Razum

Thanks for you answers. 'the end of the road' is very unlikely obviously to be a connection to MT. But as I think about it, we don't know where Astrid ventured before landing in PV. So there could possibly be a tunnel and Molly found Astrid there (and Astrid just came from a completely different place). Still doesn't look like in the cutscene and we would have to speculate over new regions, which is uncertain. I don't know, how certain it is to say that the cutscene wasn't oriented on game continuity, since the PV map existed for long back then so they could have planned the cutscene better. If they didn't, this discussion would be over. But I like it, so I'll just assume for the sake of this, that they planned it. The thing is, on the west side of PV theres no tunnel. The only road leaving there is the one at long curve, which now connects to GKS. Back when episode 3 was made, they pretty surely knew, that theres no tunnel. The next tunnel in west direction from farmstead is actually the one in GKS. And it's the only tunnel which is in reasonable distant to travel for Molly, despite still being pretty far away. I just looked up the discussion again with Molly and Astrid. All Astrid talks about there Milton. And she says "All I remember is the tunnel, the wolves, being chased, and then wandering forever" That makes it certain, that the tunnel where Molly found Astrid leads to Milton. In episode 1 we learn that the bus crashed when carrying the prisoners to Blackrock. So it's certain, that the bus tunnel leads to Blackrock. And Astrid went in there fleeing from the prisoners. It's a long way to GKS (and Blackrock and PV) but it all fits up. Walking all the way with probably no food and water and being chased by wolves, Astrid is of course in bad shape when finally getting to the exit. Maybe it was storming in the moment she left, so she just went a few meters and collapsed. Molly said "By the time I got you here (meaning farmstead), there was no way I was carrying you upstairs" and said, she dragged Astrid more than carrying her to the house, which implies, the point, where she found Astrid, is pretty far away from farmstead. So it could be GKS. Probably Molly wasn't just hunting but searching for something, so she went farther away and found Astrid.

Hi guys, this may have been answered anywhere else, but I haven't found anything. So I just wanted to start some speculation. Despite knowing how Blackrock fits into great bear, it's still unclear (for me), where Astrid was laying when Molly found and rescued her. In the cutscene we see a tunnel. Astrid is laying between some birch trees. Most likely it's the tunnel between Milton (where the bus crashed) and Southern Keepers Path. (ingame screenshot) The green sign there says 'Milton'. Now ingame it does not look anything like in the cutscene. In the cutscene Molly comes from the left of the street and there are trees. Ingame theres immediately rock (and there are many other differences, all in all, it's just not the same). Between here in Keepers path and PV there is no other tunnel, so the cutscene cannot show another tunnel there. Also this street connects to Blackrock as well as PV. https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/1845912645712259311/BE889EA7CAF7A004E14571D76E54BBBA69BDFFA1/ The tunnel from the crashed bus does as well, because we know the bus should drive to Blackrock and Astrid landed in PV. It's plausible, that they are the same street. So 2 options here: The tunnel from KP is the other end of the tunnel in MT or not. If MT and KP don't connect through this one tunnel, there are 2 other options: First: there are at least 2 separate tunnels between MT and KP (maybe a region in between, this road still being the direct connection) and Molly found Astrid at the end of the first tunnel. Astrid would have made it through the first tunnel and Molly came to here through the second tunnel, which ends in KP. What we see in the cutscene is the end of the first tunnel what we see ingame is the end of the second tunnel - asynchronicity solved. Pretty unlikely, why would Molly just randomly go through the second tunnel? Second: The bus tunnel in MT doesn't lead to KP, but still to Blackrock and PV. Also the tunnel in KP leads to MT (as the sign says). https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/1845912989411076811/48D5EF219C99A604EFEE63DF6873E1D9DCAA6B3A/ From Blackrock theres only one road that leads away. That's south at the blocked bridge. It leads directly to Keepers Path (north end). The only other option where the bus tunnel could lead would be to PV and from there to Blackrock. But theres no road from PV that leads in that direction other than the one connecting to KP. So let's assume MT and KP connect directly through this tunnel. It would all make sense, it's possible, that Molly was out there hunting (still pretty far from farmstead, but believable), but there is this asynchronicity between the cutscene and survival mode. That could just be some planning difference as back when Ep. 3 was made nobody designed how all these things connect and the environment in the cutscene is just a placeholder. But on the other hand, it wouldn't be hard to design the ingame tunnel ending after the cutscene as it doesn't change very much. I'm 90% sure, that it's the same tunnel. But what do you think?

