Food and resting.

[Labadal]

I'm okay with food/water and resting management if I only have one character to worry about. I liked Hardcore mode in New Vegas. When you have to worry about such things for more than one character, it is no longer fun. The micromanagement that I enjoy becomes too much even for me.

[Kjaamor]

*It disappointed me in BG II when my party would arrive after a long trip and be automatically tired.  You mean they walked 3 days without resting?  WHY?

 

Glad to see that I wasn't the only one who found that slightly bizarre.

 

On topic, I stand by my point that food mechanics are a dangerous thing, but exactly the sort of 'Decide if you want to do this at the start' options that Obsidian have described wanting to implement in P:E.

 

On a related note though, while I applaud the idea of making the experience customisable for the player's enjoyment, I do hope all these potential options are things you decide at the start (e.g. Hardcore/HoF mode), and not a case of being able to adjust difficulty as and when you want. I know Fallout and BG, two games I love, both did this, but after Oblivion I really would like to see that disposed of entirely.

 

...or maybe they could make THAT optional at the start.

[nikolokolus]

Filthy casuals ...

 

[Woldan]

I'd like to keep it simple, food being like potions, completely optional but giving the character minor stat bonuses over a period of time, like 1x rations = +1 Strength and +1 constitution for 5 hours. 

Making food and water essential could get annoying very quick, I used to play Skyrim in ''survivor mode'', you wouldn't believe how much time I had to spend to keep my character from starving/dehydrating. 

[TrashMan]

 

The idea that the game has to be "Wasteland survival" to have food is redicolous.

 

 

Is this a living, breathing world you are thrust in?

does food have an impact on traveling and dungeon exploring? Yes? Then it belongs. Period.

By that logic they should add in mechanics for taking a dump as well. Once a day you have to take a **** and if you don't have any TP you have to either risk infection or chance it with a leaf. If you choose the leaf then you again run the risk of getting a rash (unless you have a high outdoorsy/****ting skill).

 

So fun.

 

 

Ah...the s*** argument (both literaly and figuratively).

 

Maybe you fail to realize that taking a dump doesn't actually have any important choices or consequences, and that it isn't tired directly to what you are doing (traveling and fighting).

Not sleeping or eating WILL tire you and will affect your combat performance. Travling requires resources and is part of survival and adventuring.

Takign a dump is something that is utterly unimportant - you either took it before the battle (if you really had to go) or you don't really have to go and thus can hold it untill the battle is done.

 

This arguments that seek refuge in absurdity are a waste of everyones time...and can hardly believe I wasted time even answering.

 

But for a thought experiment - by your logic, lets remove everything we absolutely, positively don't have to do.... like fighting, selecting spells and managing itmes. Let's just have a "win game" bottun.

A redicolous argument you say? Yes it is. And now you know how I feelt reading yours.

[TrashMan]

I wonder Amentep - are you also baffled by the inabiltiy of the PC and gang to make up fighting strategies on their own, or pick and equip loot on their own?

Because - you know - that's TOTALLY something they should be capable of doing without your input. It's not like we want to manage finances and equipment (food being part of finance managment and equipment both)

 

It's funny how arbitrary these complaints feel. Not that they are, but it in tthe end it all amounts to "I didn't find the implementation of mechanic X fun in game Y, therefore it will suck here too".

 

Let's be honest here people, all attempts at some "logical, objective" reasons agaisnt food/rest mechanics can only fail, because in the ends it's never about it, now is it?

[Kjaamor]

Ah...the s*** argument (both literaly and figuratively).

 

Maybe you fail to realize that taking a dump doesn't actually have any important choices or consequences, and that it isn't tired directly to what you are doing (traveling and fighting).

Not sleeping or eating WILL tire you and will affect your combat performance. Travling requires resources and is part of survival and adventuring.

Takign a dump is something that is utterly unimportant - you either took it before the battle (if you really had to go) or you don't really have to go and thus can hold it untill the battle is done.

