" I think it is getting close to possible in single player games with a large enough reference database..." that part is a no.
People care about rpg elements of npcs in terms of them faking a dynamic life, and making it believeable, along with quests feeling organic, atleast on the first time encountering the quest. Unless the team wants to do something along the lines of characters aging and dying, which I don't think they will do. An MMORPG adds the millions of others that are also playing. So RPG is most definetly not just for NPCS. It is also the world itself and what type of mechanics you have to deal with in the scheme of things. Not hack n slash with just mobs. Example is the Stamina bar in EQ. That determined how much you could jump before you ran out of breath and couldn't do it anymore. That was a small RPG element. Hunger can also be one. We aren't advocating for you to die, but you just be penalized to the degree of a debuff, or something that turns hunger into a more RPG element.
fancy said:I like the idea of a small debuff. [...]
Someone said negative effects, like dizziness, increased chance of failure to cast spells, decreased max health/mana, etc. And just give it a set % decrease. No one wants it to be a chore. Eating a really hearty meal regens/removes these effects immediately. Where simple stuff like bread removes these effects over a period of time.
Oooo, some meals created to help with acclimation or certain zone effects would be cool too. Not all though, I still want some zones to be straight up deadly.
Maybe even fainting or overall woozieness? that is like a self imposed slow- keyboard reaction times are thick and gummy, slow to react.
I like the idea of some meals helping with acclimation provided they are intuitive, like hot peppers or curry-like spices acclimating to hot environments. The wisdom being: it raises internal body temperature so your temperature relative to outside temperature is less of a difference and therefore you feel cooler. Or hot buttered chocolate in cold environments, the wisdom being the calories in sugar and fat to help thicken the blood, plus the immediate warmth of the cup to the extremities in your hand. Let the devs make the jokes about where the peppers can be found: like fire berries from the stalks of thistle bushes at the top of freezing amberfaet, or butter churned from the milk obtained from lowing teets of the Golrus in syronai's rest, or something.
Raidil said: Yes there's a lot of people posting that just what an old school final fantasy type of game where u just run from fight to fight no rpg to it no immersion in the world.
I think that is because over the decades, action/arcade has become the mainstream focus of systems and so RPG really is an afterthought meant to give some filler for that arcade game (hence games like Dark Souls really being an action/arcade game and not an RPG). I noticed when Diablo came out, there began a trend of action/RPG hybrids to which the focus was more on the arcade play rather than the cRPG elements of character management in play. We have had numerous players over the years who have become accustomed to the arcade design and play (ie power ups, action allowing a player to overcome statistical limitations, etc…) and so the concept of an RPG system has a different meaning to them.
Raidil said: Yes there's a lot of people posting that just what an old school final fantasy type of game where u just run from fight to fight no rpg to it no immersion in the world.
The old school final fantasy games were one of the first RPG's to feature tents/cabins/campfires that players could use to "rest" during their adventures out in the wild. My preference is that food has a lot of depth and complexity to it. The components used in each dish should either be harvested from the world or looted from corpses. The only exception to that would be crafting fuel which could be purchased from NPC's, and that would be important as each fuel purchase would remove currency from circulation. If players can purchase food from NPC merchants then that will detract from all three spheres of content. Instead of players needing to immerse themselves in the world and gather/hunt/craft for food they can choose to interact with AI and purchase set-it-and-forget-it stacks of consumables. It's not a matter of running from fight to fight, it's about adding value to content. I prefer that the world is the provider of fruit/vegetables/grain/meat/sauce, and that players need to go out and acquire these things for themselves or trade with other real players.