I like all ideas, but I think they would be like a niche thing. Lighters are nice and would under these conditions give you some fires before breaking (just like firestrikers) but they would have big impact on immersion in my opinion, since it's just logical that they exist. Simple arrows would also be just logical. My argument against them is - why? And with that I mean: There are stones why use bow and arrow? But on the pro side I see first: again, just logical and immersion, second: gives skill points in bow and arrow and third: it's always nice to be able to do things not only in one way. A tarp would be nice. They should have a similar function as snow shelter, but being build easier (you don't need whatsoever many sticks and clothing) but also being less save from storms / wind. As clothing I would say, they would be practical as long as you don't have a moose-hide cloak (which kind of serves the same function but better). Also in late game, you would rather take a warm jacket instead of this thing, which only gives resistance to water and wind. At least when considering how the wind resistance is calculated in the moment.

https://github.com/Xpazeman/tld-remove-clutter Just so people can find it

There was this interview of one of the developers who explained, that the idea of TLD was exploration (if you know, pls answer with the link). TLD is so beautiful, but it doesn't really force or encourage players to go to the outer regions, like explained in this topic: https://hinterlandforums.com/forums/topic/41951-interloper-improvements/. The guy also wrote some ideas, that are also pretty good. The core problem is: Yes, you have some reward in Bleak Inlet and Desolation Point, but you don't need to go there. You could put valuable stuff there (like the guy from the post above proposes), but I wanna focus in this post on stuff that encourages you not to stay in one place. There are things like animals taking longer to respawn when you kill them more frequently which encourage you to leave a region after a while. In practice, I think it doesn't make that much of a difference and also it's a steady slow thing, which you can prepare for, if you would ever come in a situation where it's relevant. I would like to have factors, that are 1. less predictable, so you can prepare for it, 2. much more relevant, causing you to leave an are as fast as possible. The first thing I think of are wolves. Nowadays wolves are so damn boring and no big danger if you prepare for them. I mean, you can take a torch an be able to encounter 5 wolves on Mystery Lake. It's a joke (and torches are op btw). In my opinion, there should be far less wolves (like 1/3 of Interloper now) but each being more dangerous and all of them having more complex behavior. I want them to roam around the world more. So that they are present in an area for some days and kill animals there and then roam somewhere else. This would mean two things: 1. The other animals gotta get more complex, too. Just as deer run away from the player far from their spawn position, they should roam away from the presence of the wolf. 2. That means, you have to adapt. The wolf being in the area means big danger for you and also other animals not being in the area means you have no (or less) food. So you have to leave eventually (or wait till the wolf is gone). Another factor for me are changing weather conditions. The weather system is great. What I mean is, there should be longterm change of weather and it should interact with the world. I would think of seasons, but I might not have to go this far. There should be warmer periods and colder ones, there should be periods of frequent storms and fewer storms and so on. And these should interact with the world in exemplary the following ways: In times of warmer temperatures the ice in some parts of the world melts a bit. This means traversing Forlorn Muskeg is much more difficult (if not impossible), maybe even not being able to reach the isles on Coastal Highway (because the ice has gone back). In combination with dynamic indoor temperatures (https://hinterlandforums.com/forums/topic/41904-dynamic-indoor-temperature/#comment-238408, https://hinterlandforums.com/forums/topic/41423-this-is-for-the-long-dark/) it would mean, that a base in a big structure like Hydro dam would be unsustainable, because you can't get enough fire wood to keep it (and yourself) warm in colder times, so you have to look for a smaller shelter, which you are able to keep warm. This brings me to my third factor: Sudden events (I don't know what else to call it) The idea is, that things happen, that make living in a place unsustainable for some time. For example: You're in the barn at pleasant valley outbuildings. Theres a blizzard outside and you use a fire inside to keep it warm. A wind gust puts some roof shingles down so theres a hole in the roof. Now you can't repair it because of the blizzard and you won't be able to hold the temperature of the building up for long, because you will be out of fire wood soon. So the best call is, to go somewhere else (like thompson crossing or farmstead) where you can live during the blizzard period. Theres no workbench, that's the deficit, but you can keep it warm. After the blizzard season, you can repair the roof and use the barn again without too much fire wood. These ideas are crazy, I know. They won't make it into the game pretty surely as the developer diaries suggest, that the game has gotten very big, that they have made decisions that make changes now difficult and that they are far over the originally planned content. But maybe, this gets into TLD 2. And still I like to dream.

