quit the game I am waiting for the next update with a few tests here and there.

So far I've found more than a few inconsistencies between the various levels and beyond that, there are so many holes in the Wolf AI and so many expected interactions with wolves in the game that "IT MATTERS" that it gets addressed.

I find it sort of puzzled that you think I should just take a sabbatical from the forums since we don't agree and my view isn't the majority.

[KD7BCH]

If it’s any consolation I'm sure many, if not all, of us have died in similar ways while playing. Lord knows I have.

The only reason I called this bogus was because it was a puzzle as to what happened. All indicators were pointing to a safe, sufficiently warm sleep. Of course you can't receive indicators in your sleep which is why your body involuntary shivers your timbers and wakes you the hell up IRL. Should it be modeled in Stalker like in Voyageur? Maybe, maybe not. Consensus of the thread seems to be lets just leave it be and learn to play the game as it is rather than try to make it better since it is still in Alpha.

It was an expected result actually but not from the indicators which will frustrate the hell out of new players.

[KD7BCH]

Why does this forum double post me so much? :roll:

[TWM]

It was an expected result actually but not from the indicators which will frustrate the hell out of new players.

So basically, you're advocating more handholding, to shield new players from frustration.

Here are a couple of ideas then as well:

1. The dam should have a sign outside alerting newbies to expect a wolf upon entering.

2. The ravine should come with warning signs that any attempt at scaling the cliff is instant death.

3. The first couple of wolf or bear attacks, the character should give verbal hints on the various ways to deter them.

4. The character should verbally warn the player he's at risk of freezing and getting hypothermia indoors too.

With some imagination could probably add many more examples. But this is not a handholding game. One either gets over the frustration, and jumps into the fray again, and again, and again, until one manages to find out what works, or one simply shouldn't be playing The Long Dark.

It's supposed to offer a steep learning curve, that's one of the things which makes it gratifying.

[KD7BCH]

It was an expected result actually but not from the indicators which will frustrate the hell out of new players.

So basically, you're advocating more handholding, to shield new players from frustration.

Here are a couple of ideas then as well:

1. The dam should have a sign outside alerting newbies to expect a wolf upon entering.

2. The ravine should come with warning signs that any attempt at scaling the cliff is instant death.

3. The first couple of wolf or bear attacks, the character should give verbal hints on the various ways to deter them.

4. The character should verbally warn the player he's at risk of freezing and getting hypothermia indoors too.

With some imagination could probably add many more examples. But this is not a handholding game. One either gets over the frustration, and jumps into the fray again, and again, and again, until one manages to find out what works, or one simply shouldn't be playing The Long Dark.

It's supposed to offer a steep learning curve, that's one of the things which makes it gratifying.

Im advocating review of the mechanics.

I'm advocating spears because the community has expressed interest in having them put in and it makes both realistic and gameplay sense to add them. I feel that the shivering mechanic could be added as well because it is realistic and would add to gameplay. I have also cited evidence where they did just that with the freezing mechanic when you fall through weak ice instead of giving you instant permadeath.

When you say I'm advocating hand holding you misrepresent what I have clearly stated. Please continue to troll on.

[KD7BCH]

Here is some feedback I looked at today on Steam...

247.5 hrs on record

Posted: January 6

EARLY ACCESS REVIEW

-Wolves are still spawning in droves. Just had three come after me all at once. Thought we were done with this.

-Yes, Hydration is more important than Sustenance, but these still drain entirely too fast. Dying from dehydration in less than 24hrs? Nope, not how it goes.

-Wolves, too many, too agressive.

-The temperature change when you light a fire is too little. A 'fire' right beside you, unless in too much wind, will raise your temp more than 6 degrees. Even if it only lasts a few minutes, fire = fire. (Im not asking for 100 degrees like a bonfire, but 6??? Come on)

-The wolves, fix it, please, like yesterday.

Been playing this one for a while, I know its still Alpha, bugs, fixes, updates, changes, the ups and downs. Its a fun ride. I've been recommending this game to friends since I started playing earlier last year. Its still a fun game, on the lowest difficulty... :\

The mid-level is about as hardcore as doing it for real would be. The high level.... its reDunkulous.

-----omg, just take the wolves out of the game. they need a rewrite. bad------

Not going to uninstall or stop playing. I'll still tell my friends about it and how its been a lot of fun in the past. But after today's playthrough... I wont be recommending anyone buy or try till I see the wolves fixed. And other stuff too.

