Yukon devoid of animals!

[BAG-One]

I just started the Yukon map and so far it has been the most boring hour and a half or more that I have ever spent on a computer game. What a waste of time.
I started at the Loggers Point outpost and followed the story line to the Woodsmans Respite outpost. On the way I saw two caribou over 450m away and a black bear a similar distance. They were all moving into the trees and I lost sight of them.
I saw one level 1 moose just off the trail and bagged it. Yay!

From there I went NW down to the wetlands and then SW to the lookout (Brightwater Flats I think) and in all that walking, nearly all of it in crouch walk to avoid scaring animals, along with stopping regularly to scan around me with the binoculars, I didn't see or hear any animals despite such a large amount of open terrain.

When I was nearly at the lookout I finally saw two more caribou 250m away across a body of water and before I could get a shot off they moved into the trees. Finally I saw some moose 350+m away not far from the lookout, took a shot and had no luck. In all that time I also hardly saw any tracks either.

I had to laugh when the voiceover state that the area was "teeming with wildlife".
I'm sure I'm doing something wrong because every video I see online, even the ones where they have started the game again to show pointers to newbies like me, they are spotting literally dozens of animals.

I was so looking forward to playing this map what with the landscape and snow, but I'm probably not going to even bother opening it up again.

That's my rant done.

Edit:
Now that I've gotten some more hours on this map I will say that calling it devoid of animals was a possibly a bit over the top, but that's how it was feeling at the time.
In the first three and a half hours or so on this map I had a grand total of two opportunities to shoot and harvest an animal. In that time I rarely heard any calls or saw any tracks. I even went so far as to check the hunter codex at the start and finish of one 90 minute hunt to confirm that I didn't scare any game at all proving that the lack of seeing any animals wasn't due to me or my playing style.

In contrast, during my last two hunts of about three and a half hours in total I've gotten about 30 harvests and could have gotten many more if I wanted to wipe out the need zones that I'd opened up.

So, for me at least, I'm now going to refer to this map as the "Feast or Famine" map.

[Psyringe]

Originally posted by Geronimo:

Originally posted by Psyringe:

So why don't you share the actual _data_ that you have observed? And why don't you tell us which methods you have used to protect yourself from confirmation bias, or other cognitive traps?

Your only argument seems to be "I know what I'm doing", which is very very weak. _Everyone_ thinks that they know what they are doing. Everyone, even the biggest fools, think that their conclusions are valid and logical, otherwise they wouldn't have drawn them or would at least reject them afterwards. It's by sharing the data and the methodology that we can assess and test how valid and reliable they actually are.

Cuz this ain't Physics class, and most of us ain't here to collect data, we here to collect trophies.

Were just sharing gameplay experiences in hopes of learning something or passing on something to someone.

I do spend alot of time scouting, observing and the like, but I have no interest in scientific process. Just want to play.

And that is totally fine. This is just a game after all, it is meant to be enjoyed. If you enjoy just playing, and don't enjoy collecting and reporting data, then there's nothing wrong about that.

Unfortunately though, this makes some of your posts pretty worthless, whereas the posts of people who do report their data and methodology (like Victoria's) are immensely useful. I'm just pointing that out. But if you're fine with sharing your thoughts in a way that isn't very useful, then there's nothing wrong with that either.

Originally posted by Geronimo:

And I think you're a bit naive if you don't think that many people just talk out their ass here,

I don't believe that "people are just talking out of their asses", and I never said that. But I'm well aware that everyone (including myself) is vulnerable to cognitive biases, simply due to the way the human brain works, and that it is very easy to arrive at incorrect conclusions if we don't take precautions to eliminate them.

That is the reason why it is impossible to assess the validity of a conclusion as long as the data and methodology is not shared. You're pretty adamant in keeping yours secret - I mean, I have asked you several times, precisely because I _wanted_ to take your theory seriously and not just dismiss it, and you haven't given me anything except a generic "I know what I'm doing"-type response.