As suggested here https://hinterlandforums.com/forums/topic/41423-this-is-for-the-long-dark/ I would add the mechanic that you can (and need to) repair houses. For example the roof in Mountaineer's hut. I really like the sound during storms of the house making noises and stuff. I think, repairing houses holds so much potential as a game mechanic. When you repair it, it becomes quieter and better isolated, so it stays longer warm after a fire. Overall, I really want this in the game as it is a logical thing and would be a really cool mechanic. But would also make the start of a run more difficult (especially on interloper) as you don't have the resources to start and maintain fire all the time (and with my bonus: to repair the houses). To compensate, I would add some blanket (has been suggested a few times), so that you raise the bed warmth bonus.

Touché, you got me there. I didn't recognize, that obviously the stuff showed must lie anywhere on the RAM or video card and while the laptop is off for long time, it shows this e-mail during aurora, so it must have been loaded in and so the computer must have been booted in some way. But still, laptops don't change much in terms of gameplay. They stretch the rules by showing something, but not more than that. With the premise of the game logic, they would only show some artefacts. Then it wouldn't be worth including them in the game. So stretching the rules there isn't a big deal. With the drone on the other hand, it would be. And all the other points still stand. Luckily a drone with night vision? Getting a whole map with one image? With which resolution?

There is actually a multiplayer mod out there. https://www.youtube.com/c/filigraniChennel/featured Anywhere on that youtube channel you can find the Discord link and on the discord you can get the link for the mod. It's pretty basic at this moment, but it works.

I pretty much like the idea, but I agree with everything said against it. The way, electronics work in the game don't really allow to launch a drone. During aurora electricity comes back, but kinda uncontrolled. Lamps flicker, cables have high voltage. Computers kinda work but I guess, they only read something from memory statically and don't really function. Or in other context: Hinterland made them work this far to tell something interesting. So having a drone would not really make sense, as it would stretch these rules in a way that's not comparable with anything else. Technically, the drone would just randomly spin it's wings and blink with its lights, but not be able to fly controlled in any way. Due to aurora, wireless communication would be heavily distorted, so it would have to fly autonomously. In addition as mentioned, it would need to be able to see during night. Finding such a drone would and being able to do something useful would be so damn much luck - not really your survival scenario. During the day, it's pretty difficult to say, how it should be handled. Handheld lights don't work, but in story mode, radio stations do. So it could maybe be possible. Since radio is only something for story mode, I wouldn't dislike a drone in story mode, like you explained. But rather for another purpose (like transporting something anywhere). For survival mode in the end, it's only use would be to bypass mapping by oneself. I understand the argument, that users just google the maps, but implementing such a feature would legitimize such play style. It would then be part of the game and convey, that Hinterland wants the game to be played that way. It also means obviously, that the cartographer achievement would'nt be a challenge anymore. Ultimately, TLD is a singleplayer game and everybody should be able to play like he wants to. Maybe this idea is something for a mod, so everyone can decide to use it.

I wrote my wish for AI in another thread, just gonna quote it here: Of course, this means, that a wolf remembers you for a longer time. I find the whole spawnpoint orientation weird. I don't really like, that you just learn so many parts of the maps (where wolves, bears, moose, tools) spawn. But for me, when it comes to animals, this is the most wrong there. You should be forced to adapt with each run. Deer should roam around the world, searching for new food and away from wolf area, while wolves track deer. This is all very much, but even some improvements would be much appreciated from my side. To animation: Setting up inverse kinematics and doing better animation isn't that difficult. See this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNidsMesxSE So it shouldn't be such an unrealistic thing to wish for.

