Why is Sanity in this game?

[Isiforo.s]

I couldn't quite get the point. It doesn't make much sense at least in this game. This isn't Don't Starve this is something more realistic. Instead of losing your Sanity you should get more healthy while killing your enemies. I mean they kidnapped your son every kill would open your way through this forrest and should probably make you feel better in some way. Well, it's my opinion.

[Evil Tendencies]

Originally posted by Ayuno:

Originally posted by SirLoin of Burger:

did you just suggest that killing other humans should make you "feel good"???

are you a closet sociopath

Are you seriously call those cannibals human?. Well, sorry for being offensive to your friends then...

Well to be fair, it is a rather strange way of putting it, take it from someone who actually is considered to be crazy par my prior comment. But, psychologically speaking, violence and arousal are closely linked so it's not all that uncommon to get a feel good high (sexual or not) out of some sort of fictional violence. If that weren't the case video games wouldn't revolve almost entirely around it now would they?

[Badstormer]

Someone with lowered sanity is basically descending into psychosis/schizophrenia. The effects of low sanity will likely be auditory/visual hallucinations and whatnot. Same thing that would happen in the real world, unless you were really mentally hardened beforehand.

Low sanity would not initiate 'pussification,' it would just simulate the effects of insanity.

[Evil Tendencies]

Originally posted by Badstormer:

Someone with lowered sanity is basically descending into psychosis/schizophrenia. The effects of low sanity will likely be auditory/visual hallucinations and whatnot. Same thing that would happen in the real world, unless you were really mentally hardened beforehand.

Low sanity would not initiate 'pussification,' it would just simulate the effects of insanity.

That's just as much of an assumption as my comment is. Even so, if they go that route, it'll either become a nuisance to the player after the initial surprise of the first few visions have passed by or a tiresome chore. The only problem is that unlike food and water, which, while both being a chore, add a sense of survival intrigue and realistic consequence, sanity is a feature that can easily start to feel out of place and hinder both the gameplay and immersion of the player, circumstance dependent obviously. Also, reaching that level of insanity would take a significant amount of trauma over a long period of time, so there is absolutely zero realism in the idea that the PC character, even if unhardened, would fall prey to such a severe state of mind in less then a month or even a year for that matter.

I have first hand experience with several games that tout "Sanity" as a feature, and every single one of them short of Don't Starve, with the aforementioned call of cthulhu being the worst offender, have done it incorrectly and in such a way that not only clashes with realism but also hinders the experience of the game throughout.

Nothing annoyed me more then having to fight Dagon without being able to look at him because doing so would cause my character to suddenly fall to his knees gurgling to himself and cost me the game, as if not seeing the 'hideous' monster somehow made the situation better for him. Give me a break. They create this, for lack of a better term "awesome" creature, only to piss it away by forcing me not to look at it during the battle. Completely idiotic, unrealistic and annoying. Not fun in the slightest, and I can't see how this game could possibly implement it any better except by making it a shrug off nuisance that is of no consequence and therefore shouldn't exist in the first place. Being interrupted by pointless visions in the middle of fighting off cannibals is not my idea of realistic or fun and I gaurantee a hell of a lot more people will be flocking to these forums to agree rather then disagree with me once it's implemented if that's what it turns out to be. Cue subnautica all over again.

[StrifeNHarmony]

Now if some of us can put down our torch and pitchforks for a moment.

Interruption during combat seems a tad bit extreme. I could see that.. in a slower game. The combat as it stands is... fluid. Natives can come out of the woodwork as quickly as you can cut them down. Sometimes even faster. Starved mutants can go from hunting you like a rabbit to gouging each others eyes out. And that's just the cannibals. Throw in multiplayer and you have multiple PCs running around adding to the chaos. While yes it's in your favor, the game allows for PCs to hurt each other. One wrong throw of the molotov and you can burn off your friends bone armor. Act without thinking you can end up on the recieving end of a bomb that was meant for an armsy. Hell. You can hit yourself with your own traps if you don't pay enough attention.