 

To be fair, if you don't relieve yourself, you're going to get into serious difficulties and the time it would take for this to happen is, for most folks, quite comparible to starvation (although not dehydration). Also, there is a school of thought which I can't begin to comment personally on since it could not be further from my realm of experience, that being involved in fight to the death scenarios tends to have an impact upon your bladder and bowel movements.

 

 

Let's be honest here people, all attempts at some "logical, objective" reasons agaisnt food/rest mechanics can only fail, because in the ends it's never about it, now is it?

 

But for a thought experiment - by your logic, lets remove everything we absolutely, positively don't have to do.... like fighting, selecting spells and managing itmes. Let's just have a "win game" bottun.

A redicolous argument you say? Yes it is. And now you know how I feelt reading yours.

 

I wonder Amentep - are you also baffled by the inabiltiy of the PC and gang to make up fighting strategies on their own, or pick and equip loot on their own?

Because - you know - that's TOTALLY something they should be capable of doing without your input. It's not like we want to manage finances and equipment (food being part of finance managment and equipment both

[Amentep]

Filthy casuals ...

 

 

Eh, been playing video games for 20 something years...if I'm a casual, I doubt I'll ever change...

 

Ah...the s*** argument (both literaly and figuratively).

 

Maybe you fail to realize that taking a dump doesn't actually have any important choices or consequences, and that it isn't tired directly to what you are doing (traveling and fighting).

Not sleeping or eating WILL tire you and will affect your combat performance. Travling requires resources and is part of survival and adventuring.

Takign a dump is something that is utterly unimportant - you either took it before the battle (if you really had to go) or you don't really have to go and thus can hold it untill the battle is done.

 

Actually I'd think taking a dump in the wrong place and being caught - literally - with your pants down by an orc war band is about as exciting, tactically, as slowly starving to death unable to find or buy food. 

 

I wonder Amentep - are you also baffled by the inabiltiy of the PC and gang to make up fighting strategies on their own, or pick and equip loot on their own?

Because - you know - that's TOTALLY something they should be capable of doing without your input. It's not like we want to manage finances and equipment (food being part of finance managment and equipment both)

 

It's funny how arbitrary these complaints feel. Not that they are, but it in tthe end it all amounts to "I didn't find the implementation of mechanic X fun in game Y, therefore it will suck here too".

 

Let's be honest here people, all attempts at some "logical, objective" reasons agaisnt food/rest mechanics can only fail, because in the ends it's never about it, now is it?

 

I've never made any attempt to hide that I don't like food and water mechanics - I'm not sure how you could miss that in my first post: "I suppose its really what level of micromanagement you want.  But I don't generally find food / water mechanics fun."

 

When I mentioned the inconsistency, my point was not that my opinion wasn't inconsistent itself - I did say "we RPG players" after all, so as not to take myself out of the equation.  The whole set-up is arbitrary in what we can / cannot have control over.  For my money, I'd rather the need for food / water to either be completely optional toggle or be abstracted so that its not heavily micromanagement focused.  But in a choice between total inclusion or total exclusion I'd vote to exclude.

[Nonek]

I would totally agree that it be a toggle-able option, if implemented at all, just like in New Vegas. Even from this small thread one can see that the subject is divisive, and thus would be more suitable as an option, not a forced restriction that some will resent from the get go. I do think however that if implemented there should be ways of circumventing the restrictions for appropriate characters, a skilled Ranger, Druid or Barbarian for instance might be able to live off the land, making his need for rations non existent. Or he automatically gathers two portions of rations and water everyday, as an automatic ability.

 

A Ray Mears sort of skillset.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Nonek

[Dream]

Ah...the s*** argument (both literaly and figuratively).

 

Maybe you fail to realize that taking a dump doesn't actually have any important choices or consequences, and that it isn't tired directly to what you are doing (traveling and fighting).