Earlier in this thread, you complained about being called "delusional" by others, and that one poster here dismisses your theory as "nonsense". What I'm trying to make you realize, is that you are creating those responses yourself by only stating your conclusions, without sharing your data and methodology. You'll notice that people who _do_ share this information, don't receive such a dismissive response. That's because by sharing the concrete information that led to their conclusions, they are making these conclusions traceable, reproducible, and testable. If someone sees a flaw in them, they can point out where in the theory it is. With your theory, this isn't possible since you're not sharing the respective information.

Anyway. As I said, everyone's free to enjoy the game in their own way, and everyone's free to theorize about it. Just don't be surprised if your theories get dismissed if you don't present them in a way that makes them useful for discussion, is what I'm saying.

[BAG-One]

Originally posted by Leadmagnet:

For what it's worth OP, I went through something similar on PF. I went to one area at the bottom of the map and just started moving to the top. During the whole trip, there were no animals, zones, tracks or calls. I figured it was just oddball thing and jumped maps. I've since started over and haven't tried replicating that little excursion again.

I figure it is something like that.
I'm going to go back to ONLY crouch walking around as I was doing a while back.
When I scan a large open area and there is no game i'll do a normal upright walk until I come to a treeline or a rise in the land where i'll then go back to crouch-walk. It's possible that I did too much walking (I do at times get frustrated at how long it takes to go just a few hundred meters at that pace) but that doesn't really explain why I saw only a few animals well over 200m away.
I'm going to give it another crack. I've only recently started Silver Ridge and Yukon and had a LOT more luck at Silver Ridge...... but not as much as in Leyton.

[Mo0on]

Originally posted by BAG-One:

I pretty much never run anywhere.

I pretty much RUN everywhere until I hear a warning call whether fleeing or not. Usually 200m away.

I then WALK towards their warning call location until I hear another warning call or find their tracks. Usually 100m-150m away.

Then crouch walk or prone crawl while calling them in with a caller until you can see them and take your shot. Usually within 100m.

This allows you to get closer and closer without it running away from you. And doing it in a timely manner.

(This doesn't really work for coyotes they are ninjas, gotta crouch/prone walk whole time)

If you walk everywhere you're going to take forever getting out of areas that are empty during that time, which will make your map seem empty. And you're too quiet and aren't close enough to scare them to hear a warning call, so you don't even know they are there and probably crouch walking past animals in foliage you cannot see.

You're playing like a photographer not a hunter.

Also don't forget the scent eliminator.

Yukon might seem empty compared to some other maps but its my favourite map in the game I find it the most beautiful with my Reshade, plus wolves and grizzlies.

:)

[Psyringe]

Originally posted by BAG-One:

And yet I enjoy the Leyton map and see quite a few animals every hour.
I understand that it is supposed to be like real hunting, but it is also a game. Would you pay for and play a game where the only thing in it is walking through virtual landscapes?

Depends. If those landscapes are interesting, then yes. I mean, "Deus Ex Machina" is pretty much exactly that, all you do is walk forward while the world changes around you. "Proteus" is another game where the only objective is walking around and enjoying the environment, and it has 81% positive reviews on Steam. But these are also very different games from theHunter, and discussing them is not the point here, so I'll stop. ;)

I will say, though, that there are people who play theHunter purely as a hiking simulator and who don't hunt at all. It's perfectly possible to enjoy the game that way - though I doubt that it's the intended way of playing it.

What I can say about playing as a hunter in this game, is that in the beginning, I had sessions of several hours in which I didn't shoot anything. That was mostly due to me being a pretty bad hunter who (at that point) also didn't understand the game very well. But I'm still running into occasional droughts where I can't find anything to shoot for extended amounts of time - they are rare, but they do happen. They are part of the game. Personally, I don't mind when they happen - I simply enjoy walking through the environments, and when I finally manage to shoot something again, it feels all the more rewarding.

What I'm trying to point out, is that if you find those drought phases aggravating or disappointing, then this may not be the right game for you, because they do happen and will continue to happen. They are part of the random nature of the game's design. Of course, if you're _generally_ enjoying the game and just need to vent a bit after running into a drought phase, that's perfectly fine as well. :D

Originally posted by BAG-One:

so i'm either doing something wrong or the animal numbers can be different from game to game.