While I do question the choice of adding sanity. I'm not going to throw it under the bus until I see what it is. I'm not going to be mad about what it could be before it is. Do I think it should be renamed to something like "Native level" or "Passiveness"? Yes. Because that's all I use it for. To measure how Native, or Aggressive I've been.

As for the realistic approach to how much time it takes to lose sanity.. let's remember. Not only, is our character able to craft himself numerous tools in a matter of seconds as long as he has the items in his bag, but apparently took inventory mangement classes from Doom. And can magically fuse and reshape logs in many cases without nails, or a saw to build Cabins, Tree Houses, Gazebo's and multiple traps. Soo.. yea. Realism tends to be inconsistent.

[Evil Tendencies]

Originally posted by Strife and Harmony:

Snip

Well the problem I see with that is the following (Note I'm just expanding upon my prior comment I know you aren't necessarily defending this mechanic), first let's go back to my food/water example. Adding a system in that requires the player to eat and drink in order to stay alive is, by comparison, fairly simple and easy to get right. It can go wrong if the developer goes overboard in such a way as to make food to easy or to difficult to acquire depending on such variables as how fast the player becomes hungry/thirsty etc. The point is, these things are easy to get right and do not generally affect anything significant.

Sanity on the other hand is a whole different beast and only works with very specific game styles that allow for unique variables that aren't and more importantly shouldn't be possible in the forest. Take Don't Starve, which weaves a sanity meter into the very fabric of its story, it's far far more important then the players need for food and water all things considered. It also makes sense, adds to the story, doesn't impede but rather enhances gameplay and is more then just a nuisance to be fought off. But by consequence "The entire game was practically built around it."

Here in lies the problem, how can the forest implement a sanity mechanic in such a way as to neither become a nuisance nor its opposite inconsequential? Granted I have not sat down and contemplated it with any significance, but still. Name me one such way it could be implemented so that it provides all of the above sense and adds something interesting an refreshing to the game play? Passive bonuses like "your insanity makes you stronger but weakens you in such an such" do not make sense for this game and even if they did a sanity meter seems rather unnecessary to put them in. Neither do I think random visions would serve anyone well in the long run either because they're a gimmick like jump scares, once you've seen them all that's it. Then there's the worst outcome being that sanity is fatal.

I know nothing has happened yet, the problem is I can't see any good outcome coming from this.

Edit: Also nobody ever talks about the infinite bag/crafting. Haven't you read your gamer manual rule 543 :)?

[StrifeNHarmony]

I've been in a mixed tribe in multiplayer. (Hannibal Tribe as we like to call it.) The only rule that I pay attention to is when 227 is in effect.

As for going overboard. The Devs had to take out birds giving meat no? Because those idiots are extremely suicidal.

It'd be interesting if the sanity directly effects your ability to build effigies. If you want to talk about the realism of the game, why are we allowed to build effigies as soon as we stand up in the plane? Did the Native who took our son add that page for us? Another option might be to help expand the To-Do list since we the players don't influence it. The Devs (For story purposes) can add in tid-bits of character development in there. Lower sanity (High Desperation in this case) adds in tasks such as (Build an Effigy. Eat a Leader. Kill.) While a higher Sanity (Cool-headedness) would have something more akin to the guy saying "Running low on food. I better hunt." "Ran out of clean water."

On the other hand, they could also revise the Sanity effects in a way that balances out aggressive playstyles and passive playstyles. "A single death is a tragedy. A hundred is a statistic." Losing.. or lowering the penalty... of sanity debuffs when you consistently fight and slaughter cannibals rather then hiding away and playing the avoidance game with Natives. (Yes. You did say that before) But we might not figure out what Sanity actually does for awhile.

Personally. I'd enjoy it more if Sanity could be made in a way that just gives your character paranoia. (When out of earshot of the actual sources) Seeing a blur of motion off in the distance.. hearing things moving around you, eventually even hearing an Armsy or a Warcry. But alas. If how we lose sanity is of any clue to what it could entail that's unlikely to be the case. We don't lose sanity when we turn around and see a dozen cannibals at the ready. (Initially)

[Evil Tendencies]

Hmm Interesting ways of putting it, I especially like the idea of Paranoia, which seems like the aforementioned "visions" except toned down. Still, I would consider most of those possibilities, including the to-do list, inconsequential add-ins. Most of them do not really require a sanity meter and the ones that do don't really cut the mustard for being worth it. Even paranoia is not a necessary reality to sanity and it could be argued as a standalone requisite later on for the games atmosphere. Then again, it might be better to allow the players to create their own paranoia with proper ambience rather then get used to stage pieces (How long did it take you to get over 7 Days To Die's night howls?).

