Yet Another "Die From Old Age" Thread

[Rathlord]

I really do think this is a great idea, and in the devs case with them trying to make things harder, this is a story of How You Died. Everyone dies, and in all reality, a zombie apocalypse if done right, is pretty easy to survive. The main reason someone would die irl is because of their stupid mistakes, and well, that's whats happening right now. Also, dieing of old age is just as good an answer towards the story of how you died, you still died in the end.

 

 

The (unspoken) context is: "Zombie Apocalypse: This is how you died" EG you died because of the zombie apocalypse. Devs have expressed many times that this is not meant to be a "dying of old age" simulator.

[Nightmaster]

 

I really do think this is a great idea, and in the devs case with them trying to make things harder, this is a story of How You Died. Everyone dies, and in all reality, a zombie apocalypse if done right, is pretty easy to survive. The main reason someone would die irl is because of their stupid mistakes, and well, that's whats happening right now. Also, dieing of old age is just as good an answer towards the story of how you died, you still died in the end.

 

 

The (unspoken) context is: "Zombie Apocalypse: This is how you died" EG you died because of the zombie apocalypse. Devs have expressed many times that this is not meant to be a "dying of old age" simulator.

 

 

 

I really do think this is a great idea, and in the devs case with them trying to make things harder, this is a story of How You Died. Everyone dies, and in all reality, a zombie apocalypse if done right, is pretty easy to survive. The main reason someone would die irl is because of their stupid mistakes, and well, that's whats happening right now. Also, dieing of old age is just as good an answer towards the story of how you died, you still died in the end.

 

 

The (unspoken) context is: "Zombie Apocalypse: This is how you died" EG you died because of the zombie apocalypse. Devs have expressed many times that this is not meant to be a "dying of old age" simulator.

 

 

Well... since the devs are not (in my humble guess) going to implement a "Deus Ex Machina" event that kill the player death by old age must be considered.

 

And before you say that death by old age is another "Deus Ex Machina" event remember that everyone dies of old age... with our current technology is a unavoidable fact.

[The Good Noob]

 

I really do think this is a great idea, and in the devs case with them trying to make things harder, this is a story of How You Died. Everyone dies, and in all reality, a zombie apocalypse if done right, is pretty easy to survive. The main reason someone would die irl is because of their stupid mistakes, and well, that's whats happening right now. Also, dieing of old age is just as good an answer towards the story of how you died, you still died in the end.

 

 

The (unspoken) context is: "Zombie Apocalypse: This is how you died" EG you died because of the zombie apocalypse. Devs have expressed many times that this is not meant to be a "dying of old age" simulator.

 

Well, it doesnt meant either they cant make some improvements in the way their customers would like to be the product. The "dying of old age" simulator should eventually come too boring for the players, but the "Zombie Apocalypse: This is hoy you died too often and too soon" shouldnt be the rule either, if you can see what i mean.

[Rathlord]

 

 

I really do think this is a great idea, and in the devs case with them trying to make things harder, this is a story of How You Died. Everyone dies, and in all reality, a zombie apocalypse if done right, is pretty easy to survive. The main reason someone would die irl is because of their stupid mistakes, and well, that's whats happening right now. Also, dieing of old age is just as good an answer towards the story of how you died, you still died in the end.

 

 

The (unspoken) context is: "Zombie Apocalypse: This is how you died" EG you died because of the zombie apocalypse. Devs have expressed many times that this is not meant to be a "dying of old age" simulator.

 

Well, it doesnt meant either they cant make some improvements in the way their customers would like to be the product. The "dying of old age" simulator should eventually come too boring for the players, but the "Zombie Apocalypse: This is hoy you died too often and too soon" shouldnt be the rule either, if you can see what i mean.

 

 

No, making the game unfun would not be fun. Luckily, I'm sure the devs are aware of that and don't need to be told it. That still doesn't prove in any way that they should add dying of old age to the game.

[BetaSpectre]

Old Age IMO isn't a bad idea if its only a slow decrease in stats that aren't used over time, without a established time limit. If diseases get placed in the game Old Age will more or less be what kills you, getting an incurable disease and wasting away as it is IRL with old age often times.

 

As for drying food +1 Beef Jerky, and stoof.

[Rathlord]

Old Age IMO isn't a bad idea if its only a slow decrease in stats that aren't used over time, without a established time limit. If diseases get placed in the game Old Age will more or less be what kills you, getting an incurable disease and wasting away as it is IRL with old age often times.

 

As for drying food +1 Beef Jerky, and stoof.