TLD has more potential as a horror game than some horror games themselves. Imagine Slenderman in TLD. If you would tweak only some things in the game, TLD would be a great horror game. Just put some animals in houses (like more then now). I would definetely make the AI of hunters more complex, so that they hunt you over long distances. I wish, there were fewer of them with each being a bigger problem than is now. In consequence, a wolf should be a threat for a longer period of time, with you being able to prepare for it, distracting it and stuff. I don't want the wolves themselves to be stronger (more damage or something), but just their strategies to be more complex. One could say, something like this would push TLD in some wrong direction, I understand that, but I think, this would be another survival aspect of the game. It shouldn't be the main thing. TLD shouldn't go for action. I would see that as another point to count into planning. And if you're wrong, you'll propably die.

I imagined something, you may find interesting on that point. In reality, you often don't realize, you're sleeping, until you wake up suddenly. This effect could be implemented as well. Like, you stumble around and stuff and don't know, if you're still awake until you wake up where you fell asleep 3 minutes ago. That would make the whole thing much more unnerving. Sidenote: With some tweaks the game would be a great horror game. Not like everything is dark and one jump scare after the other, but with that survival aspect. I once stood in Thompsons Crossing and thought: "If that swing would swing a bit in the wind, it would be really frightening". Especially in interloper, it is that way, as you can die in no time.

This is a solid list, great!

If you used the developer consoles mod to watch the maps from above, you would see, that they are not meant to be watched from that perspective. They are made to look beautiful from every position on the ground but not from the air. Also, there are many systems in the map, which would need to be completely overhauled, if something like being able to fly would exist. For example, in the ravine there is autodeath when goating down near the ravenfalls bridge (I tried it one time. I was able to get behind the fence and suddenly the death screen with "you died due to inner wounds" appeared). Similar thing with Mountain Town, when you try to goat from the crashed plane to the street behind the tunnel where the prisoners bus crashed. On the other side, I don't think, it would fit the survival scenario really well. Building a hot air balloon is far from any cost - value calculation. You'd need immense amounts of cloth and stick and stuff. You would need an immense amount of time. For it to fly, you would need the heat. Where do you get that from? A fire by far wouldn't give enough bouyancy. Normal clothes wouldn't keep the heat very well, as they aren't meant to stop air from flowing through. Even when you got that, there is a really high risk, that you wouldn't just freeze to death or die when landing. Maybe the whole thing just bursts in fire in the air. But that's just a theory, a GAME THEORY, aaaaaannd CUT!

Hi guys, there is this mod named "Hunger Revamped" which pretty much explains my whole point. https://github.com/zeobviouslyfakeacc/HungerRevamped I just want to generalize on that. We have 4 needs to be satisfied: warmth, fatique, thirst, hunger. For hunger there is this mod mentioned above, which makes the need of hunger more dynamic. If you don't eat for days very much, you lose stored calories. This is realized by having 2 variables. Hunger is the visible meter. If you eat, it fills drastically, if you don't eat for a day, it's almost depleted. But it's also influenced by the stored calories (2nd variable). When it is too low, the hunger meter depletes faster. When the hunger meter is full, calories are transferred to stored calories, when it's empty, they are transferred in the other way. So it's not enough, to just eat some cat tail stalks before sleep to regenerate the health you lost due to starving. I don't play without this mod anymore, because default it feels just cheap (like goating :P). Same should be done in vanilla with the other needs. You should feel consequences before the meters dropt to 0. And it shouldn't be enough to fill them once to reset. The affliction mechanics do that kind of stuff, but very binary (like one second more in the cold can make the difference between hypothermia and hypothermia risk at 99%. In one case, you need to stay in the warm for 2 days, in the second case not at all). I would wish to see effects like the following: If the warmth meter is below half, you become increasingly slower (walking and crafting). You also need more energy to stay warm, so the hunger meter drops. At a very low point, things like climbing ropes become riskier (holding the rope with frozen fingers is difficult). At low fatique, you also get slower - because of lack of concentration instead of physical disability - and also I really like the idea of the faint affliction (https://hinterlandforums.com/forums/topic/41511-new-affliction-faint/). So things like crafting and reading take longer. When in low fatique for a longer time, you get these effects very steady. When at high fatique for a long time, you have more energy, are more concentrated etc. I would give this a 2 variable system as with the hunger in the hunger revamped mod. With a low thirst meter you should have similar effects to low fatique. I would also argue for a 2 variable system here, as you can't compensate for days of dehydration in one minute. Overall, health should not only reduce when a need is at 0 (depleted), but begin to reduce already, when a need is low in condition. Hunger should be managed like the mod does it. This includes a temperature bonus when well fed due to fat isolation. When running for some duration the following effects should appear (also for walking, but much less): Of course, the hunger meter drops due to need of calories. The temperature meter should rise due to heat. The thirst meter drops slightly due to sweating dependent on the temperature. Also, sweat makes inner clothing wet, but this should be only a slight effect and only relevant when walking for a day or running for a half hour or something like that. Of course, fatique will also drop. And just to mention: stamina also drops, but only when running. That all means, that needs have a wider range. The primary meters are filled pretty fast, but the effect on the secondary variables is pretty slow. You can't go from malnutrition to well fed in one day. That means, that all you do has even more consequences, but not necessarily that the game becomes harder. Such change would make this game more complex. I think, it would be more interesting. As the need system is what the game is centered around, I don't think, it's bad to make it complicated. On the other hand, it's really not that complex for the player.

