Like the ultimate mental break :
-Depressive and pessimist are most likely to kill themselves
-Possibility of failure, will cause injuries to the suicidal (depending the way he did it)
-Special mood : "learned about [NAME] suicide attempt" in case of failure
-Can not happen at any time, only during mental break such as Berserk, sad wandered, etc..
-We can't do shit about it
-Happens rarely
-Highly affect the mood of the others pawns (way more than usual death of a friend)
-With guns, drugs, medicines, electricity the possibilities are huge
What do you think ?
PS : sorry for my bad english
I feel like suicide is both a good and a bad idea.
Implementing suicide and suicide attempts could make RimWorld an even more intense and better game than it already is. On the other hand, there are people who wouldn't respond well to this. Like, at all.
I feel like a good alternative would be a "drug binge" which wouldn't be labeled as suicide, but would lead to the same thing. Or, a mental break where a colonist tries to leave the colony entirely. The results are the same; you've lost a member of you society to a mental breakdown. As with most other mental breaks, arresting the pawn would still be an option, if you react in time.
That's just my two cents.
P.s. Your English is fine :)
i think suicide could be good IF it was not just instantly dropping dead, but was more like slowly getting a gun, putting it in their mouth, waiting, and eventually firing, giving them time to think, and players time to react.
Possibly even having failed suicide attempts with medical damage, but no deaths, or just wusing out
I completely agree with O Negative. I think this would be a really good mechanic for the game but as someone who has been hospitalized for suicidal tendencies and whatnot, it's a little weird for me. Mumbles idea is just plain too far and quite disrespectful...
Sounds good to me.
It might be prudent to have it set up so that it's something that can only happen if a colonist has lost several individuals, and pets, that they have a good relationship with. For example, they lose their beloved cat, mother, and sister...they may commit suicide when having a mental break. This way, players can come to expect it a little more and prepare in an attempt to prevent it from happening.
I do agree that it might be not accepted by everyone.
But still it is a real thing and.. to be honest.. live on Rim Worlds seems indeed hard enough for this to happen.
Here are my thoughts on possible mechanics:
1. This should be a mark in like -30 - ish area of mood scale.
2. There should be a chance of softer break in -10 -ish when pawn decides to leave your colony. But this is not always possible (like on Ice Sheet).
3. There should be a special trait for a man that will never commit a suicide even if he is living in hell.
4. There should be some delay between decision and implementation so that other colonists can cope with it.
I think that for coping wth that there shall be either Tied status implemented (when pawn cannot do anything. Like in bed.) or some other colonist should be escorting suicidal pawn at all times till his mood improves.
As another variant you can sedate or make this pawn drunk, install a joywire, amputate both hands etc.
5. There should be a chance for failed attempt. So that after a failed attempt there is a cooldown of like several days.
6. It should be possible to transit from softer break (like berserk or daze) to suicide without returning to normal. (Because otherwise pawn will be stuck in softer breaks)
7. In some cases it should be possible to cope with self-inflicted injuries medically to save the pawn.
7. (Maybe) there should be no notification of attempt. Pawn just stops eating (without notifying player when starvation starts), or goes naked into blizzard, or takes luciferium, or goes straight to the attacking centipede, steps into a trap on the way home or quietly stabs itself with knife, or just do commands slower in battle in order to get itself killed... or whatnot. Like pawn is trying to hide his attempts from player (because player is its boss).
In this way it may be even no official suicide in game, but be like a hidden mechanics.
I'm not into it. Suicide isn't the result of "feeling sad" it's usually the result of long term mental illness or a feeling of utter hopelessness for major systemic issues in ones life. I think it's also probably highly triggering for those who deal with these issues in real life, and adding it to the game would only serve to push those people away, which by extension makes the game less successful. We already have drug binges that can end in overdose, and people can already go berserk and wind up dead when other colonists attempt to beat them back into submission. There is no reason to add this. Not to mention on higher difficulties where mood is always a concern, you will just wind up with rampant suicide.