Must Add:

I still stand behind Hinterland. This is a beautiful and engaging survival game. At this point, even if the issues I have don't get changed/fixed, I would still go back and pay for it. Yes, I would spend money on this game again, it IS that good. I just feel the 3rd level (staulker) is way way too harsh. If this is meant to simply be a pure challenge and we are expected to die in less than a week, ok great work. You succeeded. Im up for a challenge, but it seems that if you happen to start the game in a poor location, you're S.O.L. Gear wears out super fast. Chop up 3 limbs for firewood and your hatchet breaks? Even the dinky wood handled hatchets like the ones in the game last a bit longer than that, lol. Clothing that falls apart, even without being attacked, in a week? As I said before, dying of dehydration in less than a day is a bit harsh I think. The medium level is too easy in a few ways, just right most of the time, and a tiny bit too tough in a few. So there is a balance, but I think a few tweaks are needed. I'd love to see other types of animals. Racoons, pigs, owls, badgers, squirrels, bobcats, anything but reptiles or amphibians (duh frozen world) and I'm up for it. And please, for all that is dork, please let us equip the hatchet or knife as a weapon. I hate having to Get Attacked before I can swing on things, ezpecially when the A.I. makes a deer run right into me, c'mon.... Lemme poke it with a stick or something. OHHHHH! speaking of sticks and poking: Handmade weapons! Spears, Clubs, Stone tools, gimme gimme gimme. Ok, enough begging. I love your work, I'll keep playing because I've seen how much you've done and already become addicted to the endless wood gathering, snaring, skinning, curing, gutting, fishing, hunting, can opening, snow melting, water boiling, repairing, freezing, starving, exausting, sleeping, I think you get the idea. Cant recommend a new person to buy, but that'll change im sure. Got faith in ya.

518.9 hrs on record

Posted: January 18

EARLY ACCESS REVIEW

While the game prides itself on its atmosphere, which it does very well, the graphics are well done, and no, they aren't photorealitic graphics, and doesn't need to be. The atmospheric music plays in appropriate situations, like if you are out at night, or if your health is low, and so on. Each area has it's own theme and difficulty level, and there is something unique to explore in every zone. The weather effects and the sky are always beautiful even if you are freezing to death you can't help but marvel at it. But games aren't made to be pretty and be looked at.

The biggest problem that many players will tell you are the wolves. As video gamers we know developers and programmers have to take certian liberties for the sake of gameplay, and we know video game versions of animals are more aggressive than thier material world counterparts. The problem is the game can't make up it's mind what kind of wolves they want in the game; wolves have a very wide and unreasonable aggro range; so at certain points its possible to completely avoid them, even if you are willing to take very large detours (which waste time causing you to freeze to death or worse), and once aware of your presence will continue to follow you regardless of how you shake them; the only thing that's guarunteed to work are flares, and the wolf is usually back not 15 seconds later. If there are multiple wolves the first one will reaggro the instant the second one is flared, which means the engine cannot handle aggro mechanics with multiple wolves in it. Scenarios where multiple wolves are handled independently, removing wolves feel as a pack animal. You can leave bait for a wolf and it will stop what it's doing (even eating a fresh venison deer it just killed not five seconds ago to eat a rotting rabbit carcass you left rotting on the floor in whatever shelter you were holed up at). If you leave a piece of meat when multiple wolves are out and if you observe this from a distance, you can see the way the wolves act like computer AI as each of halt thier normal behavior when they get in range of the meat and slowly walks toward it.

The game can't even make up its mind how it wants the wolves to act; most wolves patrol an area they when they spawn and do a usual stalk you when you get into aggro radius and walk toward you as you move away from them. Run away from them and they chase after you. Even if you stand still, the wolf will appear after a period of time and then run up and attack you and you have to do a quick-time event where you tap the left mouse button to fill up a meter to fight it off. If you have something that can be used as a melee weapon, say an axe or a knife, you get a bonus on how fast the meter fills. During the even the wolf can do one of three things: do a random injury that depletes your condition (your health), inflict a bleeding effect which is always accompanied by an infectious disease, and tearing your clothing, which in turn reduces your tolerance to the elements. The longer it takes you to fight off the wolf, the more Bad Stuff it can do to you. Each of these things can be dealt with using your survival supplies; bandages, antiseptic, sewing kits and cloth. All of this seems fair if not for two things: wolves can sometimes spawn over a hill or otherwise outside your visibility range and rush to attack you immediately, and this can happen right after another wolf or bear attack, giving a player no chance to defend themselves. The other problem is that wolves have an very, very big aggro radius and can aggro through walls and other obstacles. Even in the starter area, there is no way to avoid and encounter and certain areas must be avoided completely making you take huge detours which increase your exposure and use up supplies and aren't gaurnteed not to have wolves either. I also have a problem when I try to shoot a wolf with a bow or gun, the wolf "arcs" as it runs toward you.