Not sleeping or eating WILL tire you and will affect your combat performance. Travling requires resources and is part of survival and adventuring.

Try not taking a ****/piss for a while and see how you feel after a day or two.

 

Takign a dump is something that is utterly unimportant - you either took it before the battle (if you really had to go) or you don't really have to go and thus can hold it untill the battle is done.

Eating is something that is utterly unimportant - you either ate before the battle (if you were really hungry) or you aren't that hungry and just wait until the battle is done.

 

 

This arguments that seek refuge in absurdity are a waste of everyones time...and can hardly believe I wasted time even answering.

 

But for a thought experiment - by your logic, lets remove everything we absolutely, positively don't have to do.... like fighting, selecting spells and managing itmes. Let's just have a "win game" bottun.

A redicolous argument you say? Yes it is. And now you know how I feelt reading yours.

Then lets take your stance to the extreme and take everything that could possible have any effect on a battle and implement as a mechanic in the game.

 

Sharpening your blade before every battle? Check.

Making sure the characters eat a balanced diet? Check.

Realistic injury recuperation times (forget sleeping for one night; you need surgery and 3 months bed rest for that sword wound)? Check.

 

See the difference is that this game is a fantasy RPG so combat/spellcasting/item management/etc. are relevant parts of it. If this was Healthy Living Simulator 2013 then making sure your character eats on time would be a part of the game, but it's not.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Dream

[amarok]

Well, you have a point.

The fact because i still want food in RPGs is some restriction they force upon you, if its done well.
You cant stuff up your party with food and survive in a dark cave for months, resting and healing after every battle. Because you need to refill once a week or whatever. Just one automatically consumed "food"-resource which needs to be refilled in a store every one or two ingame weeks because of its weight/date of expiery and i am perfectly happy.
 

Edited May 1, 2013 by amarok

[Nonek]

I do like the idea of weapon and armour maintenance, and have argued for its inclusion, it's a simple and easily managed feature. The inclusion of poisoned and spoiled food is also somehing I think could add to our roleplaying options, and it does not have to inconvenience the player in any way. Hopefully injuries to health are dealt with as very serious things, making us extremely vulnerable in the right situation, but yes three months of bed rest is not an appealing option. As i've stated before repeatedly I champion the inclusion of simple, easy to handle features that aid immersion and don't irritate the player unduly.

 

We can all handle a lot more than character creation, combat and conversation. Personally I see Kickstarter projects as a chance to reject modern RPG's which prate of innovation while stripping out every feature in favour of linearity, cinematics, adolescent romances and golden quest markers guiding you every step of the way, I find that distasteful and rather insultive.

 

However I do recognise that there are a lot of people who do wish to experience RPG's in that manner, so I would say once again that these modes and features be limited to the more content rich versions of difficulty or gameplay modes. Thus pleasing both camps.

[Amentep]

I like armor and weapon maintenance too. In fact I've argued for not being able to use found armor until you've had it reworked to fit your character.

 

I still hate food mechanics. Its all about what button I want to press, I guess. Partially because I find food mechanics to be busywork, a way to make the game seem longer by forcing constant backtracking and conservative tactics lest you run out of food and suffer the penalties/death associated with it.

 

That said, plenty of earlier games didn't have food mechanics back in my earliest days playing games, so I don't really see modern games not having them as being a "games now are dumber" situation.

[Nonek]

Yes one supposes that it's a matter of opinion, when the final tally is called, and also somewhat an aspect of that most thorny of issues: What is an RPG? An argument I think we're all too wise to venture anywhere near, my pen and paper campaigns were different to others, and the computer iterations are in no way beholden to follow in their footsteps.

 

Sorry if my previous post seemed a little pejorative, the issue's a little bugbear of mine that I can't help but occasionally see as all too self evident, no personal offense intended. I do like the idea of (mostly plate) harness needing to be fitted to each user, though I thought that it might be wearable with severe penalties before a skilled armourer is called upon.