Goat on dam: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG9TMn1FJzc Of course, this doesn't work for every dam. Okay, soloing. Still, why do you save energy in comparison to using a rope? IRL Soloing is not only risky but very energy consuming (while rapelling isn't). If goating was meant to be climbing down the rock, it should at least be animated like it's not just walking down. Being able to normally walk on a 80% ledge (only taking sprain risk) doesn't reflect that in any way.

My points: #1 Why is goating even possible? Please call me out, if you can savely stand on a wall tilted 5 degrees from vertical. With crampons maybe, but without you would just slide down. And also: you wouldn't be able to land on such terrain. #2 Assuming goating is possible, why does goating take more calories than sliding down a rope? Did you see goats climbing around on steep walls (like a dam)? Even for them it's difficult. Why should it be less energy consuming to goat down (take fall by fall on uneven terrain). With a rope you just need to hold on to it [https://youtu.be/8p8iUWe1LjY?t=646 short research: It's called a rappel and you don't even need carabiners or other equipment than a rope, but it helps] So you don't need much energy at all to go down. This isn't really reflected in the game, but should be in my opinion. This wouldn't make crampons worthless, as you would still have better grip upwards and save energy due to that.

Man Ghurcb, you really took much critique. I like the idea. In reality, it's really like that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl-NhIdZttw This is a video (german one, same experiment might exist in english, idk) where this guy kept not sleeping for 100h. He described the whole process. He really stretched it, like took caffeine and other than in a survival scenario he wouldn't do much (like walking miles, crafting things, being in the cold, etc.). After 60h, he says, hallucinations would get really bad. And after 100h he would just fall asleep, because of not sleeping for a long time. And this is really a big time. He prepared for being awake long. Normally you wouldn't stay awake that long. So, if you're not sleeping for like 2 days while working or walking, you would be so damn tired, that you might just fall asleep. I would add one thing to the sleep mechanic alongside the faint affliction: There is that Hunger Revamped mod, that tracks behind the visible hunger meter how much fat you stored. When you don't fill the hunger meter by eating for a while and it's low, you lose body fat and if you have only few calories stored, you take more damage while starving than you would with many stored calories. So you can't just starve for a month and only eat about nothing, then eat to refill your hunger bar and be ok again. You need to eat much for a longer period of time, to fill up you stored calories. I would do it similar for sleep. If you sleep only a bit over say 2 weeks, you are overall pretty tired and weak. If you don't sleep for 3 days at all, you need to sleep very much for a 2 days or something, to reach the same performance again. Like with hypothermia, where you need to stay in a warm area for 2 days, you would need to sleep really much to cure faint. I don't like the handling, that you are fine with letting all your stats drop to 0% for some time. That's why I use hunger revamped. I don't see a problem with encumbrance starting at 50% downwards fatique. I mean, there's theoretically also a difference between being well rested and having worked for half a day. It's all not binary, it's stedy (not like a bigger difference between 0% and 1% than between 50% and 49%)

My problem is the following: Why should goating be superior to using a rope? Ingame it's because you don't waste hunger and fatique. The question is, why do you need so much more of it when just sliding down the rope in contrast to a complex climbing act? In my opinion the consumption of hunger and fatique should be drastically reduced.

