Forums > Game Forums > Hunger / Thirst game group?
Donatello (466) on 8/9/2013 1:40 AM · Permalink · Report
Should we add this and all the other Monster Hunter games to the game group?
Stamina is a key factor in the game. Running and evading consume deplete the stamina bar. Of course, it takes just a small bit for the bar to replenish itself. If the stamina bar gets too low, however, then the bar itself actually shrinks, thus decreasing the maximum amount of stamina that one can have. Also, over time, the stamina bar shrinks on its own as well.
The main way to combat this is to eat or drink. Relying on food is all good because the game involves the harvesting of meat from slain animals and cooking it. However, the player can also drink potions to counteract the fatigue.
Seems like a perfect fit for the hunger daemon group? Counter-opinions?
Indra was here (20760) on 8/9/2013 5:53 AM · Permalink · Report
Primary intention of this game group is actually to focus on hunger/thirst replenishment via food and drink, not for health/stamina replenishment. A lot of games use food items for health/stamina purposes, however do not recognize a hunger/thirst feature. Unless you can die/whine of starvation/thirst, it's not for this game group.
Might need to tweak the limitations a bit.
Indra was here (20760) on 8/10/2013 1:24 AM · Permalink · Report
Capture and training still have to be separated, as games that feature one, may not feature the other.
Indra was here (20760) on 8/10/2013 2:32 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Like I said before, if someone is looking for something specific in mind, you can't really appreciate approaches that generalize categories. Hence, why I always distinguish the differences, as if anyone here can predict the trend of game features for the next ten years.
Casual gamers won't give a rats arse, fans will.
Indra was here (20760) on 8/10/2013 5:12 PM · Permalink · Report
Actually, many don't feature both. My original intention was that monster 'training' was limited to non-violent activities, which was a unique game feature for monster trainer games, sometimes does not involve capturing monsters (e.g. many breed monsters, not capture them).
But it's all the same, they say. Just lump 'em all in. I'll remember that the next time someone proposes something nerdish.
Indra was here (20760) on 8/10/2013 7:42 PM · Permalink · Report
They actually have that category for hentai anime, so... :p
Alaka (105745) on 8/10/2013 8:47 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--]Actually, many don't feature both. My original intention was that monster 'training' was limited to non-violent activities, which was a unique game feature for monster trainer games, sometimes does not involve capturing monsters (e.g. many breed monsters, not capture them). [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
That's why I said, a monster training only group would be fine. However, are there really several game solely about raising a monster that doesn't involve fighting it at some point?
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] But it's all the same, they say. Just lump 'em all in. I'll remember that the next time someone proposes something nerdish. [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
Have you looked at the Poker group lately. You know how many different types of Poker exist? We lump 'em all in there too. It's the status quo around here. :D
Indra was here (20760) on 8/10/2013 8:59 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start ALAKA wrote--]Have you looked at the Poker group lately. You know how many different types of Poker exist? We lump 'em all in there too. It's the status quo around here. :D [/Q --end ALAKA wrote--]I'm all for separating them into different types, however [1] I don't know enough about poker games; [2] Do not actively search for poker games; [3] Not interested in them either, hence have not submitted such a proposal.
Simply said, if hypothetically MG were in its majority only consisted of adventure and RPG enthusiasts, would would this database identify the interests of strategy gamers, when any proposal of strategy gamers how have a specific intent gets constantly ignored because their fetishes are not shared by gamers of other genres?
Does this mean if a poker enthusiast suddenly came here to MG, we would treat his specific interests in different poker games to be an outlandish proposal/too much work/redundant, simply because none of us share his/her interests in poker games?
Really?
Alaka (105745) on 8/10/2013 9:22 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] Simply said, if hypothetically MG were in its majority only consisted of adventure and RPG enthusiasts, would would this database identify the interests of strategy gamers, when any proposal of strategy gamers how have a specific intent gets constantly ignored because their fetishes are not shared by gamers of other genres? [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
I would like to think we would. What exactly has been ignored?