It doesn't sound like you're doing anything wrong. But there are huge random factors in the way how the game populates its maps, and - as Victoria said - sometimes you roll the dice and just get snake eyes.

Originally posted by BAG-One:

I've only recently started Silver Ridge and Yukon and had a LOT more luck at Silver Ridge...... but not as much as in Leyton.

Keep in mind that Silver Ridge is possibly the most densely populated map in the game (and very easy to hunt in). If you move from Silver Ridge to _any_ other map, it can easily feel rather empty. And I think Yukon is among the game's more sparsely populated maps to begin with, but I haven't been there in a while, so take that assessment with a grain of salt.

[BAG-One]

Originally posted by Psyringe:

What I'm trying to point out, is that if you find those drought phases aggravating or disappointing, then this may not be the right game for you, because they do happen and will continue to happen. They are part of the random nature of the game's design. Of course, if you're _generally_ enjoying the game and just need to vent a bit after running into a drought phase, that's perfectly fine as well. :D

You pretty much nailed what I was implying...... I do really enjoy the game, but this was a drought like nothing i've experienced since the first few hours playing the game when I thought it was a completely crap game and had no idea what I was doing.

As a side note, after the first four hours I requested a refund from Steam as I had seen so few animals that I wasn't enjoying myself. Steam refused the refund and then I fell sick and had a LOT of time on my hands. I persevered and started getting seriously hooked, so i'm going to continue playing. It wasn't that many weeks ago that I was happy if I got one or two kills in an hour and a half. Now it's rare if I don't have to move on after a few kills to avoid losing need zones (I've avoided using tripods and blinds so far)

It really was a bit of a vent and you all have confirmed a few things for me which is cool.

[BAG-One]

Originally posted by Mo0on:

Originally posted by BAG-One:

I pretty much never run anywhere.

I pretty much RUN everywhere until I hear a warning call whether fleeing or not. Usually 200m away.

I then WALK towards their warning call location until I hear another warning call or find their tracks. Usually 100m-150m away.

Then crouch walk or prone crawl while calling them in with a caller until you can see them and take your shot. Usually within 100m.

This allows you to get closer and closer without it running away from you. And doing it in a timely manner.

(This doesn't really work for coyotes they are ninjas, gotta crouch/prone walk whole time)

If you walk everywhere you're going to take forever getting out of areas that are empty during that time, which will make your map seem empty. And you're too quiet and aren't close enough to scare them to hear a warning call, so you don't even know they are there and probably crouch walking past animals in foliage you cannot see.

Yeah, when crouch walking i've come across a resting moose numerous times only 10m from me and i've had to shoot to avoid getting trampled.

[LotteR]

One thing is for sure. OP did not see a black bear in Yukon Valley, as they are not part of that map.

There are plenty of caribou and plains bison on this map with bison often to be found in open grassy areas. Lots of moose cows hanging around water's edge like in Layton Lake District. The grizzlies are hiding out in the forests during the day. The red foxes do the same. The wolves are mostly found north and east in the coniferous and/or dead forest areas. The pretty ducks can easily be hunted with a good setup.

Entering a map once and then deeming it broke/unworthy/whatever after a while is purely your own loss. Why do people require perfection immediately on first try? And if not getting it, go to the Steam forum and make a whiny post about how misrable they are? We can't help you. If you are that upset, try deleting the animal population file and see if the new one generates a population more to your liking.

The rest of the world does not care what someone decides to play or not. Why should we? We each have our own little universe to care about. A dramatic display of dissatisfaction and instant gratification need in general comes off as immature and reflects very poorly on a person. Sometimes, you have to put in a little time and effort to get results. This game in particular requires some patience.

[Geronimo]

In spite of those who think that another person's individual experiences are not worth sharing, and should be dismissed if not using scientific process, I think that people need to consider this question.