Even being aware of your surroundings isn't guarenteed to avoid a wolf battle; in a game that functions on atmosphere, using your ears to detect animals doesn't help. The growl of a wolf, the snort of a bear, or even the gallop of a deer all come from a direction other than the animal who made it. I lost count of the number of times number of times that I heard a wolf growl, only to look around confused as the wolf closed in on me. Everything about the wolves make it clear that they are designed to be Video Game Enemy #21378 that is simply there to kill you, and it completely destroys the immersion and atmosphere the game is trying to create. There are even wolves placed right near several popular shelter spots; I have been attacked right outside Jackrabbits and Misanthropes trying to start a fire outside and most of my deaths have been right outside Camp Office, Trapper's, the Barn, and other popular spots.

The final issue is with the difficulties. Playing at a high level difficulty should be a challenging yet rewarding experience. Because the major selling point in this game is immersion, playing at the Stalker level is a constant stress test and gives the player little time to appreciate the wonder of the world around him, as video game enemies are around every corner. While this may be appropriate for zombie apocalypse games like Resident Evil and Silent Hill, it's not very immersive if we have to look over our shoulder, and check every hallway and room for traps like your in an AD&D Giaxian dungeon. The game has asbosulely no idea what "punishment" is; punishment is when a player does something he should not, inflicting a penalty at random or even for things players should be doing just makes the player hate himself and develop bitterness and resentment for what he should be interacting wit instead of developing respect for it. Pilgrim on the other hand allows the character to walk through the woodlands unmolested, if the players explores everything on Pilgrim, the entire experience of playing on Stalker is ruined as the player as already seen every location. Without atmosphere and exploration, the game as nothing to offer but generic video game enemies dressed like wolves.

While I can appreicate the permadeath nature of the game, most permadeath games at least leave youwith the consolation that you had something to show for your efforts. NetHack has a scoring system and a a "bones level" where your character's remains can be looted by you or another player. Diablo III has the ability to archive your character. The Long Dark has none of that; it has a journal in which you can write entries in which you can write whatever you want in it and tell your character's story. Once the game hands you one of it's cheap deaths, your character's journal and all its development is wiped away forever, as if it never existed. When a permadeath erases all your characters accomplishments and development, its mark on the world is just as meaningless as if you would infinitely respawn without penalty. A videogame world should be one where a player has the opportunity to make some kind of impact on its world or have some kind of control. Because the game is so punishing, the player becomes less and less invested as time goes on, and incentive to utilise the journal becomes less and less. No one wants to write the same story over and over again if it's going to be erased.

The Long Dark is a game that tries to create what is a survival horror without the zombies, and while I can give it huge amounts of suspension of disbelief it time and time again pulls me out of the immersive state it creates. Simply posting "we took liberties with wildlife" at the beginning doesn't mean that you can pull whatever stunt you want and say "because video game". Fantasy worlds don't need to be realistic, they need to be believable. The Long Dark as it stands is far from believable.

139.6 hrs on record

Posted: December 5, 2014

EARLY ACCESS REVIEW

Wonderful game, beautifully stylised graphics which plays well on a basic laptop and better on a gaming machine. Simple and easy to get into but with lots of potential for the developer to add depth as it's developed. Unfortunately it's just ruined by the random (perma)death meated out by the wolves which are impossible to defeat. It's more or less an intentional system crash with a deleted savegame added in just to make things extra difficult. Shame.

30.6 hrs on record

Posted: November 29, 2014

EARLY ACCESS REVIEW

What I assumed was supposed to be a detailed survival game with the added challange of aggresive wildlife, has effectively turned into seeing how long I can avoid the overwhelming number of wolves and survive the impossible struggle sequence of when a wolf attacks you. If I ever gain any real progress in the game, I'll write a different review.

322.2 hrs on record

Posted: September 17, 2015

EARLY ACCESS REVIEW

Usually when people are developing a game they make it better over time.. this is not the case with "The Long Dark". It was a good game that I enjoyed to play when it came out and well worth buying. Since they implimented new materials and functions they have made this game worse as they "improve" it.

