Perks and Choices

[Roland]

A lot has been written of late about the desire for a system where you gain advantages in an action by practicing that action. Those who are detractors of the Perk system say that it is flawed because by killing zombies they can magically be better at planting and harvesting corn. They claim that there is a huge disconnect between where they spend their points and the actions they did to gain those points.

 

So........no.

 

 

The new perk system is an open and free system that allows people the choice to play the game however they wish. If someone doesn't care about where points come from or how they are spent they can play it that way.

 

If someone cares very much about where points come from and how they are spent, the good news is they can choose to play the game that way as well.

 

For example:

 

We earn xp from farming. There is a farming perk. I could grind farming at the exclusion of all else until I earned a point that came purely from farming and then pend that point to improve farming.

 

We earn xp from mining. I could do the same as I outlined above.

 

Now this is a very purist and probably very boring way for most people but for those who have been going on and on and on about how much they supposedly love this style of play....it is there for them if they choose to take it. And why wouldn't they since they talk and talk about how much they love it....

 

But there is an even less extreme way that those who say they like to learn by doing could do just that and here is how:

 

The player could play the game doing all sorts of activities but probably (realistically) getting most of their points from killing zombies. Now lets say that this player wanted to be able to craft seeds and so wanted to put a point into the farming perk but they had not yet done any farming. Well, that player could then do some farming. Not enough to earn a complete point by solely farming but enough to feel that they had gained some experience and learning. THEN, they could spend the point on farming.

 

Now lets say that the player wanted to improve their accuracy on headshots but knew that most of their kills had been by melee. Well, that player could then decide to practice headshots by killing the zombies by ranged attacks for the rest of that day and maybe the next to really put some headshot practice in. THEN, the player could spend that point on improving headshots. In this case most of another perk point would even have been earned purely by doing that action.

 

In reviewing all the perks there is not a single perk that a player could not choose to practice before spending the point on that actions to improve it. And in the vast majority of the perks the actual action used to practice actually does earn xp which would actually contribute to the point that would be spent for that action.

 

So why wouldn't a player play this way?

 

1) They actually care more about min/maxing and endgame rushing than they care about making sure skill progression matches the actions aligned with that skill.

2) They really don't care at all about learning by doing and are just fine with perk points earned not aligning with perk points spent.

3) They didn't realize they had such freedom to play the game the way the really wanted to all along (but now they do after reading this)

4) They don't like choices like these and want the game structure to force them to play the way they say they like to play.

 

Maybe somone who says they like to learn by doing can explain why they wouldn't play that way given the fact that the game allows for it if they will just choose to do what they want.

 

I like dead is dead and I sometimes choose to play that way. Whether the devs ever put a mode in that forces it or not I will play dead is dead whenever the mood strikes me because that is what I want. I've already decided to give what I've described a try although I am not one who has proclaimed learning by doing as the pinnacle of game design.

[Tin]

Let the chips fall where they may.

If this is how TFP want their game to be, then so be it. The 'concept', while being very loose in the games description, is still the same.

Perks, Progression, Leveling, and how they are used and applied, are just different aspects of the RPG portion of the game.

I don't see purchasing 'Perks' all that different then like in D&D. When you level you can choose extra traits and proficiency. Maybe not as in depth as D&D, but the similar.

 

I'm in it to see what TFP "End Vision" is ultimately, even with any suggestions I or others make here or there. Once their vision starts to get a bit tarnished from over playing, which is naturally going to happen, then Ill start putting my own personal shine into it with my own preferences.

 

So Bring it FP!

Show me what you got in store for me next!

I'm ready and waiting...

[Guppycur]

I don't like the type of hard Jax does (grind)...

 

...but I do like difficult. I don't want perks for cement mixing when all I did was kill zombies.

 

(Wow, that first sentence is a conentational doozy!)

[warmer]

Roland, your logic is pretty damn flawless from where I am seeing.