If you were dropped into a wilderness, would you expect every acre of land to be teeming with game animals?

IRL hunters don't just 'drop' into a forest and expect to start killing. They know that most of the woods will be empty and that they need to know a little bit about the behavioral patterns of the game animal they're hunting in order to even find them, let alone get a shot at them.

I realise that IRL may not make for great entertainment, but try to keep that in mind the next time you 'drop in'.

And again, I realise that having to avoid killing right away in order to accommodate zone management isn't easy or fun when you're anxious to shoot the first thing you see.

But, in spite of the naysayers, try it, and see if it makes a difference in the animal population in the zone areas.

If it works, you don't even have to pat me on the back. Just enjoy the same game-filled environment that i play in every day,

[Leadmagnet]

Originally posted by BAG-One:

I figure it is something like that.
I'm going to go back to ONLY crouch walking around as I was doing a while back.
When I scan a large open area and there is no game i'll do a normal upright walk until I come to a treeline or a rise in the land where i'll then go back to crouch-walk. It's possible that I did too much walking (I do at times get frustrated at how long it takes to go just a few hundred meters at that pace) but that doesn't really explain why I saw only a few animals well over 200m away.
I'm going to give it another crack. I've only recently started Silver Ridge and Yukon and had a LOT more luck at Silver Ridge...... but not as much as in Leyton.

I might try it again at PF then...just to see what happens on the new profile. Sometimes the game just does weird stuff that leaves you scratching your head. With everybody's map being different, it can be a headache to figure out if it is something that you are doing or if the game is being goofy.

[VictoriaHuntress]

@Psyringe and Geronimo
Hey, leave me out of this LOL. It's not a competition. Geronimo and I have spent many fruitful and fun hours posting back and forth, bandying about hypotheses.

Trying to discover internal mechanisms is probably not going to pay off - I can think of any number of algorithms and approaches that I might try if I were solving similar problems - the COTW project team can do the same, and they probably have come up with ones that I might not have considered.

The best we can do is to treat the game like a black box board game with randomness (maybe like a cruel version of Monopoly), with buttons, dials, and levers we can play with, and observe what happens on the board. After enough observation and experiment, we can come up with hypotheses and try to predict the outcomes for various sequences of operations. It would be an interesting exercise to build a Causal Analysis Graph for this game ( ala Judea Pearl's work), but I'll pass

I think two things are clear:
1. the game is using random sampling of probability distributions to control the outcomes of its algorithms, from initial populations of NPCs, to what state an animal will be in (calm, alert, ...) when we are close enough to affect it, and so on.
2. What we do affects the game state (obvious, but it needs stating): for a herd of animals, obviously; for the animal populations and need zones, yes, but there may be too many confounding variables to be able to predict the probable outcomes of any one action on the entire state. If this is the case, as no two players will play the game in the same way, teasing all of this out will be a challenge.

[Mo0on]

Originally posted by VictoriaHuntress:

@Psyringe and Geronimo
Hey, leave me out of this LOL. It's not a competition. Geronimo and I have spent many fruitful and fun hours posting back and forth, bandying about hypotheses.

Trying to discover internal mechanisms is probably not going to pay off - I can think of any number of algorithms and approaches that I might try if I were solving similar problems - the COTW project team can do the same, and they probably have come up with ones that I might not have considered.

The best we can do is to treat the game like a black box board game with randomness (maybe like a cruel version of Monopoly), with buttons, dials, and levers we can play with, and observe what happens on the board. After enough observation and experiment, we can come up with hypotheses and try to predict the outcomes for various sequences of operations.

We try but the issue has always been consistency. What works for some people, other people say it doesn't work and they cannot replicate...

[Psyringe]

Originally posted by VictoriaHuntress:

@Psyringe and Geronimo
Hey, leave me out of this LOL. It's not a competition.