I see nothing wrong with food/drink that provides health/mana regen but again those things should be an element of a specific dish rather than a universal trait shared by all of them. Players should have to choose whether they want MP regen or extra stats. Some exotic recipes might offer a variety of benefits. Tying food to merchants would offer a "path of least resistance" that would absolutely reduce the demand of player-crafted-goods. If that happens then any/all content that drops components used in food recipes will be devalued. It has been stated many times that a player-driven economy is key/paramount to Pantheon. With that being the case then we should go out of our way to help it flourish and that means increasing the value (and demand) of items that are acquired exclusively from players. Just like player/role interdependence is important ... imagine if players could hire NPC's to help them XP or finish a quest, even at reduced efficiency. That would be antithetical to the design focus and there is historical precedence of that happening in other games that suffered the consequences.
At the end of the day, I could get on-board with the idea of players needing food/drink in order to function at regular capacity ... as long as food/drink is exclusively player-crafted, and the acquisiton of necessary components isn't made ridiculously easy in order to compensate. If the accessibility of food/drink needs to be increased to the point where it's a common commodity (that can be purchased from NPC's) to satiate the massive demand of players that need it to function, that would be a loss in my eyes as it would lead down the same rabbit hole of allowing players to hire NPC's to quest/adventure with. Ceythos is the developer behind crafting/harvesting and when he was asked about whether or not there would be group harvesting mechanics, here was his response:
"Short term I don't see that, I think initially everything is going to be fairly contested and it's first come, first serve. That plays more to the economy side of things ... wanting to keep supply/demand in check. If you start having ... nodes that are rare, we're only going to travel as a group to get 6x the results we might have (otherwise) gotten from that node. That would introduce 600% more things into the economy."
In my opinion, that same logic applies to NPC's selling food, but it extends way past the 600% number. Every single time a player purchases food from a vendor, that's introducing "more things" (artificial things, IMO) into the economy while simultaneously reducing the demand for "real things" (harvested items/looted recipe components). NPC merchants typically don't have limited supplies of goods which means that an unlimited amount of food/drink could enter the economy and it's in direct competition with the resources that should truly matter. That is the issue with conflating "common commodity" with "specialized product." There is a massive difference between a player-driven economy and an NPC/AI-driven economy and if food becomes a basic necessity that every character needs (in order to not be debuffed) then it's far more likely that it will be something offered by NPC's.
Food buffs aren't a cheat, that is just nonsense. They add a layer of depth that has an impact on the entire world. They affect the relative value of itemization (there could be hundreds of different drops that are used in a recipe) which has a direct correlation to the perceived value of anything that drops those items. They affect the economy (players would have no choice but to stimulate the economy if they want food as purchasing from NPC's wouldn't be an option, and the folks who are selling food recipe components would be more likely to sell them to real players (instead of merchants) since the demand and relative value of these items would be increased) -- there is a lot at stake here. There are many intertwining layers of a player-driven economy and while it may not seem like a big deal, allowing NPC's to sell food would depreciate the relative value of all three spheres of the game.
Watemper said:Yes, I remember Brad saying something along the lines of wanting to put the E back in PVE. Might be time to start putting RPG back into MMORPG lol.
Lol no kidding. I would not even be here but for a brief moment if not for Brad and much of the VR team (their background) working on this game.
I am not big on the idea of food/drink being a meaningful stat boosting or effect granting thing, let alone something players have to resort to the player market for. Forced involvement in the player economy, especially when it comes to one specific tradeskill, isn't my idea of healthy. In fact I'd rather all food only came from vendors (I know that won't be the case) since at least that removes money from the economy.
Granted I am not a huge fan of consumables to begin with as they tend to always vastly out-earn every other tradeskill because players have to keep coming back by necessity. Any sort of stat boosts or special effects I feel should come from alchemy/potions, and I am of the opinion that those potions should not offer any unique combat benefits/buffs that are not otherwise already available via spells/abilities/buffs of various classes. There is great enough value/appeal in being able to do some things other classes can, such as being a warrior but loading up on levitation and Black Wolf Swiftness potions. Optional yet valuable.
Iksar said:I am not big on the idea of food/drink being a meaningful stat boosting or effect granting thing, let alone something players have to resort to the player market for. Forced involvement in the player economy, especially when it comes to one specific tradeskill, isn't my idea of healthy. In fact I'd rather all food only came from vendors (I know that won't be the case) since at least that removes money from the economy.