[Lephys]

I like armor and weapon maintenance too. In fact I've argued for not being able to use found armor until you've had it reworked to fit your character.

 

I still hate food mechanics. Its all about what button I want to press, I guess. Partially because I find food mechanics to be busywork, a way to make the game seem longer by forcing constant backtracking and conservative tactics lest you run out of food and suffer the penalties/death associated with it.

 

That said, plenty of earlier games didn't have food mechanics back in my earliest days playing games, so I don't really see modern games not having them as being a "games now are dumber" situation.

You're arbitrarily giving food mechanics a negative connotation, without viewing the potential of nourishment-representing mechanics without bias. Sure, if you look at the ways to do it crappily (just make it something else you have to keep track of in the game, that's highly intrusive and, all by itself, requires you to do twice as much backtracking and micromanagement throughout the entire game), it's always going to look bad. Hell, if it's done like that, I hate it too. So, I don't blame you for that.

 

But, why not try to constructively criticize the ways you've seen it done poorly, and try to collaborate with others here to try and figure out how it might be done in such a way that it isn't purely a chore and also provides ineresting and useful gameplay dynamics? Where's the fun in saying "Well, some people failed to make it fun, so now I have no interest in it ever being fun."

 

What if the first people to make RPGs had made really poorly-designed RPGs, and we all just said "Oh well, this type of game's been terrible with several attempts from other people, so we'd better not try to make a good one. u_u"? Where would we be, then?

[TrashMan]

To be fair, if you don't relieve yourself, you're going to get into serious difficulties and the time it would take for this to happen is, for most folks, quite comparible to starvation (although not dehydration). Also, there is a school of thought which I can't begin to comment personally on since it could not be further from my realm of experience, that being involved in fight to the death scenarios tends to have an impact upon your bladder and bowel movements.

 

Except...ya know..being a seasoned adventurer and all. People loosing control of their bladder is a rare occurance in general, and doubly so among fighting men - and even then, it doesn't stop people from fighting. Uncomfortable and embarrasing, yes, but not much more than that.

 

Also, there is nothing stopping any person from relieving yourself at any point. There is no chocie involved. No skill. Not to mention that people have been known to hold it in for hours.

Food and rest depend on resources and planing.

 

Trying to model bowel movements is not only pointless, it also adds nothing.

[TrashMan]

 

Try not taking a ****/piss for a while and see how you feel after a day or two.

 

Eating is something that is utterly unimportant - you either ate before the battle (if you were really hungry) or you aren't that hungry and just wait until the battle is done.

 

I see this is going in WAAAAY over your head.

 

Eating is something that is important because without food you die. You need to aquire food and distribute it. You can't eat what you don't have.

Reliving yourself is something that can be done practicly at any time and takes a few minutes tops. It has no prequisites or restrictions. (and b.t.w - the record for holding it in is 48 hours IIRC)

 

Eating or not eating is something that will affect you in battle, it's not something you do doring battle.

Nor is it something that you have to micro-manage (having food rations is enough, the characters would eat automaticly)

It will also affect your entire expedition, as you need to carry food and supplies with you. Which translates to inventory managment.

 

The difference should be obvious to anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together.

 

 

 

 

Then lets take your stance to the extreme and take everything that could possible have any effect on a battle and implement as a mechanic in the game.

 

Sharpening your blade before every battle? Check.

Making sure the characters eat a balanced diet? Check.

Realistic injury recuperation times (forget sleeping for one night; you need surgery and 3 months bed rest for that sword wound)? Check.

 

See the difference is that this game is a fantasy RPG so combat/spellcasting/item management/etc. are relevant parts of it. If this was Healthy Living Simulator 2013 then making sure your character eats on time would be a part of the game, but it's not.

 

- sharpening your blade wouldn't have a noticable effect, as blades don't become dull so fast. But, it could fall under regular mantainance. As long as you have a wheatstone, you can sharpen it.