 

Not much more to add other than, there is no argument left if the option to play as you wish is what you are after.

[Numberz]

Sure, the logic is fine but being forced to ... I mean choose to... opt for some perks as opposed to others when all are available just feels ... I dunno... unsatisfying.

 

Sorry, just doesn’t feel right for me to coerce myself into playing that way.

[Roland]

I don't like the type of hard Jax does (grind)...

 

...but I do like difficult. I don't want perks for cement mixing when all I did was kill zombies.

 

(Wow, that first sentence is a conentational doozy!)

 

The intelligence perks that unlock recipes like the forge, workbench, cement mixer, etc are problematic for this playstyle. The only thing I can think of is that a person could only spend the perk point after having found a working workstation in the world and using it to craft some items before being able to build their own. Slightly easier would be to allow for broken workstations to count since you could study its design and then rebuild it yourself after spending the perk point.

[Scyris]

I dunno, I feel at least the weapon related skills should get better by doing only, a17 feels like its just overly simplifying it. Fallout 4 uses the exact same sort of system and it made the game feel rather hollow to me. I kinda like how a16 does it, you want those higher blade weapons skills/perks? gotta use it to lv it, though you could spend points, but thats kinda silly when you can earn by doing.

 

What I heard early about a17 made it sound like it was going to be like a elder scrolls game, everything raises by doing, and once you gain enough exp to level you can choose a perk, this includes stat points in the ones before skyrim overly simplfied it. You had to get the skill to certan levels before the perks become avail.

 

Then again I just wish a17 would come out already, so we can all stop the speculation and actually try it for ourselves. I just hope the game never gets too realistic, for example I couldn't stand project zomboid due to the stupidly insane levels of micromanagement you need to do for your char. Needless to say I refunded it, because the char needed way to much management, so much so that it just wasn't any fun to play.

[Roland]

Sure, the logic is fine but being forced to ... I mean choose to... opt for some perks as opposed to others when all are available just feels ... I dunno... unsatisfying.

 

Sorry, just doesn’t feel right for me to coerce myself into playing that way.

 

Right. It's just a choice. More of a roleplaying style. And it's not that you are opting for some perks rather than others. It's that you are doing actions related to the perk you want before you spend the point so that the point feels more like it came from practicing that action. You aren't foregoing anything.

 

It's not the same as trying to simulate food spoilage by coercing yourself to throw away half your food every day.

 

It's for those who say that they derive the most pleasure from learning by doing. If that's how they really feel then there wouldn't even be anything coercive about it. They would gladly look for related actions to do before spending their perk point to help the game feel more in alignment with their sensibilities.

[SnowDog1942]

I learned Karate by painting a fence. Its all good.

[PiercedFromWithin]

People don't want to be "forced" to play games in a style different than what they want. They want the "freedom" to play as they like, when they like. But when they get that freedom they complain that the game doesn't give them anything to do. Everything feels aimless and just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. They don't want to have to "pretend" there's a reason to do it that way. That's a demand that simply can't be fully met.

 

This isn't much different, and once people figure out what gives the best bang-for-the-buck to develop your character/base the fastest, they'll complain about how they are forced to play that way, and they'll complain about anybody else they see doing it differently for doing it "wrong." It's just the way of things.

 

Leveling each ability by doing means doing the easiest, dullest variant of a task over and over is the quickest way to get good at it for when you need it. That's no fun, but then leveling by doing anything means you just do whatever gives the most reward until you are good at the things you need to get good at, and that's not very believable and leads to just as predictable gameplay. Basically, whatever we can't do is clearly the more fun way to do things. For some people playing the game in an "inefficient" way is unthinkable so unless a game can be perfectly balanced, rewarding, challenging, variable and exciting in every single way you'll always end up hitting that wall somewhere. For other people worrying about anything beyond the most basic level of "will I get anything valuable out of this task" is not very high on the priority list.