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] Does this mean if a poker enthusiast suddenly came here to MG, we would treat his specific interests in different poker games to be an outlandish proposal/too much work/redundant, simply because none of us share his/her interests in poker games?
Really? [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
No, I was simply pointing out that we have a habit here of not fully thinking game groups through. We seem to have an add first, ask questions later philosophy.
Indra was here (20760) on 8/10/2013 11:30 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start ALAKA wrote--]No, I was simply pointing out that we have a habit here of not fully thinking game groups through. We seem to have an add first, ask questions later philosophy. [/Q --end ALAKA wrote--]Hey, don't look at me. My game group descriptions give enough indication how much thought and effort I put into for each proposal.
Indra was here (20760) on 8/10/2013 11:40 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Non-violent training is the main feature for all Monster Rancher games. Monsters do not grow stronger via combat, only through training, i.e. Monster trainer games.
[edit] Additionally, monster capturing is for the sole purposes of capturing monsters, many of which for the purposes of being used (i.e. eaten) or sold. Megumi Tensei for example allows capturing monsters just for eating them.
And lastly, for this monster-related game group to be complete, in my original framework, there also needs to be a Monster Breeding game group, where monsters are breed via egg fertilization.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66248) on 8/11/2013 2:44 AM · Permalink · Report
Let's determine:
- just how many varieties of monster husbandry you want to isolate
- then, how many of them turn up in multiple games
- across more than one game series.
(Since, after all, I don't need a "games with a functional frotz spell" group if it's 100% congruent with the "Enchanter series" group.)
Alaka (105745) on 8/11/2013 4:00 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--]Non-violent training is the main feature for all Monster Rancher games. Monsters do not grow stronger via combat, only through training, i.e. Monster trainer games. [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
So then I assume you consider how a monster gets stronger is important. You consider that there is a difference if a monster gets stronger by repeatedly battling (Pokemon) or if they get stronger by doing sit-ups before getting sent into battle. (Monster Rancher). However, the end result is the same. The monster is stronger because of doing repetitive actions. I think I understand your point though. So then, the Monster Rancher series should be in a monster training (non-combative) group only?
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] [edit] Additionally, monster capturing is for the sole purposes of capturing monsters, many of which for the purposes of being used (i.e. eaten) or sold. Megumi Tensei for example allows capturing monsters just for eating them.[/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
So then you are saying we would require a group for capturing only (non-combat purpose) and one for capturing only (combat purpose)?
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] And lastly, for this monster-related game group to be complete, in my original framework, there also needs to be a Monster Breeding game group, where monsters are breed via egg fertilization. [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
Do you have a game example of this?
Indra was here (20760) on 8/11/2013 5:35 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start ALAKA wrote--] 1. So then I assume you consider how a monster gets stronger is important. You consider that there is a difference if a monster gets stronger by repeatedly battling (Pokemon) or if they get stronger by doing sit-ups before getting sent into battle. (Monster Rancher). However, the end result is the same. The monster is stronger because of doing repetitive actions. I think I understand your point though. So then, the Monster Rancher series should be in a monster training (non-combative) group only?
-
So then you are saying we would require a group for capturing only (non-combat purpose) and one for capturing only (combat purpose)?
-
Do you have a game example of this? [/Q --end ALAKA wrote--]
-
As far as I know, there are two different major gameplay features in the Monster Trainer sub-genre. Games that follows Pokemon and Digimon, focusing on capturing monsters and leveling them up via duels and Monster Rancher which focuses on non-combative training, where monsters for the most part are acquired elsewhere. Hence the separation.
-
Eh? Capturing regardless of combat or non-combat. I do not see why this needs to be separated nor have identified any unique game feature precedence to warrant a separation.
-
Actually, the title was first suggested by Parf. Though his idea was capturing and nurturing monsters. Shouldn't necessarily be limited to egg fertilization though, any form of monster husbandry should apply.