- balanced diet is largely a myth. There are perfectly healthy people who eat only one kind of food. The effect is unnoticalbe.

- I'm all for a more serious injury system that doesn't triviliaze wounds and doesn't make HP easy to restore. But 3 months? Lolno.

 

 

Also, what this game is and is not is not for you to decide. "Fantasy RPG"? Ha. That's a very broad category. You got hack-and-slash games that fit the bill. You do realise that have been Fantasy RPG's with all the things mentioned? No, you probably don't.

 

So don't tell me what is and is not part of the game - given that you have no clue yourself, nor apparently any knowledge on the history of RPG's.

[TrashMan]

I do like the idea of weapon and armour maintenance, and have argued for its inclusion, it's a simple and easily managed feature. The inclusion of poisoned and spoiled food is also somehing I think could add to our roleplaying options, and it does not have to inconvenience the player in any way. Hopefully injuries to health are dealt with as very serious things, making us extremely vulnerable in the right situation, but yes three months of bed rest is not an appealing option. As i've stated before repeatedly I champion the inclusion of simple, easy to handle features that aid immersion and don't irritate the player unduly.

 

We can all handle a lot more than character creation, combat and conversation. Personally I see Kickstarter projects as a chance to reject modern RPG's which prate of innovation while stripping out every feature in favour of linearity, cinematics, adolescent romances and golden quest markers guiding you every step of the way, I find that distasteful and rather insultive.

 

However I do recognise that there are a lot of people who do wish to experience RPG's in that manner, so I would say once again that these modes and features be limited to the more content rich versions of difficulty or gameplay modes. Thus pleasing both camps.

 

Wise words Nonek, however I think that all of it being toggable is not feasalbe. Since each option affects balance considerably, trying to please both camps will end up in a clusterf*** of crap.

 

 

I like armor and weapon maintenance too. In fact I've argued for not being able to use found armor until you've had it reworked to fit your character.

 

I still hate food mechanics. Its all about what button I want to press, I guess. Partially because I find food mechanics to be busywork, a way to make the game seem longer by forcing constant backtracking and conservative tactics lest you run out of food and suffer the penalties/death associated with it.

 

See, I personally feel that conservative tactics feel right. After all, you're supposed to be a guy living in a dangerous world and fighting for your life.

I guess there's a difference between how people look at PRG's. Some look at them like leasure strolls and don't like anyting that "inconveniences" them. In other words, they don't want to adjust to the games pace, they want to force their pace on the game.

 

I also find it funny that you're prefectly fine with backtracking to getyour armor fitte,d but backtracking to get food and healing is bad? For serious?

[Dream]

I see this is going in WAAAAY over your head.

 

Eating is something that is important because without food you die. You need to aquire food and distribute it. You can't eat what you don't have.

Reliving yourself is something that can be done practicly at any time and takes a few minutes tops. It has no prequisites or restrictions. (and b.t.w - the record for holding it in is 48 hours IIRC)

 

Eating or not eating is something that will affect you in battle, it's not something you do doring battle.

Nor is it something that you have to micro-manage (having food rations is enough, the characters would eat automaticly)

It will also affect your entire expedition, as you need to carry food and supplies with you. Which translates to inventory managment.

 

The difference should be obvious to anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together.

So your idea for compelling gameplay is having to buy a stack of pixels once a week to keep in a corner of your inventory? You don't even need to actively manage it; just have the mental capacity to not forget to purchase it (and later in the game when money is flush you can just buy a year's worth of **** and be done with it for the rest of the game).

 

Damn, am I glad you aren't a game designer.

 

 

Also, what this game is and is not is not for you to decide. "Fantasy RPG"? Ha. That's a very broad category. You got hack-and-slash games that fit the bill. You do realise that have been Fantasy RPG's with all the things mentioned? No, you probably don't.