 

As has been mentioned before when this comes up, as far as I know no one has ever made it that long in the game. This would mean the devs taking time away from features that everyone can enjoy to implement a feature that is directly unfun (the only way to reasonably get there would be to spend hundreds of hours- of real time- fast forwarding the game [or cheating]) and that few (literal few, most likely) would ever get to use.

[The Good Noob]

 

Old Age IMO isn't a bad idea if its only a slow decrease in stats that aren't used over time, without a established time limit. If diseases get placed in the game Old Age will more or less be what kills you, getting an incurable disease and wasting away as it is IRL with old age often times.

 

As for drying food +1 Beef Jerky, and stoof.

 

As has been mentioned before when this comes up, as far as I know no one has ever made it that long in the game. This would mean the devs taking time away from features that everyone can enjoy to implement a feature that is directly unfun (the only way to reasonably get there would be to spend hundreds of hours- of real time- fast forwarding the game [or cheating]) and that few (literal few, most likely) would ever get to use.

 

The "dying of old age" is a hyperbole. The idea is about the general content that the gaming community are asking, this case is only an example. I agree with the idea of focus the Devs in other features that are more needed. The point is that there will be a time that they will have to balance betwen a "d o o a" simulator and the "dying to soon" simulator.

[Nightmaster]

The main point Rathlord is that as unlikely as it may sound, people will, after a lot of experience, achieve that millestone: surviving, without cheating, for many many years ingame.

 

Not touching the subject of dying from old age because of the "That is how you died" motto is a bad idea because the entire phrase can mean a lot of things.

 

Old age is simple another way to die.

[Livio Persemprio]

the point is that the devs aims to make the game balanced to be hard enough to make you thank just for the fact that you survived another day. they aim to make it so that it will be legendary to survive one year, something that almost no one will be capable of doing. putting time and effort into adding an aging process is pointless since they're working on operation "kill you before late game"

[Rathlord]

The main point Rathlord is that as unlikely as it may sound, people will, after a lot of experience, achieve that millestone: surviving, without cheating, for many many years ingame.

 

We're 3 years into development now and no one has come remotely close. Not to be rude, but your main point is a bad one. Did you even read my last post? TIS isn't going to develop features that are both against the entire idea of the game and that wouldn't be enjoyed by any significant portion of the playerbase.

 

Surviving 50 years in game would take approximately 19,000 minutes of gameplay (assuming you're playing on the fastest possible game setting), or 316 consecutive hours of gameplay on one file. And, while there are some people who have reached that amount of hours played before, even the people with the most hours played don't come close to having that amount of time in one save file.

 

If you think "This is how you died" means 'lel, everyone dies eventually guys!11!!!' then you're severely misinterpreting the entire concept of Project Zomboid.

[Nightmaster]

No, I have read it and I understand it quite well.

 

The fact is that unless the devs put a "Deus-Ex Machina" situation ingame that kills the player, with good planning and skill on the part of the player its is possible to survive for years.

 

I have made once the math and in 2 months one can play a entire year (playing for 6+ hours a day every day) quite easy and without cheating using 1 hour days. That means that in a single year one can survive ingame for 6 whole years.

 

That need dedication? Yes for sure it does but is feasible.

 

I havent done this yet because I dont have that much time to play anything (PZ or not) and because I dont have that good of planning and skill.

 

Now you can say that dying of old age is a Deus-Ex Machina situation but then again I dont know anyone that dont die of old age in RL.

[EnigmaGrey]

So you'd still have to play a single game for serveral years in real-time before aging would even be a factor . . . And then just arbitrarily kill you after a year plus of investment in the game.

[Kajin]

I wouldn't mind death from old age if it was a character trait you could select at the start. Less strength less endurance slower healing and a percentage chance to die of a heart attack.

But characters GETTING old? No.

[Nightmaster]

So you'd still have to play a single game for serveral years in real-time before aging would even be a factor . . . And then just arbitrarily kill you after a year plus of investment in the game.

Actually that math of mine is based on the 1 hour day cycle, with play time in the 6 hours mark. If you play with a 30 minutes cycle one year of play will mean 12 years ingame. If one makes a 8 hours play mark he could in a single month play for 240-480 days ingame (dependind on the 30-60 minutes day cycle).

 

Since the player age at the start of the game is 27 in 2 years of play one can have a 49 years old character (57 if you play for 8 hours a day) if he/she uses a 30 minutes day cycle. Of course that is not enough for a healthy person to die of old age.

 

The point is not on the Old Age ending and more on the fact that unless you find a solution to players high skill/patience, the game becomes a eternal grinding without an end.

[Kajin]

To the player that actually manages to do that:

Shine on you crazy bastard. Shine on.