Examples of monster breeding:
Azure Dreams - Player searches for monster eggs in a tower, goes back to town and nurtures eggs until they hatch.Dragon's Breath - Player hatches dragon eggs using alchemical properties. Eggs may be purchased at any time.Creatures - Hatching monsters from egg fertilization unit.
Though I still have no idea whether or not this should be limited to monsters, other animals, or even humanoids. Safer to limit it to monsters for now.
Rola (8486) on 8/11/2013 9:21 AM · Permalink · Report
Yeah, because this group is clearly about gameplay mechanics. Wouldn't this apply also to, say, Princess Maker "raising simulation" games?
Am I right that one of the key elements is "lack of direct control" - this isn't your avatar, you just take care of the creature.
And in the capture group the thing is about "capturing & controlling NPCs/enemies".
Indra was here (20760) on 8/11/2013 7:53 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Rola wrote--]Yeah, because this group is clearly about gameplay mechanics. Wouldn't this apply also to, say, Princess Maker "raising simulation" games?
Am I right that one of the key elements is "lack of direct control" - this isn't your avatar, you just take care of the creature.
And in the capture group the thing is about "capturing & controlling NPCs/enemies". [/Q --end Rola wrote--]We already have that life simulation game group, so trying not to overlap with that one. So monster breeding seems to be the ability to manually spawn new monsters as one would do with chicken/cows/horses in a farm/ranch.
The capture group is just about capturing. Doesn't really matter what happens afterwards as long as it can be further manipulated in some way. Some gamers just like the option of capturing monsters.
Alaka (105745) on 8/13/2013 9:14 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] [Q2 --start ALAKA wrote--] 1. So then I assume you consider how a monster gets stronger is important. You consider that there is a difference if a monster gets stronger by repeatedly battling (Pokemon) or if they get stronger by doing sit-ups before getting sent into battle. (Monster Rancher). However, the end result is the same. The monster is stronger because of doing repetitive actions. I think I understand your point though. So then, the Monster Rancher series should be in a monster training (non-combative) group only? [/Q2 --end ALAKA wrote--] 1. As far as I know, there are two different major gameplay features in the Monster Trainer sub-genre. Games that follows Pokemon and Digimon, focusing on capturing monsters and leveling them up via duels and Monster Rancher which focuses on non-combative training, where monsters for the most part are acquired elsewhere. Hence the separation. [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
Just to be clear, are you suggesting we have one Monster training group or two?
Indra was here (20760) on 8/13/2013 9:55 PM · Permalink · Report
One. Don't confuse my use of sub-genre 'monster trainer' with 'monster training' game group. One is a genre, the other is a common feature within the genre.
Alaka (105745) on 8/13/2013 10:27 PM · Permalink · Report
Just to clarify if I'm understanding you correctly:
So the game group we have on file now you want to split into a monster capture group and a monster training group, correct? The majority of those games fit into the capture group and the training group would consist of mainly the monster rancher series at the moment, right?
Indra was here (20760) on 8/14/2013 3:27 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Sounds about right.
I'm still wondering if the Monster Capture game group needs to be limited, it includes all times of capturing with no distinction to monster capturing as a major feature or as a minor feature. Though that's easily fixeable in the game group description to separate and identify the two, I suppose.
Googling 'monster capture' does not show MG in meine top 10 results. Grr.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66248) on 8/11/2013 2:40 AM · Permalink · Report
I don't think it's too unreasonable to expect that matters of great interest to many people here get prioritized over matters of middling interest to small numbers of people. That's practically democratic.
Indra was here (20760) on 8/11/2013 11:01 PM · Permalink · Report
Mandatory story-based results shouldn't be included, as they technically aren't a game feature. I suppose the possibility of failing to catch a monster should also be identified.
Parf (7873) on 8/12/2013 4:19 AM · Permalink · Report
Where would the MAGs in Phantasy Star Online fit? You start with one, can (rarely) find new ones, they are permanently attached to your character. You "feed" it any item from your inventory in set intervals to make it grow stronger. I seem to recall that you could also let some enormous attack loose with their aid at times. Otherwise it's completely docile.