 

So don't tell me what is and is not part of the game - given that you have no clue yourself, nor apparently any knowledge on the history of RPG's.

The reason there are RPGs with different mechanics is because, get this, RPGs are all different (it is impressive that I have to tell you this). Deep and complex C&C mechanics don't make too much sense in a game like Diablo, but they're key for a game like Deus Ex. At the same time some kind of mechanics related to food makes sense in an RPG where scrounging for food is part of the narrative (say one that takes place in a radioactive wasteland, for instance), but in a game where that is not the case food management can go in the category of "**** your characters do behind the scenes." 

 

Look at it this way: the air filter mechanic was pretty cool in the Metro games because of the world they took place in, but shoehorning that mechanic into Halo would feel weird. The point of gameplay is to compliment the narrative.

 

[TrashMan]

So your idea for compelling gameplay is having to buy a stack of pixels once a week to keep in a corner of your inventory? You don't even need to actively manage it; just have the mental capacity to not forget to purchase it (and later in the game when money is flush you can just buy a year's worth of **** and be done with it for the rest of the game).

 

Damn, am I glad you aren't a game designer.

 

So first you argue against having to manage it, and when managment is reduced to a minimum you complain there's not enough of it?

 

Food is a relatively simple concept - you either haev it or you don't. You can buy it or scavenge/hunt. It has weight and takes space. Also it can go bad or be poisoned.

I don't see any reason to complicate it needlesly. Yes, food managment is simply - just like health pots. After all, all you have to do is make sure you have a few in your inventory right..and click when helath is low. Not much different from food.

 

 

 

 

The reason there are RPGs with different mechanics is because, get this, RPGs are all different (it is impressive that I have to tell you this). Deep and complex C&C mechanics don't make too much sense in a game like Diablo, but they're key for a game like Deus Ex. At the same time some kind of mechanics related to food makes sense in an RPG where scrounging for food is part of the narrative (say one that takes place in a radioactive wasteland, for instance), but in a game where that is not the case food management can go in the category of "**** your characters do behind the scenes." 

 

Look at it this way: the air filter mechanic was pretty cool in the Metro games because of the world they took place in, but shoehorning that mechanic into Halo would feel weird. The point of gameplay is to compliment the narrative.

 

And it is only your oppinion that is doesn't belong in PE.

Food belongs in every setting with humans, so it's not "out of place" anywhere really.

 

A LOT of things can go into the "s*** characters do behind the scenes". Like 99% of the things you usually do in 99% of the games.

[Dream]

A LOT of things can go into the "s*** characters do behind the scenes". Like 99% of the things you usually do in 99% of the games.

 

What does that even mean? Are you saying that pretty much everything in every game can be described as "**** characters do behind the scenes?" If so then I can see why you're having issues here; you're retarded.

[mcmanusaur]

 

A LOT of things can go into the "s*** characters do behind the scenes". Like 99% of the things you usually do in 99% of the games.

 

What does that even mean? Are you saying that pretty much everything in every game can be described as "**** characters do behind the scenes?" If so then I can see why you're having issues here; you're retarded.

 

It seemed like a perfectly valid point to make for me. The only thing that determines boundaries such as what "goes on behind the scenes" or is "a boring waste of time" or is "not worth making players worry about" is one's imagination and what one wants to get out of a game. If you have players with low attention spans and narrow imaginations, you'll end up with a lot of stuff (pretty much everything except combat) that's left for "behind the scenes". Other players (and if not the people here I wouldn't know where to find them) might relish such detail. That said, you make a decent point about the gameplay existing to facilitate the narrative; however, I personally would prefer that the players be given as much choice as possible as to what the narrative focuses on.

 

For me, a hunger system is unnecessary in an old-school game like Project Eternity, and I'd be fine if food was just a substitute for healing since I hate potions. That said, games with a persistent world (such as MMO's, though this could apply to certain single-player games) could definitely use a food and rest simulation cycle for offline times. I've actually been brainstorming the potential for this, and this is about the only inspiration worth taking from dating sims I think. A certain fraction of offline time would automatically be given to food and rest, but the player could choose what to do with the remaining time, from a whole host of options, with a bit of a penalty compared to doing these things while online.