The balancing out of aggressive vs passive could also be interesting, I'm just concerned as to how it might be done and whether it could be without rendering itself moot, but we won't retread familiar terrority.

And to your final question of effigies, well I could be an ass and say because it's early access, but instead I'll just suggest that perhaps the player gets the idea from seeing the cannibal totems, which you encounter fairly quickly IME. If the cannibals put totems up, I don't see it as to far of a stretch to assume that putting up ones own totems or effigies in this case as a threat would go unnoticed, desperate times after all. You should watch the Mayflower mini-series avaliable on DVD. A situation occurs with the indians that causes the english to put up head totems for just this reason, granted it happens way later at the movies end, but still.

I suppose you could argue that being able to build them straight away at the plane renders that point moot, but lets not split hairs on video game logic. Realism can still be a thing as long as it treads carefully on suspension of disbelief. AKA I can deal with a magic bag but not fairies flying around. Just as I can deal with a single man having both the strength and energy to fight off five cannibals without sleep. But going completely nuts within the span of a month is another matter, it's out of place, cannot be justified with any amount of logic twisting and could hinder gameplay whereas the other mechanics are built for convenience.

[StrifeNHarmony]

You have won a lot of points by having an intelligent conversation on the internet without using the tired "Are you stupid?" phrase, and similar statements.

Now! What if. Sanity effects do hinder you, however they are an option to toggle on and off. (Xcom's Second wave options) ?

[Evil Tendencies]

Originally posted by Strife and Harmony:

You have won a lot of points by having an intelligent conversation on the internet without using the tired "Are you stupid?" phrase, and similar statements.

Now! What if. Sanity effects do hinder you, however they are an option to toggle on and off. (Xcom's Second wave options) ?

It's hard to make an argument against anything that is optional. As long as the game isn't significantly built around the mechanic being enabled (Thereby punishing players who decide to opt out by giving them a lesser experience of sorts which I would then consider to be a disingenuous excuse) or requiring to much dev time, I don't think I'd complain about it. I don't have a problem with Fallout's hardcore mode for example.

The problem then becomes, are the sanity effects a worthwhile second wave relative to other perhaps better ideas that could replace it? But that's an argument of speculation.

[Kurogo]

Sanity works for progressive story single player experiences, where the severity of the sanity effects can increase along with the plot. To be effective, they have to be unexpected, unavoidable, and designed into the game. With this also comes the side effect that the game would need to have a finite time to complete, otherwise sanity effects would have to suspend until the story progressed or be rendered harmless no matter how severe they got. Either way, they wouldn't be effective.

The Forest hasn't really developed it's story yet, and if it relies on sanity, I'll be praying to God that they include a sandbox mode without it. It's not that I'm against sanity, but I don't want to lose the open world, sandbox nature we're enjoying now. I don't want there to be a forced ending, and I don't want cheap gimmicks disrupting that sandbox.

[Evil Tendencies]

Originally posted by Kurogo:

Sanity works for progressive story single player experiences, where the severity of the sanity effects can increase along with the plot. To be effective, they have to be unexpected, unavoidable, and designed into the game. With this also comes the side effect that the game would need to have a finite time to complete, otherwise sanity effects would have to suspend until the story progressed or be rendered harmless no matter how severe they got. Either way, they wouldn't be effective.

The Forest hasn't really developed it's story yet, and if it relies on sanity, I'll be praying to God that they include a sandbox mode without it. It's not that I'm against sanity, but I don't want to lose the open world, sandbox nature we're enjoying now. I don't want there to be a forced ending, and I don't want cheap gimmicks disrupting that sandbox.

Precisely.