Granted I am not a huge fan of consumables to begin with as they tend to always vastly out-earn every other tradeskill because players have to keep coming back by necessity. Any sort of stat boosts or special effects I feel should come from alchemy/potions, and I am of the opinion that those potions should not offer any unique combat benefits/buffs that are not otherwise already available via spells/abilities/buffs of various classes. There is great enough value/appeal in being able to do some things other classes can, such as being a warrior but loading up on levitation and Black Wolf Swiftness potions. Optional yet valuable.
What's Forced you don't have to. do or do not do. Supplying your character for what you need to enter a dungeon should be part of the game. Immersion, Role-Playing game.
Caine said:What's Forced you don't have to. do or do not do. Supplying your character for what you need to enter a dungeon should be part of the game. Immersion, Role-Playing game.
Everyone seems to be in agreement that some sort of food/drink system is a good thing. It's really how its implemented that we all vary in opinion.
So first off if food/drink is a required item for regen you are affectively being forced into using it. That will be a baseline stat/item everyone will expect you to have. The norms of the server and the community dictate the forced features in a lot of ways. If you are going to require food to have baseline regen, which I'm against, it needs to be available from merchants.
So back to the point of my argument. Buying food that simply allows HP/Mana to regenerate isn't immersive to me. It's not about stocking up on those crucial items before some night of adventuring. It would be akin to a house keeping task you must perform on your character. Some task required just to maintain a "normal state". I want my plans for the evening to affect what I stock up on. If I'm going to a frozen area maybe I need Stew because it gives a bonus to that climate. Maybe I'm a going to play a DPS role rather than a tank role tonight so I opt for the Stew with +2 str over the Stew with the +2 stam. If I'm broke, or running late I can completely skip it if I want. This wont alter someone elses playing experience because the idea behind a simple 1-2 stat increase is to not be so much that it makes or breaks you but enough to encourage you to do it.
Rather than CTRL+C, CTRL+V a system from EQ lets look at making it more in depth.
I will say with 100% certanity though that if food is only hp/mana regen it wont negatively impact me. I'll buy my 3 stacks of each every few weeks and never think about it again; but that's the issue I have with the current EQ version of food/drink. If its something I only do every week, two weeks, whatever, and don't have to think about again, I just don't see it adding any value.
EppE said:I will say with 100% certanity though that if food is only hp/mana regen it wont negatively impact me. I'll buy my 3 stacks of each every few weeks and never think about it again; but that's the issue I have with the current EQ version of food/drink. If its something I only do every week, two weeks, whatever, and don't have to think about again, I just don't see it adding any value.
It isn't supposed to be a focal point feature. It is a layered sub feature. If done properly, bag space will also be at a premium, which means that you will have to use slots in your bag for food/water (giving separate bags for food I think is defeating the point of limited bag space and should not be provided). Then, if "weight" is also a component of play, water and food will provide a limitation here as well. Those races/classes that have high strength will have less of an issue, but casters and weak races will have to watch how much they carry, making food/water weight a factor (ie combined with bag space, limiting how much one can carry).
This gives meaning to crafting as well, allowing the player to craft, buy better foods that last longer and are lighter. It is a sub component of RPG systems, not a focal and it is this among many systems to which layer to provide character management within the game.
While some of the suggestions are interesting by some on making this complex (oneADseven), I think that it turns a sub feature into a focal point, which take away from the over all concept of the RPG development (ie making it more a surivival focus style). Aside from that, food buffs I tend to see as "arcade" style game play, "power up" focuses to enchance combat and action play, not an RPG based focus of play. Making everything a "bonus" detracts from the concept of player managaement and turns the game into a sequence of seeking bonuses to do even better, not manage a character in a world with some form of practical realism.