 

Expecting someone who naturally views the game as a puzzle to solve in the most efficient possible manner to impose arbitrary rules on themself just to make things seem a little more fair or immersive just isn't ever going to work. If that sort of thing was amusing to them they would do it anyway, and if it isn't then it won't make things any more fun. They need to be forced to do it differently, but then that will be awful because they're being forced to do stuff in a certain way. So you don't force them to do each different task and that will be awful because they're being forced to always do it the way that seems to work the fastest.

 

 

 

That's too many words to make a point, but people are always going to see the flaws or unbelievability in whatever system you use. They'll always be there, and they'll always get found, and then they'll always be the worst thing ever(for some people). Even if it is possible to roleplay around those flaws it really won't help people that get annoyed by them.

 

I guess on some level it makes sense to have XP/Ability gain be general and any task can apply to any skill as long as everything that you do can contribute to that gain. That way it's not really true to say you "have to" play a particular style to progress. On the other hand it also means an impossible balancing act to make everything progress at the same rate, and it will always be possible to dig your way to combat mastery.

 

To have at least some sort of categories like "physical stuff makes you better at physical stuff while brainy stuff makes you better at brainy stuff" seems like a good idea, but you still have to define those categories somewhere. And then you'll still always have things that really shouldn't improve each other unless you specialize it down to the point that it would be incredibly tedious to get good at more than a few things. Being able to do a basic level of every task is a good thing, but as long as you can improve your skill people will feel like they have to. And of course if that means doing something they find dull they'll complain.

 

I suppose you could try some sort of hybrid system where you gain from everything, and you can apply that gain to everything, but you'll have much slower progress if you are applying your brainy points to your physical skills for example. And there's surely some fatal problem with that method too(limited XP to earn being one immediate issue).

 

Any way that you do it there will always be some flaw in the balance, and then "min/max" type thinking will flock to it. And some of them will be unhappy about that.

 

 

I do sort of like the current way some skills gain by doing(running/chopping/bashing) while letting you boost them if you wish, while others require dedicating points(kind of simulates studying them). But with limited points it makes it feel silly to spend points on stuff you can get for "free" so nobody does. It's also hard if not impossible for that to work with a lot of the other skills and could lead to some silly ways people learn stuff(like standing on top of spikes eating aloe cream like candy to get better at using your armor and medicine). But I'm the type that will be pretty relaxed with however it works out and will play as I wish and only "grind skill" if absolutely necessary -- and who doesn't mind pretending there's a reason to do things now and then.

[Numberz]

Right. It's just a choice. More of a roleplaying style. And it's not that you are opting for some perks rather than others. It's that you are doing actions related to the perk you want before you spend the point so that the point feels more like it came from practicing that action. You aren't foregoing anything.

 

It's not the same as trying to simulate food spoilage by coercing yourself to throw away half your food every day.

 

It's for those who say that they derive the most pleasure from learning by doing. If that's how they really feel then there wouldn't even be anything coercive about it. They would gladly look for related actions to do before spending their perk point to help the game feel more in alignment with their sensibilities.

 

So, I’ve got my eye on a knife perk and a cooking perk. Today I’ll go out and kill zombies with just my knife and collect goldenrod and chrysanthemums along the way to brew tea later on so I can feel good about spending those points at the end of the day on those two perks.

 

Sorry but this just feels forced and unnatural to me. I don’t think players plan their activities this way and it isn’t a play style that is attractive to me.

 

Also, with this play style you are asking the player to turn a blind eye to other perks that might be better choices at the time and that impacts immersion in my opinion.

[Viktoriusiii]

I just wanna say that your logic is very flawed.

This is a downgrade in all aspects.

Before, it was a hybrid, meaning get better by doing stuff and if u want get better at what u want with xp.

 

Think if skyrim had done that... instead of getting better over time, they now gave skillpoints... outrage!

