Limitations of the Long Dark

[cekivi]

I had originally posted this elsewhere but I thought it deserved its own thread.

Firstly, with the latest update there are no longer any true "limited" resources. Since resources are no longer scarce once the main areas have all been explored the game will get boring. Once you're fully equipped than all you're doing is hibernating to run up the survival time.

Now, I don't consider myself a greenhorn (I have a character at 200+ days) but from a "casual" player perspective - when you can only game for short periods - I do not find the glut of resources to be game breaking. I have fun exploring the maps and seeing what changes between playthroughs. Where will I find my first hunting knife? My first hatchet? Although a lot of the fun in earlier alphas was resource/tool scarcity (I used to get super excited for finding a single can opener) not having to worry about being unable to repair tools does make the game less stressful. When I only have a few precious hours to game I want to soak in the atmosphere of The Long Dark. Yes, there has to be risk of death for the game to be fun (I fail at shooting wolves so that's not a problem) but I would get more bored of the game if I constantly succumbed to the elements because I couldn't harvest wood or skin animals.

Personally, I am less concerned with the resource glut in the latest alpha (as others have mentioned, this is easily tunable by increasing harvest times/reducing supply) than I am about a potentially static game world. If the sandbox maps never change in the final game than the game automatically limits its replayability. Having random elements and limited procedural generation would probably be very costly to implement but are necessary to ensure longevity of the game. When repeating the same action for certain locations gives you a maximum chance of survival or if you "know" where drops for certain items are than you're no longer playing a game, you're solving an equation. Can you imagine how crazy it would be if, in some future update, it's possible that you come out of the woods to find the Camp Office at Mystery Lake (for instance) burned down? Wouldn't that completely change how you play the game? If locations can change between playthoughs than as opposed to having an optimal strategy to follow you actually have to explore again because you will no longer know what's around the corner.

Regardless of whether resources are abundant or scarce I believe the true limiting factor for The Long Dark will be how static the game world is. Would you rather play a game where all animal, shelter and resource locations can easily be listed in a guide or a game where nothing is certain and every time you step outside you walk blindly into the unknown? And the best part is, you only require a little randomness to achieve this effect

Anyways, that's my input. What do you think will be the ultimate limitations on replayability of the Long Dark?

[ethomas21]

Story mode will add some of the long-term changes to the environment I expect, such as important or reliable structures burning down, or roads collapsing, etc.

There are a few other threads suggesting things like this for sandbox though, and I like the idea since it would add texture to the mid- and long-game where I'm otherwise just going through the motions of hunting, harvesting, and repairing in a well-established base location.

[selfless]

You've explained it well. Static. For some players this is a negative to replayability. They replay for new experiences. For others it is the opposite. They replay to get the same experience. So, boon or bust. It will be that way because what exists now is only the precursor to the actual project, the Story.

And the Story will be static. I figure it will be so static as to demand the exact same choices be made everytime to reach the end. Except for a few choices that have no effect on outcomes whatsoever. Do whatever you want on those. Doesn't matter how you choose to get the monkey out of the tree, as long as you take his banana so you can use the peal to free the wizard to move on. Don't want the monkey's banana? No other option.

But Story mode will add the one thing the Sandbox has not: an end.

[cekivi]

And the Story will be static. I figure it will be so static as to demand the exact same choices be made everytime to reach the end. Except for a few choices that have no effect on outcomes whatsoever.

I hope it's not that bad. Sure, I don't expect branching paths with 10 different endings. I don't even expect "Fallout style" where you get to see how your changes altered the game world (hard to do in a survival setting). But it would be nice to have some randomness and procedural generation outside of the core story.

Deus Ex would be a good example of how I would like story mode to be. Yes, everything is static but there's enough illusion of choice, variation and "limited" path branching that you can play the game multiple times and have each playthrough be unique. Mainly because it Deus Ex you could get the banana from the monkey in the tree to free the wizard... but you could also pick the lock, hack the lock or blow up the lock to break the wizard out of their cell.

It would be very disappointing and a wasted opportunity if the final game was completely static with only one way to play.

[HarliKatt]

I truly envy others when it comes to gaming. It's long been a joke amongst my circle of friends that I am going to be personally responsible for bringing about the apocalypse due to an innate ability to break and/or negate the laws of probability. Most don't believe me until they see it for themselves and then I usually get a cupcake out of pity. My RNG is awful. Truly, regardless the game I'm in, if something relies on a random figure, almost without fail mine is against me.

The absolute worst instance in TLD thus far was a 30 day game I had in which I scoured ML, a couple cars and a house in CH and all of PV to find four hunting knives. I had to resort to breaking open a few cans before I found the first one. No hatchet, no rifle, not even a magnifying glass. When I personally am able to find more tools, I get positively giddy. My current game is less unfortunate, but there have been times I've gone very long stretches without even one instance of certain tools. More often than not it's rifles for me. I think I'm at about 55% of my time in game without a single rifle. And I've never had a game played where I found more than one and even then, they're in staggering disrepair.