Tanix said:While some of the suggestions are interesting by some on making this complex (oneADseven), I think that it turns a sub feature into a focal point, which take away from the over all concept of the RPG development (ie making it more a surivival focus style). Aside from that, food buffs I tend to see as "arcade" style game play, "power up" focuses to enchance combat and action play, not an RPG based focus of play. Making everything a "bonus" detracts from the concept of player managaement and turns the game into a sequence of seeking bonuses to do even better, not manage a character in a world with some form of practical realism.
My suggestion is to make food consumption optional and for it to provide some sort of temporary/situational effect when consumed. Your suggestion is to make food consumption required to function normally. I'm not really following your logic here because the latter is clearly more of a "focal point" in gameplay. You then go on to use trigger words like "arcade" "power up" "bonus" and "action play" -- holy batman, we're just talking about drinking orange juice and eating kabobs here. I think your terminology is probably a little disingenuous, to say the least. We aren't talking about getting extra lives or mech suits in Contra 3, flying capes and giant shoes in Mario 3, or the "pizza time" invulnerability buff from TMNT: The Arcade Game. We're talking about an increase to a stat, or a resist, or acclimation, or a type of regen. The reality is that allowing food to do this is nothing more than a sub-layer -- there are multiple ways to increase those stats in-game and food/drink is one of them. It's not a focal point because it isn't required to survive. It's one of many optional sub-layers that players can choose to take part in or ignore it and go on their merry way.
An interesting observation I have here is that you're implying that the hunger mechanic wouldn't be a focal point. If you're tying a mechanic into "survival" -- as in, you need to do this to function normally or not die, it should be a focal point. Unfortunately, it sounds like it was more closely aligned with what Eppe was suggesting. A set it and forget it "sub-layer" that has a minor impact on being able to play inventory tetris. It doesn't sound challenging and it doesn't sound immersive. It sounds like an extremely basic "problem" that can be countered by an extremely accessible "solution" -- carry a stack of food/drink in your inventory (that can be purchased from a convenient neighborhood NPC) and remember to replenish it after X amount of hours/days. It sounds boring and thoughtless. Hunger is a survival game mechanic where the overarching goal of play is self-maintenance. It works fine in games like Minecraft (Survival Mode), Day-Z, and Don't Starve because it creates a sense of urgency and excitement that can lead to players searching dangerous areas for food. In other words, "hunger" is a focal point and that is what makes it interesting. Purposely turning it into a sub-layer ... where the hunger mechanic itself is more of an afterthought, and where players are more concerned about inventory space, what a waste that would be, IMO. There is no sense of urgency when you can buy stacks of food/drink from an NPC and set them to auto-consume. That sounds like tedious game design and anybody who has experience with a legitimate hunger mechanic (from a survival game) would be shaking their head in disappointment.
oneADseven said:Tanix said:While some of the suggestions are interesting by some on making this complex (oneADseven), I think that it turns a sub feature into a focal point, which take away from the over all concept of the RPG development (ie making it more a surivival focus style). Aside from that, food buffs I tend to see as "arcade" style game play, "power up" focuses to enchance combat and action play, not an RPG based focus of play. Making everything a "bonus" detracts from the concept of player managaement and turns the game into a sequence of seeking bonuses to do even better, not manage a character in a world with some form of practical realism.
My suggestion is to make food consumption optional and for it to provide some sort of temporary/situational effect when consumed. Your suggestion is to make food consumption required to function normally. I'm not really following your logic here because the latter is clearly more of a "focal point" in gameplay. (Hunger is a stat in Minecraft Survival Mode.) You then go on to use trigger words like "arcade" "power up" "bonus" and "action play" -- holy batman, we're just talking about drinking orange juice and eating kabobs here. I think your terminology is probably a little disingenuous, to say the least. We aren't talking about getting extra lives or mech suits in Contra 3, flying capes and giant shoes in Mario 3, or the "pizza time" invulnerability buff from TMNT: The Arcade Game. We're talking about an increase to a stat, or a resist, or acclimation, or a type of regen. The reality is that allowing food to do this is nothing more than a sub-layer -- there are multiple ways to increase those stats in-game and food/drink is one of them. It's not a focal point because it isn't required to survive. It's one of many optional sub-layers that players can choose to take part in or ignore it and go on their merry way.