Suicide makes part of reality just as berserk and drug binges, and should be added to Rimworld. Players would be forced to care more about colonist mood, but it's mood penalty should be not worse than usual death, otherwise suicide would wind up a suicide rampage, ending up really bad. Joe suiciding shouldn't make Harry and Bob follow him to hell :P
Instead of an RNG event like berserk and binges, have it give the pawn a long-term health effect "Depression". Starting on 30%, it builds up slowly as long as the pawn's mood remains under the threshold and decreases even slower when it's above it.
Once it reaches 100%, then the player would be given a warning message and a few hours to try to talk the pawn down. Success will put it back to about 80% and a 20+ mood boost "Given hope" that would last a few seasons. Should they fail however, then the pawn will try to kill themselves with any weapon they may be holding. Though there would be a chance for them to just severely wound themselves instead of dying. Allowing for another chance to save them, when this happens the depression is put back to 90%.
The social mechanics can then come into play as having friends would act as a booster for recovery. The more friends you have, the faster you overcome depression. Their relation with the pawn will also affect their chances of successfully talking them down. But on the other side, losing friends, families and pets, will add instantly to the bar.
Drugs can also have a role here. Aside from providing happiness, there could also be some sort of anti-depressants or something that will prevent depression from building up.
TL;DR - Extreme Mental Breaks gives pawns "Depression" in their health tab. It builds up when they're sad or bad things happen to their friends and families and they recover when they're happy and have lots of friends. They'll only attempt suicide when they reach 100%. So, it's more of a disease than an event you have no control over.
Edit: Typos
Quote from: Xyntak on September 09, 2016, 05:30:15 AM
I completely agree with O Negative. I think this would be a really good mechanic for the game but as someone who has been hospitalized for suicidal tendencies and whatnot, it's a little weird for me. Mumbles idea is just plain too far and quite disrespectful...
This.
Suicide is contagious behavior - if a suicidal person sees somebody else commit suicide (even for pretend, in a game/movie; even if they just read about it in the news), it's like being given permission. If Harry and Bob were already leaning that way,
yes, they might follow Joe to hell, this is a real thing.
For me, I would NOT want to see a Rimworld pawn try to commit suicide in a method that
I can do too - holing up in their bedroom with a knife/gun, for example, or a deliberate drug overdose. But I'd be comfortable with Extreme mental breaks that have the potential for death by another source, like stripping down and walking out into the cold snap to sit down at the edge of the map, or going out to stand near a predator and wait, or even just walking out to the edge of the map and waiting to starve out there. If the mental break ends before suicide is successful, that's one way to prevent the death; it also allows the player time to send somebody out after them to arrest/rescue them.
But I would also want rescuing them to be something
every non-psychopath pawn on the map would try to do automatically and immediately, without commands from the player, interruptible only by the player themselves drafting the pawns out of it, and with a serious mood hit to every non-psychopath pawn if the suicide is successful - and still a shaken/scared mood hit even if the suicide is prevented.
One of the biggest factors in suicide attempts is the feeling that nobody would care if you die; one of the biggest preventatives is knowledge that people
would care. I feel like, if Engie despairs and goes out into the wilderness to freeze to death, that's scary; but if all her buddies follow and bring her home and start engaging in "cheer up patient"/joy/doctoring activities with Engie, that becomes comforting, for me as a player. There should be a Wardening activity for keeping Engie company for a season or so, particularly doing joy activities together, chatting, or eating meals together. (Actually, I would like it if this Warden job existed for any impending/recent mood break. People should take care of each other.)
Also - Schizmo's not wrong about the causes of suicide; it's never a result of a bad mood. It should be a rare mental break, either with a low PctPawnsEverDo, or a low base chance, or tied to the Depressive trait. (Not Pessimist. These are vastly different things, and Depressive doesn't belong on the mood scale to begin with. God, I gotta mod that. >:( Has anybody modded it already?)
But I also think Houkime's not wrong, that living on a Rimworld could count as triggering utter hopelessness for major systemic issues in ones life -
if things are going badly enough for the colony. Perhaps this could be addressed by letting the chance rise, for a particular pawn, in proportion to the number of other major/extreme mental breaks that pawn has had already. Suicide shouldn't be the first way a non-Depressed pawn breaks, but I think that if a pawn has already gone through a number of berserk/pyro/psychotic breaks, they've probably hit a point where suicide's not off the table anymore.