 

Look, if TFPs want this downgrade, its their system. But if the player has to choose if he wanrs to be immersed or have a benefit for survival, its not immersive anymore. Freedom should only ever exist WITHIN the world (what do i do next, how to defend myselfff)

NEVER should the player have to descide what gamerules he plays by (after the menu). Because that mean EVERY fan of the survival aspect of the game (or as you so 'lovingly' call them:min/maxers) are forced to either make the game harder for themselves (not enjoying survival anymore) or ignore immersion to be the best they can within the world ruleset.

 

To put it simple: you are removing survival in favour of sandboxing and roleplaying.

Its you choice, but not one I recommend any other dev to emulate.

[LuckyStar]

@Roland,

 

I'm not sure why you bother with this stuff.

 

A [very small] group complains that the game isn't EXACTLY how THEY want it and everyone else is wrong and they and ONLY they have the right answer.

 

In the end it makes no difference what "logic" TFP used, this is the game mechanic they chose for THEIR game.

And it is a game. Let's remember that.

 

This isn't a law that everyone is against or voting for a leader of a country or some sociological paradigm that's going to ruin the lives of everyone who's against it.

This is an OPTIONAL recreation activity. If a small handful of people don't like it, they can move on.

 

Also,

 

I just wanna say that your logic is very flawed.

This is a downgrade in all aspects.

.

 

It's not a downgrade, it's a choice TFP made for a game mechanic they want in their game.

This is 7DTD and this is how it's played.

 

Sorry it's not to your liking but that doesn't make it wrong.

It's your opinion...... and it's one that TFP doesn't agree with.

[Viktoriusiii]

Its not a small portion and it is not an opinion.

From a gamedev point of view “xp and skillpoint“ have always been the boring, safe and cheap way of doing it.

It is standard and easy, but gameplay wise it is not an opinion.

“Freedom“ is just a buzzword.

Lets say it how it is:

“we found no way to balance it our way, so we implement a cheap and easy xp system“

 

But yes, it is their game.

 

You have the freedom in ET to make up your own story.

You have the freedom to use glitch x in game y.

 

OR to hit my point home:

Its not lazy gamedesign, its freedom.

(Homage to the infamous saying “its not a bug, its a feature“)

 

Done with tjis discussion. No new points are brought forth. Its their game and their choice to dumb it down. Good day.

[Gazz]

I remember when I had to harvest with a construction tool instead of the proper tool just to grind up some construction skill to buy the Next Important Perk. I did not feel particularly immersed.

That or upgrading random blocks just for the XP from an upgrade action is no less silly than what some complain about.

 

Of course some will only play the game as a puzzle to solve in the most efficient way. If that's their idea of fun then they are welcome to.

Most players just want to play the game and the perks they buy will largely reflect what they are doing. If you do a lot of climbing around you will likely end up with a few levels of Parkour to help with that while you may not buy any farming perks that you don't care about.

 

If all you want to do is dive into the XML data to calculate the Best Way To Play, go nuts. Just don't assume that everyone feels forced to do that.

[Viktoriusiii]

At least a new argument:

 

no. I didnt say it was immersive to farm stuff with a retarded tool. But that could have easily been patched. I'm not talking about the actual implementation, but the thoughtprocess behind it.

 

Upgrading random blocks costs you ressources and... wanna know something? If you are a apprentice as a blacksmith, you will do a LOT of stuff that youll have to reforge or throw away... Its called training. And if someone wants to train, why not? Now you can still do that, gain XP and level up your pistoldamage. YAY improvement. /sarcasm/

 

Its not about wanting to solve a puzzle. It is basic gamedesign:

Problem -> Solution.

If a game has no problems and any solution (or one solution of every difficulty (swimming on a lake;supereasy/drivingaround;easy/running around the zombies;medium/building a real fort of defense;hard) gives you the same reward and the same outcome (namely you survive) then there is no choice to be made.