An interesting observation I have here is that you're implying that the hunger mechanic wouldn't be a focal point. If you're tying a mechanic into "survival" -- as in, you need to do this to not die, it should be a focal point. Unfortunately, it sounds like it was more closely aligned with what Eppe was suggesting. A set it and forget it "sub-layer" that has a minor impact on being able to play inventory tetris. It doesn't sound challenging and it doesn't sound immersive. It sounds like an extremely basic "problem" that can be countered by an extremely accessible "solution" -- carry a stack of food/drink in your inventory (that can be purchased from a convenient neighborhood NPC) and remember to replenish it after X amount of hours/days. It sounds boring and thoughtless. Hunger is a survival game mechanic where the overarching goal of play is self-maintenance. It works fine in games like Minecraft (Survival Mode), Day-Z, and Don't Starve because it creates a sense of urgency and excitement that can lead to players searching dangerous areas for food. In other words, "hunger" is a focal point and that is what makes it interesting. Purposely turning it into a sub-layer ... where the hunger mechanic itself is more of an afterthought, and where players are more concerned about inventory space, what a waste that would be, IMO. There is no sense of urgency when you can buy stacks of food/drink from an NPC and set them to auto-consume. That sounds like tedious game design and anybody who has experience with a legitimate hunger mechanic (from a survival game) would be shaking their head in disappointment.
Again, food as a buff is not an RPG concept, it is more of an arcade one. So I am against these types of features due to their origin and nature. I honestly think that one of the downfalls of modern gaming is the need to "reward" the player for simply existing. Food buffs I see more as cheap gimmicks. It is esentially giving spells to everyone for just eating/drinking.
As for food as a surivival thing, the point is you are then making food a primary focus of play (in an RPG, the point is adventure, exploration, developing the character in the world and defeating the obstacles, not focusing on eating/drinking which is what a survival genre is focused on "surviving"). If a player does not eat in your system, they die (game over). This makes food/water a primary focus and concern in play. My point was that the system should be a sub layer, not a mandatory means in terms of penalty. Food/Water is required to be at a "normal" state. If a player runs out, after a time when they start to get hungry they begin to not regen health (food), mana (water). The player can continue to play in a limited capacity, but the "game" doesn't end as it would in a surivial game.
Survival games have different focus, they are not role playing games, the entire point is existing in the world first and foremost. Making an RPG focus on this, while interesting is counter productive to the over all concept of an RPG. It is better suited for a survival game and its design.
Tanix said:As for food as a surivival thing, the point is you are then making food a primary focus of play (in an RPG, the point is adventure, exploration, developing the character in the world and defeating the obstacles, not focusing on eating/drinking which is what a survival genre is focused on "surviving"). If a player does not eat in your system, they die (game over). This makes food/water a primary focus and concern in play. My point was that the system should be a sub layer, not a mandatory means in terms of penalty. Food/Water is required to be at a "normal" state. If a player runs out, after a time when they start to get hungry they begin to not regen health (food), mana (water). The player can continue to play in a limited capacity, but the "game" doesn't end as it would in a surivial game.
I'm not sure what system you're talking about. I have been pretty consistent in saying that food/drink should be optional. I have never suggested that players should die from hunger. My stance is predicated around the idea of food being considered an optional sub-layer of play. You are suggesting that food/water should be required to function normally, which is far closer to being a focal point or primary focus and concern in play than anything I have suggested.
@Tanix and Raidil You both raise very good points. And thank you for speaking from an mmoRPG perspective :)
Anyway, food/water being only ‘optional’ for immersive gameplay is a terrible, terrible idea.