So for people like me, I'm having quite a bit of success at difficult survival. Maybe the best way to accommodate everyone with some measure comfort at both ends of the spectrum could be resource sliders in the menu. You're able to tool availability based on the play-style that caters to your wishes. Think there's too many animals? Adjust your slider to thin out the herd. Find too many tools? Tweak the tool slider to provide you with less opportunities to pick up a usable can opener.

I understand it's frustrating for people who feel like there's just too much of a good thing in the current iteration of the game. I truly do. But remember there's always someone like me out there who's strangling rabbits bare-handed because she can't find a better alternative.

[cekivi]

The absolute worst instance in TLD thus far was a 30 day game I had in which I scoured ML, a couple cars and a house in CH and all of PV to find four hunting knives. I had to resort to breaking open a few cans before I found the first one. No hatchet, no rifle, not even a magnifying glass. When I personally am able to find more tools, I get positively giddy.

I fully agree. In prior updates, I used to do fist pumps if I found a can opener. Now, in my most recent run, I found four axes at 80% condition within 12 in-game hours

However, I'm not arguing for changing the loot tables. I'm arguing for releasing the static map parameters. An excellent example of how this works in the Long Dark now is Fluffy. Will Fluffy pay you a visit? You don't know. Can you take the risk? It leaves a big question mark over that area of the map so you are left with uncertainty as to the outcome. The only way to get a definitive answer is to pay Fluffy a visit to see if they're home.

So, no, I don't want the game to be more punishing by making loot drops rarer. What I want are more game elements that can change between playthroughs so that the game world does not feel static. I don't want a game that never changes or a game where there is only one solution to every problem.

[HarliKatt]

I fully agree. In prior updates, I used to do fist pumps if I found a can opener. Now, in my most recent run, I found four axes at 80% condition within 12 in-game hours

However, I'm not arguing for changing the loot tables. I'm arguing for releasing the static map parameters. An excellent example of how this works in the Long Dark now is Fluffy. Will Fluffy pay you a visit? You don't know. Can you take the risk? It leaves a big question mark over that area of the map so you are left with uncertainty as to the outcome. The only way to get a definitive answer is to pay Fluffy a visit to see if they're home.

So, no, I don't want the game to be more punishing by making loot drops rarer. What I want are more game elements that can change between playthroughs so that the game world does not feel static. I don't want a game that never changes or a game where there is only one solution to every problem.

>.> Don't mind me if I sneak into your base and steal some of your stuff! And yeah, I understand what you actually meant. I was more gently reminding those that do call for rarer loot to remember that some people are actually finding it rare enough.

I remember my second playthrough of CH. I almost shed real tears when I arrived at the townsite to find that precious little house in the middle just behind and kitty-corner to the garage burnt to the half-mark. But at the same time, I was excited because I knew that meant things could change and I could expect differentiation.

I have to hope that Hinterland knows what they're doing, they've done incredibly well by me thus far, even with decisions that I disagree with or that I think could use a little extra time and effort to tune. I genuinely doubt they'll make a story world so static that we play it through only once because, well, we've played it once and that's all it needs. I'm personally hoping for a more Dark Side/ Light Side approach, in which every choice you make has either a positive, negative or neutral affect on the situation which can in turn affect the way the morality of the character develops over time

[joki]

I think one of the easier to implement options to increase replayability somewhat, would be to replace drops for specific items with a generalized drop base (maybe per map) and pick one from it at random by per-item-chance. So instead of knowing by heart, where you have a chance for each individual item to spawn, everything is a lot more randomized. You might also want to have additonal houses beeing burnt down or missing. (maybe on a per map basis, e.g. in mystery lake, either the camp office, or the trappers homestead could be burnt down, or none of them. But never (or very unlikely in highest difficulty) both of them).

And yes, I do miss the times, when all ressources (Not only food, but especially clothing and to some extend scrap metal) were scarce.

[brun]

For me the number one limitation is the fact that I know the maps, almost by heart. Everything else can be worked around by applying some roleplaying. But I'm pretty sure I'll prefer this limitation to whatever limitations a random-map-game would offer :-)

[cekivi]

For me the number one limitation is the fact that I know the maps, almost by heart. Everything else can be worked around by applying some roleplaying. But I'm pretty sure I'll prefer this limitation to whatever limitations a random-map-game would offer :-)

That's exactly what my current problem is: the maps aren't new anymore. Clearly though we have differing opinions on how good or bad this is

Again, a completely procedural generated map, while it would be awesome, is not practical. I would assume that would require a whole year (at least) of additional development to just generate a map the size of mystery lake. And, like you pointed out brun, this is not something that all players would enjoy.

For me personally, I just want some elements to not be static. Heck, even if it's only a 1 in 5 chance that the Camp Office is burned down or that a loot drop/corpse can sometimes be in the middle of the map. Just something organic in the game so that I have something new to explore and struggle against each time. Due to being very busy of late I only play now when there's been a new update. Mainly because the part of the Long Dark that I enjoy the most is exploration (whether it's a new map or a new mechanic). In a static game, I lose the thing I enjoy most about the game

[tortuosit]

I'm not experienced yet, but what I have seen is there are way too many deer appearances. It should be more interesting to hunt deer. Currently, they are too often seen and sometimes run right across me. Sneeking should be necessary.

Also I've found a lot of stuff too easily. It's a question of balancing. Or they should add hardcore options.