 

And if the outcome of "do I go farming 24/7" and "do I go looting 24/7" and "do I mix it up" all end up with the same result (getting a specific perk leveled up) there is also no choice to be made. While one gives you crops and the other gives you other stuff, both give you roughly the same amount of reward)

 

 

 

I not once went into the xml files. I don't want to metagame. I want to play the game and find out INGAME what the optimal solution is for solving my problem.

 

I tell you my playstyle:

 

Before A17:

save every xp point for important perks that cant be leveled by doing it.

result: day 21 I still only had scavenging on 30, meaning I didnt have the best equipment, but I had good perks for lategame (which would have been missing if I spend all my points in scavenging early on)

after A17:

just spend everything in the best perk and be completly broken because TFPs dont balance for the extremes but for the average.

I have nothing to lose now when I spend my perks for the best stuff.

 

 

I.... I for the life of me can not see how anyone with a half clear mind cannot see that this REMOVES "freedom".

At least for the survival aspekt.

 

 

Think of skyrim. When you get your lvl 100 1h or sneak or magic (without exploiits), You are most likely lvl 50+ when you do.

Why? Because you may have healed your wounds with healing magic, you have bartered with shopkeepers, you have gained armor from beeing hit, you have lockpicked and so on and so forth. And this is if you generally only use 1h in combat.

 

Now imagine Skyrim where you get xp for all those actions instead of for explicit perks. Your 1h(sneak or magic whatever) is on level 100 in no time. You might not barter as good or pick the lock quite as efficient, but now instead of having to fight bears or sabertooth tigres, you have lvl 100 1h against wolves and mudcrabs.

 

THIS is what made Skyrim such a balanced game (in theory without exploits). You do all the ♥♥♥♥ that increases the level and therefor difficulty.

If you go in a town and only level barter and potionmaking, you might have a lot of gold and some great potions, but the direbears outside the city will rip you to shreds.

 

What you have done is the xp option. And this is why im so sad. Now your character doesn't grow over time because of what you do, but because of how much you have done something.

And... this is definatly my last post on the matter. I can see that some people are too blind and too stubborn to try and take a look.

 

 

Just to close this off:

I like your game TFPs. I really enjoyed my 800 hours of this game. You created a really nice world and a lot of things you did right.

But the skillpoint replacing the more immersive system is NOT the right way to go.

It is your game and if you think this is the best course of action, do it.

I'm sure most people will be too flashed by the new graphics to really mind these changes. But you WILL lose a part of your playerbase.

Maybe not instantly, but over time. As this has reformed the one nieche it has filled. (survival-voxel with a learn-by-doing skillprogression)

 

I have to say I personally didn't like Fallout 4... so maybe thats the problem, that you want it to be more like that... but... oh who knows...

 

I wish you all the best

[Kubikus]

Maybe somone who says they like to learn by doing can explain why they wouldn't play that way given the fact that the game allows for it if they will just choose to do what they want.

This is why:

 

The way I understand the mechanic is this: You do all kinds of things and that levels up your character and when you level up your character, you get perk points to spend. However, leveling up your character is an exponential function, right? You need more and more xp, aka do more and more to reach the next level. So earning that next skill point will become harder and harder. Early game, you pick up a rock, boom, level up. End(ish) game you have to fell a forest worth of trees, kill the zombiefied population of a medium size town, build a castle and farm enough potatoes to supply your local Mc Donalds for a year.

 

So if you decide to focus on combat in the early game, you will easily level up your corresponding skills. But if that gets boring and you shift your focus to farming or building, you will have a much harder time to level up those skills.

 

If, on the other hand, you have a learning-by-doing system, you still have exponential curves, but for every individual skill. So if you started some serious mining after 500 hours, you would still reach a pretty good level in a reasonable time. Late game with a perk system and you might need hours to level up even once.