#communitymatters
oneADseven said:Tanix said:As for food as a surivival thing, the point is you are then making food a primary focus of play (in an RPG, the point is adventure, exploration, developing the character in the world and defeating the obstacles, not focusing on eating/drinking which is what a survival genre is focused on "surviving"). If a player does not eat in your system, they die (game over). This makes food/water a primary focus and concern in play. My point was that the system should be a sub layer, not a mandatory means in terms of penalty. Food/Water is required to be at a "normal" state. If a player runs out, after a time when they start to get hungry they begin to not regen health (food), mana (water). The player can continue to play in a limited capacity, but the "game" doesn't end as it would in a surivial game.
I'm not sure what system you're talking about. I have been pretty consistent in saying that food/drink should be optional. I have never suggested that players should die from hunger. My stance is predicated around the idea of food being considered an optional sub-layer of play. You are suggesting that food/water should be required to function normally, which is far closer to being a focal point or primary focus and concern in play than anything I have suggested.
Ok I was thinking of your early comments about food requirements, not your recent discussion then. As for that, a food buff is nothing more than a spell anyone can use and so it then conflicts with the idea of classes having individual merit and need in groups. Also, as I said the concept of a "food buff" is very arcadish in nature and not a concept of managing a role in a game. The food buff is optional, which means the player can completely ignore it and be at 100% functionality, it is a "power up", a "bonus", etc...
My position puts food as something that needs to be managed, but... because it is not an "absolute" penalty, it does not "drive" game play (ie the game can not go on without it). For instance, if a group runs out of food in a dungeon, plays for a period of time and enters a hunger/thrist state, it is then their play wil begin to deminish, but they will still be functional to some extent (ie an spell could be used on them that has mana regen or items could have such, but their base regen would be stopped). So they can still function, but at a very inefficent level. That is what I mean by it being a sub layer, but not a "focal" as for instance a survival game makes food/water.
Tanix said:Ok I was thinking of your early comments about food requirements, not your recent discussion then. As for that, a food buff is nothing more than a spell anyone can use and so it then conflicts with the idea of classes having individual merit and need in groups.
What early comment? The only one I can think of is where I suggested that food being viewed as a "requirement" would be more of an emergent social construct (your fellow players may expect you to have it) than an element of tedious game design. In other words, it wouldn't be a true "requirement" as imposed by the game. Depending on what you're doing, and who you are grouped with, it might be viewed as an expected standard of play, but that is all dependent on player discretion. As far as food being nothing more than a spell anyone can use, and so it then conflicts with the idea of classes having individual merit and need in groups ... this isn't really accurate. If players can equip gear that provides stats then that would accomplish the same thing. If anything, food buffs provide value to the provisioner class. It's not an adventuring class but it's still a role in the game that should matter. They should provide something of value that is unique to their trade and not in direct competition from NPC's. Imagine if players could hire druids/warriors to adventure with. That would create conflict. Provisioners being able to offer food buffs doesn't conflict with anything, they are just adding a sub-layer to gameplay ... and the amazing by-product of allowing that to happen is that it increases the value and relevance of content across the board. I am not a fan of the term "trash mobs" in an MMO and that's exactly what you get when mobs drop trash. If we want meaningful mobs then they should have meaningful drops and the provisioner class provides an outlet for that to happen.
Tanix said:Also, as I said the concept of a "food buff" is very arcadish in nature and not a concept of managing a role in a game. The food buff is optional, which means the player can completely ignore it and be at 100% functionality, it is a "power up", a "bonus", etc...
Managing resources would certainly qualify as managing a role in the game. I just prefer that the process is more complex. Rather than being able to purchase food/drink from NPC vendors, I think all food/drink should originate from the world itself. I don't like the idea of food/drink being something that players automatically consume. I would rather see consumables be a cherished resource that players have to manage tactfully than a necessary resource that simply needs to be stockpiled. That is the primary difference here. When I think of "managing a role" it should include player involvement and decision making. Inventory tetris is probably the least interesting form of player involvement and decision making that I can think of when it comes to managing food/drink as a resource, especially when the resource is available for purchase from NPC's. Players should have to craft their own food or purchase it from other players. Participating in the economy (buying/selling from/to other players) would qualify as a tradesmen role. It has meaning in a game like this where a player-driven economy is key.