I would have like to seen them add seasons into the game, no where up here is it winter 100% of the year. They also need to calm down the never ending snow storms.. (the cold can be very deadly all on its own with added windchill,) if it snowed that much there would be 100+ ft of snow and nothing would be moving around. Adding harvest timers (on sticks/plants) and a stamina bar to limit your running would be alright over the normal duration of a day but days/night time span is increased (meaning 24hr day is not 24hrs in game) so the time it takes to click would easily represent how long it would take to pick up a plant/stick, walking at a increased time rate would be the same as running all the time as well so I do not think the stamina bar has any place in this game. Encounters with wildlife in this game have changed to the point of stupidity, if you don't have the rifle your going to face injury every encounter.. wolves may be dangerous in a pack but will generally avoid people (especially the "lone wolf"), lets face it.. it's a dog, granted wild and large but still a dog. With a hunting knife or hatchet in your hand your can easily not get injured on every encounter with a single wolf. The added forges feels like they are trying to copy other games that have had success with that system but they are losing the unique gameplay I think this game had. When certain small aspects are added/changed in a game that make general gameplay unappealing is a game changer. On a good note the graphics still look excellent and are definitely improving as time goes on and adding new zones is another bonus to the game. I'm sure there are some that will still find this game entertaining for a short time if you play on easy mode but where's the fun in that..

It is unlikely that they will revert to back when it was good and possibly go another direction with it. So as it sits, it is one to keep your eye on and see if possibly they will find a way to make it enjoyable to play once again.

92.1 hrs on record

Posted: May 11, 2015

EARLY ACCESS REVIEW

Graphics and Sound: 10/10

Fun: 7/10

Realism: 2/10

Overall score: 5/10

Fix the too numerous and overaggressive wolves and the unrealistic hunger and thirst and then you'll have a decent game.

You betrayed the intellectual spirit of your game by including the annoying spam-the-mouse combat behavior. Make your players think, not jerk. If the player has a weapon it should be automatically engaged.

If you're going to make a survival game you should know that people can go days, if not weeks, without food, and several days without water.

Also don't be afraid to make the maps even bigger than they already are.

47.3 hrs on record

Posted: February 28, 2015

EARLY ACCESS REVIEW

I love survival based games and this one really is on my top charts, but what its worth right now I wouldnt recommend it. Im a hoarder at heart and thats what keeps me going on playing(I think its an addiction), but It seems as though there is no real survival other than raiding houses for food and trying to find the rifle. The devs are great and added all these updates but it seems like they are focusing on the size of the game instead of the mechanics.

Pros:

-Easy adaptation

-Hours of wolf fun

-Beautiful environments

-Big environment

-Fun for Survivalist

-I love hoarding

Cons:

-Too much wolf fun

-bland mechanices

-search houses or die

-AI is not so AI

-where the hell is the rifle?(hard mode)

-did i mention wolves?

All in all its I would recommend to buy the game at a lower cost for early access but as of now its not up to par for what they ask. I believe they have a lot of potential for the game but they need to focus more on the mechanics instead of the map size.

In reading these reviews by players with a lot of time in the game I see the commonality of wolves and so I make mention of it. It is by no means exclusive but there is strong commonality here by players who don't recommend the game but have a lot of time in it.

I am on record on Steam giving the game a positive review, and feverishly in support of the games continued development, and I have been playing it since 2014. In the thread asking if it is worth it I indicated YES and it is. I am posting this here to support my earlier point on spears/wolves and why many if not most players with lots of time in the game depart it, in the hopes that part of the game will be modified to improve it.

Additionally here is the exact type of review calling out the same mechanic this thread was intended to address...

40.9 hrs on record

Posted: January 15

EARLY ACCESS REVIEW

I enjoyed this game at first, but then I became bored by the repetition and slow progression. Most of the gameplay is waiting for your charcter to finish eating his wolf steak, melting some snow, opening a can of tomato soup, or sleeping 2/3 of each day. I don't want to wait for the game, I want to play the game.

Secondly, this is what pushed it from "recommended" to "not recommended":

So there I was, day 55, ice fishing from morning into the evening, wrapped in my wolfskin and deerskin clothing, insulated from the cold. With plenty of food and water to spare, and practically full health, I crawl into my sleeping bag. This apparently killed me. Why? I can only assume that my character strtipped himself of his warm clothes before climbing into his sleeping bag, apparently oblivious to the cold. Dying unexpectedly in your sleep shouldn't even be possible, but of course this isn't limited to just this game. *cough* *ARK*

Basically, it's a frustrating game. I think the devs have some work to do to bring the gameplay and functionality up to snuff.

5/10 would not inexplicably die in my sleep from boredom again