 

Furthermore, if the number of perks you can get is limited, you might not be able to level up abilities at all in late game. If you reached max level without ever, say, using melee, you won't earn any skill points any more and even if you kill ten billion zombies, won't level up that skill ever.

 

So these are some purely logic based concerns one might have about a perk system.

 

 

Myself, I don't generally mind a perk system, but if I am supposed to bother myself with one, I want each and every perk I buy to make a meaningful difference, not just a minute increase of damage dealt or a bit of speed increase or some more health or stamina. I want to buy a perk and clearly notice a difference. Here are some examples:

 

- unlock power attacks

- unlock duel wielding

- unlock kicking, stomping, pushing

- unlock specific modifications slots for each weapon (let me select what kind of mod I want: Silencer, extended mag, faster reload, longer range, more damage, ...)

- certain dismemberment when a zombie is below a certain health

 

Recipes should never be unlocked by a perk, they should always be tied to experience (for example, unlock a better club-recipe after killing so-and-so many zombies with clubs, unlock better armor after killing so-and-so many with tools/melee weapons) or quests. I hope the new quest system will be half as brilliant as "I heard devs say". Such as, make a quest where you tell the player to a hub (like 0|0 or 8|9) and then make the engine select a proper building, have the player search the building for a recipe or kill a boss zombie or find a building highly fortified with bandits inside.

 

Sitting in a perk-menu to unlock 5% more damage for your melee weapon is uninteresting.

[toores]

If someone cares very much about where points come from and how they are spent, the good news is they can choose to play the game that way as well.

 

By that logic, none of the skill systems before it had any faults either. You could choose not to abuse them.

 

I have a suggestion: Let's remove XP from the game completely and open all skills up from the start. This way it's...

...open and free system that allows people the choice to play the game however they wish.

When I feel like I've earned to advance a skill, I just take it!

 

:D

Sometimes, Roland, you just know how to entertain people!

 

EDIT:

And what Kubikus said! +1

[Gamida]

A lot has been written of late about the desire for a system where you gain advantages in an action by practicing that action. Those who are detractors of the Perk system say that it is flawed because by killing zombies they can magically be better at planting and harvesting corn. They claim that there is a huge disconnect between where they spend their points and the actions they did to gain those points.

 

 

[More Reading]

 

 

I like dead is dead and I sometimes choose to play that way. Whether the devs ever put a mode in that forces it or not I will play dead is dead whenever the mood strikes me because that is what I want. I've already decided to give what I've described a try although I am not one who has proclaimed learning by doing as the pinnacle of game design.

 

I like to read to learn some new things. Maybe they could add books. Like for instance, to learn how to make a forge they could add a book to show you how to assembly one of those. The nice thing is you could make one for anything....a bow, a rifle, a workbench, etc.

I think a lot of people would like that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<devillaughing.gif>

[RestInPieces]

4) They don't like choices like these and want the game structure to force them to play the way they say they like to play.

 

Maybe somone who says they like to learn by doing can explain why they wouldn't play that way given the fact that the game allows for it if they will just choose to do what they want.

 

I will be brief because I've discussed this matter to death.

 

Replying to various people in this thread and speaking generally, a game IS a structure. Any game consists by rules in a theoritical level - only purely sandbox ones aren't. Rules like numerical heath, damage, durability etc. The thing is that "playstyle freedom" is irrelevant to these rules. Playstyle freedom involves many different rulesets, NOT loose, abstract rules.

 

That said, the perk system does not belong in this category. It belongs to the playstyle freedom aka "different rules". What belongs in this category of abstract game design is this:

It's not the same as trying to simulate food spoilage by coercing yourself to throw away half your food every day.

...and you are very much correct in saying that it's not the same. The above kind parades under "playstyle freedom" in many of the discussions, but what it really is, is plain old bad design.

 

Now as for the perk system, the reasons I would prefer a system like "learning something by working on it" are purely roleplaying reasons. To me, it's more realistic, more intuitive and I don't think the player will be forced to do an activity just to raise it, without a global skill hard cap that is. There is a reason that the "TES system" was a popular one. It helped in roleplaying instead of diminishing it.