I apologize for dragging your name into this. It's just that your posts tend to be very well-structured, with observations, concrete examples, and conclusions that logically follow from the observed data, hence I was referring to them as good examples. I did not intend to play the two of you against each other, that is not how I operate - though I suppose that some of my comments could be read that way.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by VictoriaHuntress:

@Psyringe and Geronimo
Hey, leave me out of this LOL. It's not a competition. Geronimo and I have spent many fruitful and fun hours posting back and forth, bandying about hypotheses.

Trying to discover internal mechanisms is probably not going to pay off - I can think of any number of algorithms and approaches that I might try if I were solving similar problems - the COTW project team can do the same, and they probably have come up with ones that I might not have considered.

The best we can do is to treat the game like a black box board game with randomness (maybe like a cruel version of Monopoly), with buttons, dials, and levers we can play with, and observe what happens on the board. After enough observation and experiment, we can come up with hypotheses and try to predict the outcomes for various sequences of operations. It would be an interesting exercise to build a Causal Analysis Graph for this game ( ala Judea Pearl's work), but I'll pass

I think two things are clear:
1. the game is using random sampling of probability distributions to control the outcomes of its algorithms, from initial populations of NPCs, to what state an animal will be in (calm, alert, ...) when we are close enough to affect it, and so on.
2. What we do affects the game state (obvious, but it needs stating): for a herd of animals, obviously; for the animal populations and need zones, yes, but there may be too many confounding variables to be able to predict the probable outcomes of any one action on the entire state. If this is the case, as no two players will play the game in the same way, teasing all of this out will be a challenge.

Wink wink

[VictoriaHuntress]

Originally posted by Psyringe:

Originally posted by VictoriaHuntress:

@Psyringe and Geronimo
Hey, leave me out of this LOL. It's not a competition.

I apologize for dragging your name into this. It's just that your posts tend to be very well-structured, with observations, concrete examples, and conclusions that logically follow from the observed data, hence I was referring to them as good examples. I did not intend to play the two of you against each other, that is not how I operate - though I suppose that some of my comments could be read that way.

Understood - don't worry about it

[BAG-One]

Originally posted by Lotte:

One thing is for sure. OP did not see a black bear in Yukon Valley, as they are not part of that map.

There are plenty of caribou and plains bison on this map with bison often to be found in open grassy areas. Lots of moose cows hanging around water's edge like in Layton Lake District. The grizzlies are hiding out in the forests during the day. The red foxes do the same. The wolves are mostly found north and east in the coniferous and/or dead forest areas. The pretty ducks can easily be hunted with a good setup.

Entering a map once and then deeming it broke/unworthy/whatever after a while is purely your own loss. Why do people require perfection immediately on first try? And if not getting it, go to the Steam forum and make a whiny post about how misrable they are? We can't help you. If you are that upset, try deleting the animal population file and see if the new one generates a population more to your liking.

The rest of the world does not care what someone decides to play or not. Why should we? We each have our own little universe to care about. A dramatic display of dissatisfaction and instant gratification need in general comes off as immature and reflects very poorly on a person. Sometimes, you have to put in a little time and effort to get results. This game in particular requires some patience.

You are correct that it was not a black bear but a grizzly. Easy mistake to make when the other maps I've played had black bears.

Why does it bother you that someone posts in a discussion forum that they had a decidedly lacklustre experience on a particular map? I was simply having a bit of a vent that the Yukon map, for me, appeared to have a serious lack of game compared to the other maps I've used when hunted in a similar fashion.

If wandering around for an hour and a half with much, much less in the way of sightings, sounds or tracks than I've previously experienced is a lack of patience then we have different definitions of the word. Unlike many I rarely have more than an hour or two at any one time to play this game so having the opportunity to take more than one shot in the space of an hour and a half would be nice.

If the "rest of the world" do not care why do you even comment? You obviously seem to care enough to disparage my personal qualities, of which you know virtually nothing about.

It is interesting that threads with even a hint of criticism of this game in any way no matter how minor seem to bring out the defenders quite quickly.... and in numbers greatly exceeding the game I saw in Yukon :)

On the bright side, it's good to read from others who have experienced similar droughts and who provide positive suggestions and tips, even if the tip is just "it happens sometimes".