[MyTJ]

Conclusion : Although I would prefer a simple old age random death (average + 2 standard deviation), I'm ok with none... I can always stop playing a game and start a new one if I feel I should be dead of old age.

 

I had some though on the subject and made a brief search to see if my suggestion would be repetitive, guess so.

 

My concerns arose while playing very easy sandbox setting (while using my patented OLT : OP Looting Technique, edit : I'm pretty sure I suggested an end to that with an hardcap based on strength). By 1,5 months into the game, I had several crates of perisheable food, water, medical supply and tens of crates of fuel (propane, charcoal and gas).  The list could go on...

 

Now, what I see in the near future is playing for brief periods (foraging, fishing, trapping, farming and the occasionnal looting as loot is set to respawn every two months), followed by periods on speed ++++ so that I can actually see the result of farming (and allowing zone respawn for foraging, fishing and loot, as well as allowing "ticks" for trapping).

 

It got me thinking that probably it would be endless, unless I was going to die of old age.  Thus my search and this post.

 

I understand that this is (edit) not a trivial matter, that to make a good "dying of old age simulator", the dev would need to have a average life expectancy with two standard deviations for randomness, then modifying it with the (infinite) factors that the community would raise (malnutrition, overexertion, lack of exertion, alchoolism, diseases ...).  Thus, I find Rathlord comment, that it would take time from the dev for fun features (cars, NPC) for unfun feature (for most people, myself not included) that require tedious grind, spot-on (for most people).

 

P.S.: In case anyone need bashing on a player that plays casualy-ish : (1) I have very limited time with my work and all other obligations, (2) I find that low challenge is the lesser of two evil against starting over and over and ... (especially in context of 1).  That being said, I won't comment further any line of conversion on this PS, and refrain from reporting (as I would be in some sort of conflict of interest).

[Rathlord]

Tell you what, when one of you finds me a player that has demonstrably made it 50+ years in game without cheating and without idiotic easy sandbox options (not the way the game is meant to be played, and TIS has no need to balance around Sandbox) I'll consider changing my position on this issue. But the fact of the matter is, no one will because it would be boring, tedious, and unfun. Forgive me if I don't hold my breath, though, because even if they started today they wouldn't be done for another couple of years of real time.

 

But worse than all of that, it would mean the game has utterly failed at its goal. Again, anyone who thinks dying of old age falls into the game's vision has directly and deliberately missed the actual meaning of "This is how you died."

 

And you're also  missing the fact that NPCs will be in the game at one point. Now, they aren't just going to be all on a constant murder spree, but the fact of the matter is eventually something will cost you your life, whether it's betrayal from within your group or an attack from without, even if the zombies don't get you.

[Blasted_Taco]

Ok i just read the whole thing and i agree with what Rathlord (someone actually surviving the boredom of +2 years).

 

But i want to ask something aside from all these points of view and i didnt see anyone mention it here.

 

How in the flying fuck do people want to die of old age? You think that old age is some sort of sickness that kills you just like that?

 

I mean jesus, if you guys want to die of old age, might as well just put cancer into the game as well and you can get cancer while eating BBQ.

 

You know what? Even better, lets put some random heart attacks while we are it, that way if you sprint too much and you are eating a lot of fats foods you will randomly die!

Isn't that great?

 

Want some facts? 

"Since 1900, life expectancy in the United States has dramatically increased, and the principal causes of death have changed. At the beginning of the 20th century, many Americans died young. Most did not live past the age of 65"

 

So a lot of players get characters along the age of 25-29, you want to tell me that one motherfucker is going to play around 40 years IN-GAME to die of old age? Someone seriously thinks that someone is going to live 40 years? Most people quit around the first year mane.

 

So people want their characters to die to some random stroke, cancer, heart disease?

 

I seriously don't understand how people want that, is like the guy who suggested to be able to be strike down by lighting at random just cause, that is just artificial difficulty tier. 

[Zorak]

IMO its a waste of time. no one or 0,001% of players will be able to reach that point.

[Nightmaster]

Rathlord, your only argument is that no one has made it yet and no one will.

 

You are missing the fact that the fun of the game is the challenge of surviving as long as you can. Even when NPCs and other features planned by the devs are added to the final game there will be people that will try to beat the game, to survive despiste all odds and for the longest time possible. In fact most (75%+) of the gamers will try that.

 

There will be a moment that the player will get so skilled in the game that he will be able to survive for as much time as he wish. At that point the game becomes boring indeed but since, as you said, the point of the game is to die because of the zombie apocalypse a solution must be found to this problem.

 

The only possible way to prevent players from giving up on the game is to add an ending of sorts that dont include a direct death at the hands of zombies, NPCs, starvation, dehydratation or disease. That's where "Death by Old Age" comes into play.

