CastIronFabric

oh, my bad most likely. Yeah I am not a fan of the architecture but I am also not a fan of lore in video games at all but even more so the general 'vibe' of the lore in this game. not a fan at all, which is why I turn off storms and stability and all of that. The architecture reminds me too much of 7 days to die which I played for many years but I am done with that kind of game play. super not intrested.

sorry but the ladders are anyoying and I am sorry that fact might hurt the lore. I do not like the traders litearlly nothing about any of these trader changes, and I could not remotely care less how much the changes might affect the lore. are we seriously here suggesting that the traders need to have ladders becasue of the lore? am I understanding this correctly?

reference: In the old version it took 3 hits with a copper spear to kill a boar if I recall correctly. In the new version when I was crouched and aimed well, it took me 3 hits with a cooper spear to kill a boar. so the same. I have not studied it closely though to be fair.

Ok, fair enough I was not trying to be confrontationtial. You just didn't understand my point and that is fair, carry on

if I understand correctly the idea is 'go outside and look at new thing, ok, cool, time to go back in'. Someone does have to develop that feature, create the models etc. or am i misunderstanding

That would work one time I think (if I understand correctly) I think its just the wrong player base for this kind of stuff. We are here to build, craft and explore. I do not think this game appeals much to the COD crowd if that makes sense.

That is exactly my point. That was exactly my point with the COD example. Do you see how my COD example would apply to storms specifically? There is more of a long term reward system in place now for Storms than exists for COD one of the most popular games around I am asking not be confrontation but rather to make sure you understand my core point.

Let me suggest a thought experiment. There is more 'reward' system in the greater game play experience for Storms than there is doing combat in Call of Duty. I spend hours making my house pretty, there is no in game reward system for me doing so, its not that much different than a COD player getting a dopamine spike from killing a drifter...oh I mean Not zs. So perhaps its not a question of reward vs risk at all, perhaps its just not fun. MORE SPECIFICALLY, maybe its just not fun at that very specific time because at that exact time we all are working on a long list of to-do items that we want to do and if we wanted to be interrupted by a phone call we would likely not even be playing the game at all in the first place. OR...maybe this game is not for COD players? or maybe its just not super refined combat sim enough. It could be both of those possibilities at the same time actually does that make sense? The bottom line to my point though, is I do not think a long term reward system is always a requirement for enjoyable game play

The problem with Homo Sapiens is that it does not have traders (even though that feature is so terrible I just spawn in my own traders to be fair), ruins or translocators. That is why people do not play it.

well to recap what I have said many times, Lore is meaningless at the level of game play. full stop. I can not stress enough how much pulling the 'lore card' hold absolutely positively nothing for me. Lore is background at best, its not a foundation, not important.

My assessment of 7 days to die as it relates to this game specifically: I have a lot of complaints about 7dtd and I ended up leaving the game. Many of the points expressed here I agree with. With that said however, I want to point out how 7dtd relates to this game specifically. 7DTD is a pure 100% tower defense game in which you are ALWAYS running at a deficit. Build a city? likely never. Have a heart attack after 200 hours of stress and fighting to have 10 seconds to build something pretty? yes. Do we really want this game to be extreme high action, always fighting, tower defense, non stop 100% of the time for 1000 hours of game play? Do we need another 7days to die building game? I would leave this game if that ever became something that could not be overridden in the settings. There are nearly zero games of this depth that are not also stress/tower/interuption simulators. Can we just have a few that are not that please? I would much rather have a building game in which 'uncompromising' means something other than having monsters smash your face. You know, uncompromising like if someone just dropped you off in the middle of a massive forest with no cell phone. It is possible to make a game very hard and very ' uncompromising' without monsters. real life is a good model for that.

Traders: I wish I could point to something that I like about the changes to traders but I cant. The trading system is already so dispersed that I barely find it useful, now the traders are harder to find as well. The ladders are the bane of everyone's cadence and I get vibes of 7 days to die in the architecture design which god please lets not

god I hope not. regardless, what I think is going to happen is that all of this action focused game play is going to go into the procedural created dungeons which in my opinion is perfect game design. So everyone mark this prediction and check back in a year. Last thing I think any of us want is to be 'mobbed' while we are smithing

I challenge your claim below. I would request evidence that suggests its true. That all said, all of this is not related to the assertion everyone is responding to.

Here we go again. The only evidence that the storms are the way the developers want them is because they are as they are. Which is true for everything in the game. In fact, the same evidence that suggest that they should be ever present is also the same evidence that they should be EXACTLY as they are in total and not changed. The logic you want to apply to 'why they should be global' can also be applied to every single aspect of storms as they exists right now. regardless, that is not related to the point I was making.

My view that 'storms' should be a place you go to is a separate point entirely from what I was saying.

sorry I do not fully follow you I was not responding to you about that

I have seen the argument of forcing a player into an experience that they do not want by removing all methods a player comes up with to avoid the experience in this game and many other games as well. To put it lightly I find this concept very disturbing. I understand there is a gray area but the default should always be 'if the player does not want to do something and has found a way to avoid it with standard game play then leave them alone' instead of 'how dare someone else do something I think they should not do in order to avoid doing something I think they should enjoy but they do not, too bad for them' the latter is just flat out very creepy. So in short: If one want to fight the monsters during a storm one should go do it and not concern themselves with what other people are doing.

How do we come to the conclusion that the are crucial to the game and story? has the dev weighed in on this in anyway that implies that? I actually do not know. I know that storms are referenced in the story but I do not know if to an extent that they are critical to the story baseline.

nope. I reject the notion that cooking is 'uncompromising'. EDIT: to put a finer note, when the ads say this game is 'uncompromising' I am confident that cooking is not the list that backs that up, I also have not seen cooking mentioned in the few videos I have seen that go into detail as to why this game is 'uncompromising' regardless, that is getting into subjective stuff that I am not going to engage in.

I would say your assessment on cooking is extremely subjective. I do not find cooking remotely 'uncompromising'. I am however inclined to avoid engaging anymore

let me walk you thru this. Cooking..'well the game says its uncompromising game thus cooking needs to be uncompromising' would you agree? SIDE TOPIC (EDIT): no, what I am saying is that if the dev decides 'this 'uncompromising' thing is not working out well' they can change it. Its not written in stone. I am not advocating that it be that way I am just saying I reject the arguement that something should be as it is BECAUSE it has been decided to be as it is. I reject that line of logic in all things

when it comes to fishing, I got a boar worth of meat from 3 worms I got with a grunter. I think the fishing feature was in part put in place to balance the berry changes for early game

ok, maybe do not reply

I am not advocating that it should not be. I think you are intentionally cherry picking what I said, I am not sure why you would do that but as a reminder that quote is related to specifically storms not needing to be dangerous because the game is ALREADY uncompromising without the storms.