[Amentep]

 

I like armor and weapon maintenance too. In fact I've argued for not being able to use found armor until you've had it reworked to fit your character.

 

I still hate food mechanics. Its all about what button I want to press, I guess. Partially because I find food mechanics to be busywork, a way to make the game seem longer by forcing constant backtracking and conservative tactics lest you run out of food and suffer the penalties/death associated with it.

 

See, I personally feel that conservative tactics feel right. After all, you're supposed to be a guy living in a dangerous world and fighting for your life.

I guess there's a difference between how people look at PRG's. Some look at them like leasure strolls and don't like anyting that "inconveniences" them. In other words, they don't want to adjust to the games pace, they want to force their pace on the game.

 

I also find it funny that you're prefectly fine with backtracking to getyour armor fitte,d but backtracking to get food and healing is bad? For serious?

 

The problem I have with the conservative tactics angle (and perhaps I could have put it better) is when its used to make a short game seem longer. Like the kind of thinking that leads to "you could run through the entire map of the world in 20 minutes except you have to eat so all the backtracking adds value length to the game".

 

Note that with armor fitting you already have armor (if you bought some), you just can't use the new armor until its fitted. If you're going to starve to death you can't continue on without food. So its also not exactly a 100% the same scenario

 

And I've said several times that my position isn't terribly consistent because, again, my experience has been that food implementation is either busywork created as a money/time sink with little gameplay value or it has too much value and the game becomes "where do I get my next meal from" simulator and not "adventuring in the lost city/cave fighting/rping/whatever.

 

Again this is an emotive position; which is why if its going to be there I favor a toggle.

 

You're arbitrarily giving food mechanics a negative connotation,

 

Not arbitrary, its based on my experience.

 

without viewing the potential of nourishment-representing mechanics without bias. Sure, if you look at the ways to do it crappily (just make it something else you have to keep track of in the game, that's highly intrusive and, all by itself, requires you to do twice as much backtracking and micromanagement throughout the entire game), it's always going to look bad. Hell, if it's done like that, I hate it too. So, I don't blame you for that.

 

But, why not try to constructively criticize the ways you've seen it done poorly, and try to collaborate with others here to try and figure out how it might be done in such a way that it isn't purely a chore and also provides ineresting and useful gameplay dynamics? Where's the fun in saying "Well, some people failed to make it fun, so now I have no interest in it ever being fun."

The thing is - for me at least - you'd need to look at several different things

 

Where do you get food from? If you always buy it are there always ways to make money so that you can get it (I can't remember the name, but I remember playing a game in the late 80s where it was possible to be stuck with no money and no way to get money and no way to survive without food to travel where you could get money.) If you can search for food or hunt, are the skills to do so done in a reasonable way (in particular, since most characters start out low skilled, could a character survive with low skills in the early part of the game?)

 

How often do you eat? Is there a "food meter"? Or is it time based? How are screen transitions handled; is it clear how much food is used between them? If there are travel points like BGII does your character ever forage for food while traveling or do they always eat from the supply?

 

If time based, since the game world won't have a 1-to-1 ration in the passage of time, is it clear how much time has passed? How is the player notified of hunger states? Is it satisfied-hungry-starving-dead? Or more granular like satisfied-need to eat soon-should eat now-hungry-really need to eat-extremely hungry-starving-almost-dead

 

How do you know how much one food item effects hunger? If I eat an apple am I full? Not full? Many meter based systems basically encourage you eat everything in sight which seems to be poor modelling for food systems. If I'm starving why would eating three turkey dinner fill my health meter? Shouldn't there be a limit to how much I could eat and drink (thus making it impossible to go from starving to satisfied)?