Quote from: A Friend on January 01, 2017, 10:19:36 AM
Instead of an RNG event like berserk and binges, have it give the pawn a long-term health effect "Depression". Starting on 30%, it builds up slowly as long as the pawn's mood remains under the threshold and decreases even slower when it's above it.
Once it reaches 100%, then the player would be given a warning message and a few hours to try to talk the pawn the down. Success will put it back to about 80% and a 20+ mood boost "Given hope" that would last a few seasons. Should they fail however, then the pawn will try to kill themselves with any weapon they may be holding. Though there would be a chance for them to just severely wounding themselves instead of dying. Allowing for another chance to save them, when this happens the depression is put back to 90%.
The social mechanics can then come into play as having friends would act as a booster for recovery. The more friends you have, the faster you overcome depression. Their relation with the pawn will also affect their chances of successfully talking them down. But on the other side, losing friends, families and pets, will add instantly to the bar.
Drugs can also have a role here. Aside from providing happiness, there could also be some sort of anti-depressants or something that will prevent depression from building up.
TL;DR - Extreme Mental Breaks gives pawns "Depression" in their health tab. It builds up when they're sad or bad things happen to their friends and families and they recover when they're happy and have lots of friends. They'll only attempt suicide when they reach 100%. So, it's more of a disease than an event you have no control over.
I like all of this except using the weapon they're holding, for the "I could do that", too-close-to-home reason.
"STAND BACK! I've got a hat, A COWBOY HAT and I'm not afraid to suffocate myself with it!"
Hmmm... mysterious death of sadness?
Quote from: A Friend on January 01, 2017, 10:19:36 AM
Instead of an RNG event like berserk and binges, have it give the pawn a long-term health effect "Depression". Starting on 30%, it builds up slowly as long as the pawn's mood remains under the threshold and decreases even slower when it's above it.
Once it reaches 100%, then the player would be given a warning message and a few hours to try to talk the pawn the down. Success will put it back to about 80% and a 20+ mood boost "Given hope" that would last a few seasons. Should they fail however, then the pawn will try to kill themselves with any weapon they may be holding. Though there would be a chance for them to just severely wounding themselves instead of dying. Allowing for another chance to save them, when this happens the depression is put back to 90%.
The social mechanics can then come into play as having friends would act as a booster for recovery. The more friends you have, the faster you overcome depression. Their relation with the pawn will also affect their chances of successfully talking them down. But on the other side, losing friends, families and pets, will add instantly to the bar.
Drugs can also have a role here. Aside from providing happiness, there could also be some sort of anti-depressants or something that will prevent depression from building up.
TL;DR - Extreme Mental Breaks gives pawns "Depression" in their health tab. It builds up when they're sad or bad things happen to their friends and families and they recover when they're happy and have lots of friends. They'll only attempt suicide when they reach 100%. So, it's more of a disease than an event you have no control over.
I actually like this too.
It really is a good idea on its own.
A Friend, would you like to create a separate thread on Depression Mechanics and Mental Health?
Even if there will be no suicide, constant poor mood being a trigger for slow development of mental issues that affect consciousness, manipulation and such is a great idea.
I would also consider some other mental issues. For example, if pawn butchers (or operates) humans all time, slaughter animals, kills left and right or observes blood and corpses too often he might obtain a Psychopath trait after a period of Psychopathy mental issue development.
Or pawn can become a Pyromaniac during a large fire. ^_^
Or a prostophobe if a man with prosthetic arm killed his wife.
etc.
I think Tammabanana is right that there should be some softening details like only exotic ways of suicide (same that with Kerbal Space Program. Deaths of Kerbals feel a bit distant because they die usually in very exotic ways.)
And a very high will for others to help would be nice too.
I don't know whether raiders should stop their assault to rescue a suicidal pawn.
That would be very kind and warm, but a bit unrealistic.
But maybe with some chance. ))) Especially if they are only to steal stuff.
Makes a good story.
I like this idea and am all for it. Since it obviously isn't for anyway, a simple solution would be to have a toggle for it in options.
Quote from: O Negative on September 08, 2016, 01:52:30 AMOr, a mental break where a colonist tries to leave the colony entirely.