Tanix said:My position puts food as something that needs to be managed, but... because it is not an "absolute" penalty, it does not "drive" game play (ie the game can not go on without it). For instance, if a group runs out of food in a dungeon, plays for a period of time and enters a hunger/thrist state, it is then their play wil begin to deminish, but they will still be functional to some extent (ie an spell could be used on them that has mana regen or items could have such, but their base regen would be stopped). So they can still function, but at a very inefficent level. That is what I mean by it being a sub layer, but not a "focal" as for instance a survival game makes food/water.
My position also puts food as something that needs to be managed. Maintaining food/drink wouldn't be "absolutely" necessary because it wouldn't be driven by an imposed game mechanic. Instead, the consumption of food/drink would be something that players would manage themselves. There would be times where using it would be beneficial, times where it wouldn't be beneficial, and times where it would be viewed as "expected" as determined by other players. Players would be able to function without food/drink but it would be at decreased efficiency of what would otherwise be possible. There would also be a large variety of food/drink available which means that players would need to decide what would be most helpful considering where they are, who they are grouped with, what items they have equipped, what buffs are available, and what enemies they are fighting. An auto-consume function could never account for all of these factors which is why it's important that consumption is managed carefully by the player.
We can use trigger words like "arcade game" and "power-up bonus" but that's really twisting the narrative. You previously mentioned that if you had to choose between food giving buffs or not having food at all, you would rather not see food at all. For someone like me, who views food as a sub-layer of gameplay, or a leg of potential power and progression, the idea of removing it from the equation would be considered a "cheat." That would only create a situation where you have one less thing to purchase, carry, and manage. I prefer depth and complexity when it comes to gameplay or character management. Most important of all, though, I also appreciate having a player-driven economy. If food/drink ends up being a common commodity that can be purchased from NPC's then an entire leg of gameplay that could have otherwise been interesting and flavorful would be boring and bland. All three spheres of content would suffer because the game would be trying to emulate this "hunger" mechanic that belongs in survival games and doing a piss-poor job at it. If hunger/thirst are going to be game mechanics then they should be meaningful ... not something easily overcome by visiting any merchant in the game that sells stale bread and water.
Oneadseven I think auto consume can fit it it was done like eq u could force eat to change the food u want to use and what ever food is closes to 1st use spot typically bag one upper space as eq. I do reference eq some just do to the easy of use of food. I think panthon needs a step up from it in with hunger that grows with to well help keep this craft valid and to help economy..
And with the new salvage skill other trades will keep in use to as I see that taking out of the economy they spare other loot drops and what not. I can even see so nice magic sword drop needing to be broken down to make a crafted nicer sword.. ect
Tigersin said:I will enjoy crafting high level food to sell to players before their raids!
..or, if there are no food buffs, I guess I'll enjoy something else. Blacksmithing maybe.
Are we talking about whether making food should be part of the crafting system?[/blockquote
No on hunger. food will be it's already part of the provisioner trade
Alright, good. So in the early and mid levels of the trade, for what will the food be used? Will early and mid-level food stuffs provide buffs? Can they be sold to players as well? Will anyone want them?
I'm just getting at the point that food buffs should come from crafters and not NPCs and that they should be optional and available to the players who want that edge. Casual or relaxed players at level 20 shouldn't feel they must have food on them but a speed-leveling or min/max gamer should have the option to purchase the food with buffs. :) So that's what side of the fence I'm on.
Well most people talk about immersion but then dont want food to be at all realistic. Then again its a game right so i would be comfortable with some where in what i feel to be a middle ground, your character should have some intrinsic value for food. Food should be necessary for me to have. I should have to travel back to town to get more . The player made food, summoned or otherwise, should be wanted by ppl and have value as well. However thats just my two cents on the matter