 

The intelligence perks that unlock recipes like the forge, workbench, cement mixer, etc are problematic for this playstyle..

 

I think that they are problematic for any playstyle. Because they are essential. Like I suggested in another thread in great detail, they could just be tied to exploration, instead of character progression.

 

 

Finally, this system opens the way for an even more roleplaying-friendly system to take place than what we had before. And it also is kind of the middle ground, if you think about it. Raising the attributes themselves with activities, instead of raising specific skills with activities. For example a group of activities like mining/melee/etc, raising strength and unlocking higher tier strength perks, and then the player choosing where to spend his perk points he got by leveling. It doesn't have the absolute amount of freedom the A17 system does, but it has a fair amount of it, it won't feel silly to many players and makes absolute sense rp-wise. It would probably be tricky to balance and I don't know if TFP want to head that way but just saying.

[Hellevik]

Remember the time we had lots of books to find to learn to make things. that was a nice gameplay mecanic. the perk system is to big in A16 and wil be even biger in A17.

 

No wonder it is so many emty servers. you need to spend 20+ hours to get a decent carracter. not many peaple want to do that over and over again.

[KingSlayerGM]

So why wouldn't a player play this way?

 

1) They actually care more about min/maxing and endgame rushing than they care about making sure skill progression matches the actions aligned with that skill.

 

I fall under this category. I love to always be on top of things, I love to always be the best I can be in the game, or the strongest.

 

However, learning how to farm from killing zombies doesn't make sense at all. It never has and never will. No matter how many page-long posts you write Roland. (Same as painting bricks on a metal surface, and all other nonsense combinations of paint and blocks..)

 

I get your point: I can self impose the rules that I would like the game to have and actually get the same experience. Wrong, because my first priority is min maxing, which requires taking advantage of everything the game offers.

 

So the system appears to not be well designed because of the nonsense of improving something by doing something different. I would actually prefer the skill and perk system that Skyrim has. TFP are trying to reinvent the wheel here IMO..

[KingSlayerGM]

I just wanna say that your logic is very flawed.

This is a downgrade in all aspects.

Before, it was a hybrid, meaning get better by doing stuff and if u want get better at what u want with xp.

 

Think if skyrim had done that... instead of getting better over time, they now gave skillpoints... outrage!

 

Look, if TFPs want this downgrade, its their system. But if the player has to choose if he wanrs to be immersed or have a benefit for survival, its not immersive anymore. Freedom should only ever exist WITHIN the world (what do i do next, how to defend myselfff)

NEVER should the player have to descide what gamerules he plays by (after the menu). Because that mean EVERY fan of the survival aspect of the game (or as you so 'lovingly' call them:min/maxers) are forced to either make the game harder for themselves (not enjoying survival anymore) or ignore immersion to be the best they can within the world ruleset.

 

To put it simple: you are removing survival in favour of sandboxing and roleplaying.

Its you choice, but not one I recommend any other dev to emulate.

 

I agree, well said!

[KingSlayerGM]

I remember when I had to harvest with a construction tool instead of the proper tool just to grind up some construction skill to buy the Next Important Perk. I did not feel particularly immersed.

That or upgrading random blocks just for the XP from an upgrade action is no less silly than what some complain about.

 

This just means that the old system wasn't perfect and needed improvements. But it does not automatically mean that in general the idea of a system in which you only improve skills that you actually use is a bad idea.

 

You are using a bad implementation as an excuse to discard a good idea.

[KingSlayerGM]

By that logic, none of the skill systems before it had any faults either. You could choose not to abuse them.

 

I have a suggestion: Let's remove XP from the game completely and open all skills up from the start. This way it's...

 

When I feel like I've earned to advance a skill, I just take it!

 

OMG lol, he is so right...