 

That ending could be triggered after a set amount of ingame time elapse, like 5-10 years. If the player is still alive when he achieve that millestone a special ending will unfold in which the screen fades to black and like in the begining of the game a serie of text lines are displayed, telling the player how after so many years of surviving he finally succumbed to the worst of foes: Time itself. That he is likely the only living human on Earth and that in his death bed he remembers all the friends, enemies and hardships he faced just to stay alive and then he fades into a dream where he meet everyone and the game ends... Okay, that may not sound good text but I am not a writer so forgive me ok?

[Teesee]

I won't repeat EG's,Blasted_Taco's or Rathlord's arguments. I see no point in putting time in a feature that will benefit less than 1% of the players, and completely misses the game's point. Apart from records-fanatics, I don't see many people willing to spend more than an actual year on the same save. A neat feature would be an automated data-retrieval for TIS after a player dies, in order to get some interesting statistics. I'd bet that a year after the game is released, 99% of the players using the Survival mode wouldn't make it past one in-game year.

 

I'd be ok with very very very late game easter eggs, though. And an achievement to brag about.

[Rathlord]

Rathlord, your only argument is that no one has made it yet and no one will.

Only if you're illiterate. If you're not going to read people's posts, don't bother to reply. If you want to disagree, that's fine, but be respectful enough to actually debate what I'm saying rather than just tell me I'm saying one thing (which I'm not).

[Blasted_Taco]

Rathlord, your only argument is that no one has made it yet and no one will.

 

You are missing the fact that the fun of the game is the challenge of surviving as long as you can. Even when NPCs and other features planned by the devs are added to the final game there will be people that will try to beat the game, to survive despiste all odds and for the longest time possible. In fact most (75%+) of the gamers will try that.

 

There will be a moment that the player will get so skilled in the game that he will be able to survive for as much time as he wish. At that point the game becomes boring indeed but since, as you said, the point of the game is to die because of the zombie apocalypse a solution must be found to this problem.

 

The only possible way to prevent players from giving up on the game is to add an ending of sorts that dont include a direct death at the hands of zombies, NPCs, starvation, dehydratation or disease. That's where "Death by Old Age" comes into play.

 

That ending could be triggered after a set amount of ingame time elapse, like 5-10 years. If the player is still alive when he achieve that millestone a special ending will unfold in which the screen fades to black and like in the begining of the game a serie of text lines are displayed, telling the player how after so many years of surviving he finally succumbed to the worst of foes: Time itself. That he is likely the only living human on Earth and that in his death bed he remembers all the friends, enemies and hardships he faced just to stay alive and then he fades into a dream where he meet everyone and the game ends... Okay, that may not sound good text but I am not a writer so forgive me ok?

 

Most players suck at the game when it comes down to survival mode, we are talking about a feature that no one will see or try to see because of boredom.

 

What you want to do is put an artificial ending to the game so you can feel "oh man i won this game", that shit aint going fly in this game EVER, the devs themselves said so. 

 

Like i said before, you want that after 2 years in-game, your character gets ultra cancer and is going to die of "old age", why do you want to limit the playtime of a player? If he wants to survive for +5 years, let him do it, hell if you survived to +5 years i am sure that by that point you already have a community running or some shit like that (and no one is going to bother going past 2 years i assure you, not even half of the PZ community of steam as it stands out right now has passed the first year since build 32).

 

All of that just doesn't make sense, let the player play as long as he wants, the game will never have an ending.

[MyTJ]

Why does quote do not work... strange, I'll have to read about it on the help forum.

 

Anyway, @ Blasted_Taco : I feel that your argument meets mine... you can always quit the game at anytime you like.  I especialy like the touch where you state "why do you want to limit the playtime of a player?"

[Benson]

 

the point of the game is to die because of the zombie apocalypse a solution must be found to this problem.

"Metal Gear Solid" had a nice aging method: There was a Boss Enemy, called "the end" who could die from old age when you did not play the game for a longer time.

Every loading of the savegame included a check of the internal clock of the operating system and the timestamp from the last save. Too many weeks in between and the boss was gone forever.

At least in theory, PZ could use such a method to do some evil maths.

Like recalculation of the zombie population, when loading a savegame.

....Speaking about more and more Zombies after each day passing by in real time.

Another cool Idea about this, is that it would be possible to simulate a PZ Singleplayer Game in realtime.

If a savegame loads, it could synch to the internal clock of your OS. Say you did not play for 3 days, and load your game, erosion and zombie population could be adjusted to 3 days in the future ingame.

Maybe this aspect is going too progressive, but i just wanted to share this idea.