 

Because of this if I were to play a game I'd rather buy abstract "rations" that are equivilent to, say, 1 day of food. It carries a weight, takes item spots, etc, but isn't overly granular. My preference would be for the rations to be eaten automatically and the game to notify you when you're low on rations (maybe something like rations last X days, notify when X > Y where Y is the number of days it takes to get to nearest known town). Hunting/gathering can add to rations stores.

 

But I gather the kind of thing being promoted here is a lot more robust and along the lines of "you must carry 10 gallons of water with you and press a button everytime you are thirsty". Could be wrong though.

[Nonek]

I'd like exactly that implementation, simple, easy to manage and also easy to make roleplaying opportunities from. I'd also add that I think water can be used as a great icebreaker, instead of ransacking empty homes or breaking into locked ones, we knock at the door and ask for a cup of water or chat around the local well. Obviously our responses would be managed by any number of factors, reputation, charisma etcetera, but this would ensure that we have always full waterskins, water is acknowledged as a precious resource, have a deeper interest in the surrounding world, and hear the little rumours the designers want us to hear. Whether we actually need a physical waterskin or flask like in New Vegas, is another issue, could that be abstracted or would it be better present and part of our panoply?

[Lephys]

Not arbitrary, its based on my experience.

Understandable, but it's arbitrarily being applied to yet-to-be-designed food mechanics, unless you're suggesting that we can only choose from the exact implementations that have already been tried (which I don't believe you are). We're human, and we do that, but it doesn't make it correct to do. We have to try our best not to do it. If you have a bad experience at even a couple of different restaurants, do you just say "Meh, this is ridiculous... I'm just not ever going to go to a restaurant ever again."? Or do you rule out THOSE restaurants (or at least approach them with extra caution if you try them again), then keep on trying other restaurants?

 

That's the value that can be taken from bad experiences. Not applying the way they make you feel to all potential future experiences of the same type.

 

The thing is - for me at least - you'd need to look at several different things

 

...

See, this is where abstraction comes in. I don't think there's too much value in the manual control over when the characters put food in their mouths. That would almost be like controlling how quickly they eat their food, and whether or not they get a stomach ache, etc. I'd assume they can control all that just fine on their own. Also, I think the whole "How often have you eaten?" thing could be abstracted a bit. It should probably be something that, if managed, provides benefits (depending on the types and qualities of food you're giving your characters), and if neglected for too long, provides detriments. Maybe even no detriments. Maybe the detriment is the lack of the benefits from actually taking advantage of the system. After all, that's how it works with equipment. If you don't get newer equipment, your armor doesn't start LOSING armor value. You simply lack the improvement to armor value from the newer, better armor.

 

So, there doesn't need to be a food-o-meter. You do plenty of traveling, so your characters should be able to snack on some trail rations, etc. as they go. Maybe if you don't spend money on any food, it is understood that they just hunt/gather basic provisions. I don't know that a starvation mechanic is actually necessary.

 

See, one of the problems I think that occurs when things like this are incorporated into video games stems from the need to micromanage and maintain a whole 'nother system simply to prevent regression and maintain a state of normalcy. First of all, how you manage your food isn't the focus of the game. The story and reactivity of the world is the focus of the game. Everything else is meant to support that. So, if managing your food starts hampering the focus of the game, you have a problem. As cool as a lot of food management mechanics would be in some game, I don't think they belong in every game.

 

But, to get back to my take on this, I DO think that food/nourishment could be implemented in P:E in a manner that's both immersive AND non-detrimental to the game's focus. In a way that supports the rest of the gameplay, in other words, both mechanically and lore-ily (that's a new word I just made up). I'd like as much valuable depth as possible in it, but that doesn't mean that the food usage, itself, has to be extremely complicated. Your characters eat, and if you provide them with better food, they eat better. And MAYBE if you neglect their food completely for 3 days, they get all hungered and feeble. Maybe...