To #4: Would be an interesting mechanic if buildings could get damaged due to storms/blizzards (get holes) and though decrease the ability of holding temperature. In that sense: Would be nice if you could increase the average temperature of a cave or house with fire and it would stay warm for some time. To #3: Seasons would be actually interesting. Doesn't mean, that snow melts and grass sprouts. Just some things like the lakes in Forlorn Muskeg to be frozen fully in winter and much less in summer and such effects. Maybe you won't be able to stay in some regions some time of the year. Getting less easily through Forlorn Muskeg due to weaker ice in summer (or easier in in winter), ice holes for fishing freezing faster in lower temperatures in winter, all in all it could have some effect on possibilities without changing the game in a fundamental sense.

Regarding point 1: I'd like to see an extension of the "hold items in your hand(s)" system, which only works with some items like rifle, stones, etc.: 1. You can replace the current take and place system. It's pretty unintuitive that you can take a can or whatever walk the stairs up with it and right click for it to appear where you picked it up. Regarding potential lower speed when transporting for example a rifle that way, this point becomes even stronger (like you really have the rifle in your hand). The proposed system just does it the same way without the ability to let the item snap back to it's original position. When you pick it up, it's in your inventory. This would go along with your first point. 2. It could make hunting/defending more interesting. Like if you think there could be wolves nearby, you take the hatchet in your hand or knife or whatever and that would be the weapon to fight with. I like that idea because it would be another decision to carefully make and could reduce stress in the struggle, when there are 5 options and you got to choose which weapon to use. But I wouldn't change the struggle system itself. A nearby idea would be to use the selected tool for interactions like cutting wood or metal shelves but I think, that would be unnecessarily complicated. (Maybe make the tool in your hand preselected) Key bindings: "put away" would work the same. The selected item would just not be selected and still be in your inventory. Item interaction with now usable items would then be the same (thinking of rifle, stones etc.) There would be a button to switch to placement mode. Then you can place with left and abort with right.

I don't need it, but it would'nt bother me, because I'd just turn it off. For some it might be helpful and it's a very simple feature, so - why not?

On the other hand it consumes more calories, so it would be really fair.

My point wasn't just more randomness. It's distribution. This system now is in fact random. But the gameplay in the longrun isn't. As you say, you could just go to all 9 locations and are sure to find these items, no 'real' randomness. I mean, it is random; but in gameplay terms, it's not, because you have a strategy. Same as described here https://casinoandsportstalk.com/articles/does-the-bet-doubling-strategy-work.php If you are for example not able to find a hatchet in the entire BR, you have to move earlier than you would have if you were to find it. Same goes for bow and other gear. It would be more random. That's the goal here. So, I don't really understand your point. The thing with the dropped ammo is just an example of how intelligent distribution could make item finds feel more realistic. It's really unrealistic, that you find one soup or other food in every second shelve. It's more likely, the peoples who lived in those houses would put all their remaining food in the same. It would be less random, but more compelling. In gamplay-perspective it would be less random, but, I guess and hope, more exciting, as you think about, what might have happened there. And since it's not prescripted, but only chance, it won't feel like you've seen it before. Problem with procedurality is, it always feels the same, even then it's different. At this point, it might also be like it, but still it would be better, then the current system.

Sry, I got to say this. I'm studying informatics which contains a big portion of math and also statistics. So, if you didn't were to study in a similar field, I'd say, I know more about randomness and distribution than you do. And also I want to disprove you. Randomness depends on the point of view. If you were to not give restrictions to item spawns (like the revolver in the fridge) technically, the item spawns are more random. But also, the playthroughs would be less random, more predictable, because you would, no matter where you go, find everything on average you need. If you were to set fix item spawns, like the distress pistol always to spawn at certain locations would also make the gameplay less random, for obvious reasons. By restricting item spawns in different ways (or coupling their likelihoods) you won't find all things for sure depending on your luck. So you got to search further and be intelligent about it (search for distress pistol at specific points but you're not sure to find it) and it's more of deciding to take a risk. Such system would allow to place high rarity items in less extreme spots without unbalancing the game. If you would find a village and get like no loot out of one house, you could guess that you won't find much in the other houses (again risk estimate), so you won't find the rifle in one of the other houses. That means, that you won't find the rifle at the well known spots anymore so often and if you want to have it, you got to search houses, where you wouldn't find anything else. That would be a much more random gameplay feel, than any other item distribution (fixed spots or totally random).