I agree with this one. It has the same gameplay effect as a suicide while avoiding the sensitive issues surrounding it. Not to mention there's a precedent for people marching off to their deaths in desperate situations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Oates). Letting colonists injure/kill themselves would require mechanic changes, and open the door to some scenarios with... rather disturbing implications. ("I got this hideously ugly colonist who wasn't good at anything, so I forced him to sleep outside and eat slop until he snapped and killed himself. My other colonists got a mood buff from his suicide because they disliked him.")
Absolutely should have as a mental break. I wondered why it wasn't in the game already.
Quote from: A Friend on January 01, 2017, 10:19:36 AM
...
This is a pretty good idea. I would make "Chronic Depression" a disease hediff like how Asthma works- it needs treating via antidepressants every so often. If colonists are untreated for too long their mental breaks get locked to sad wander, hiding in room, sleeping all day, and attempting suicide.
I too would like to see suicide. Here are my thoughts on it though:
Its only possible in extreme conditions: family death, multiple person family death, husband/wife leaves them.
When it happens, there is a short timer to save them if anyone is nearby they will rush to help like an injured person. This makes it so that the suicidal person you will want to keep around other people.
Even if there is no one around to help if the suicide is complete there is still a chance for failure (eg. shot off body part, cut off arm w/e) and blood loss needing medical attention. Or they succeed and that person insta-dies due to suicide.
Already implemented in the excellent RimDisorders mod by SeveralPuffins
https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=33075.msg336955#msg336955
Their mods in general are excellent too. I particularly recommend 'Razzle Dazzle' and 'Rumors and Deception'.
I think this is a terrible idea.
1) suicide is a real, current problem, and as has already been pointed out in this thread, SEEING and being reminded of suicide can lead to REAL WORLD suicides. It's a TERRIBLE idea from an "effect-on-real-people" standpoint.
2) getting a "you die, lol" effect in any game isn't fun. There used to be an event in rimworld that picked a colonist at random and said that he was a secret double agent from a hostile faction. That colonist would suddenly belong to a hostile faction with no hope of it "wearing off" and your only option was violence (as he would actively attack you) - maybe if you got lucky, you could capture him and try to recruit him...from scratch. People hated just having a "your pawn is dead" event, which is essentially what that was. That event was written out ~5 alphas ago BECAUSE it was a no-fun event that just pissed people off. Making it a "slow process that the player could notice and prevent" is no better, as NOTHING in the game behaves like that, despite several events in the game that COULD work off of requiring the player to notice. In other words, its a TERRIBLE idea from a gameplay and game continuity perspective.
3) It adds nearly nothing to the game. Like an earlier "rape" idea on the grounds that "well, it exists in real life, just like other bad stuff in rimworld," suicide adds nothing to the game. berserk mental breaks already serve the role of "most extreme break" quite effectively, posing danger not only to the berserking pawn, but to all surrounding pawns as well. features added to the game NEED a better reason than "because it would be realistic" - there has to be a gameplay reason to add any given feature, and this has none. It is a TERRIBLE idea from a game-design perspective.
Quote from: O Negative on September 08, 2016, 01:52:30 AM
I feel like suicide is both a good and a bad idea.
Implementing suicide and suicide attempts could make RimWorld an even more intense and better game than it already is. On the other hand, there are people who wouldn't respond well to this. Like, at all.
Agreed. Great idea in theory, must be careful in execution. At the end of the day this game IS escapism, even if it's generally bleak. As others have said, renaming it will in itself help, and then having it occur in a less conventional way as well. For the name, I would recommend "DESPAIR" as in "A DESPAIR event". A DESPAIR event could involve the pawn abandoning the colony (always a good dramatic device), refusing to eat or sleep. For added tension, he could do so when the other colonists or asleep, and the game could tell you straight-up there is no possibility of apprehending him.
PS: The only game I've seen do suicide is This War of Mine, which is a VERY bleak game that's meant more as artistic expression than fun pastime: it exists as a game second, and first as a reminder of the things refugees of war will do to survive. Rimworld gets dark, but I don't think it has ever tried to match the darkness of This War of Mine's tone.
Suicide attempts seem like they'd happen before berserk imo, so it's probably an excellent mental break to have, not to mention the most realistic. After all, for every depressed person who goes on a killing spree you have tens of thousands who commit suicide irl.
I understand that suicide is a real life problem, but so is husbands leaving their wives or wives leaving their husbands and yet we have that in the game. Also people going crazy and killing people is a real problem, and we have that in the game.
I don't think suicide is a 100% chance of loss of your character. It simply means if you have a guy who just lost family members or was left by their spouse, you should probably keep them in the base near others so that if they start to attempt suicide then others will rush and prevent them. Even if they are able to complete the suicide attempt, it can still fail resulting in losing body parts, bleeding, and needing treatment.
In my opinion, I'd rather have someone depressed who I keep at home so I can prevent their suicide than to have someone with the plague. It also seems more realistic to me that a person who suffered the loss of a family member was suicidal and not that they went on a killing spree in a berserk stage.
Once again an idea is opposed bombarded with but we might offend someone. FFS, there are plenty of things that are present in our world and plenty of people who will get offended by anything and everything.
Let me remind you people one thing: THIS IS A VIDEO GAME.
Saying that suicide shouldn't be a thing because it might trigger someone into doing it themselves is ignorant and disrespectful. Someone who wants to commit suicide doesn't do that because video game characters did it. Making it so shallow is offensive. :|
If someone has serious issues that may lead them to commit suicide they shouldn't be playing a video game about killing people and divorces.
Your logic leads to covering everything in pillows because someone might hurt themselves.
Actual gameplay implementation can be thought out to make it balanced and meanigful, but if you begin the conversation with but muh someone's potential feels I have little hope in having constructive discussion.
Quote from: Perq on June 02, 2017, 05:06:18 AM
Let me remind you people one thing: THIS IS A VIDEO GAME.
It normalises it. It's a bad thing. Read a book.
I'm on board with O Negative here. Suicide, rape, sex slaves, and getting hit by bolts of lightning happen in the real world, but some things should just not be included.
Foamy's rant notwithstanding... Yeah, people become an hero in the real world, but you know what else people do in the real world? Drink water, take showers, urinate, have children, buy/sell slaves, build a second story on their house, stand beside traps they're rearming (as opposed to on top of them), eat food at a table instead of in the freezer, and go fishing. None of these are in the game either; And although it would require more coding, I feel these options would add more to the game without touching on sensitive subjects or relying on cheap sensationalism.
Additionally, mods already exist with this functionality.
Unlike rape, I fail to see the issue with implementing depression and suicide aside from controversy (which I don't really care all that much about). With my suggestion,
Quote from: A Friend on January 01, 2017, 10:19:36 AM
TL;DR - Extreme Mental Breaks gives pawns "Depression" in their health tab. It builds up when they're sad or bad things happen to their friends and families and they recover when they're happy and have lots of friends. They'll only attempt suicide when they reach 100%. So, it's more of a disease than an event you have no control over.
I believe that it can be an interesting feature. Acting as sort of a disease that's tied to the relationship system. But it should definitely not be as common as berserk.
Although quite dark and falls on the "not funny" side, I think there's room for it in Rimworld. Providing a more serious story of loss, tragedy or hope in contrast to the wacky adventures of Cannibal Carl and his cat who smokes weed.
If you believe that this mechanic can influence people in real life to kill themselves then I'd like to see studies about it. Otherwise, it holds as much proof as violent video games makes people violent.
Quote from: Perq on June 02, 2017, 05:06:18 AM
Let me remind you people one thing: THIS IS A VIDEO GAME.
That argument is at least 10 years too old. Probably more. The idea that video games is a cultural safe space that doesn't interact with the rest of society and doesn't have to consider the impact of their message died a long time ago. Most people have accepted that video games can be just as influential as any other cultural work, for good or bad.
Quote from: Perq on June 02, 2017, 05:06:18 AM
Once again an idea is opposed bombarded with but we might offend someone. FFS, there are plenty of things that are present in our world and plenty of people who will get offended by anything and everything.
Let me remind you people one thing: THIS IS A VIDEO GAME.
Saying that suicide shouldn't be a thing because it might trigger someone into doing it themselves is ignorant and disrespectful. Someone who wants to commit suicide doesn't do that because video game characters did it. Making it so shallow is offensive. :|
If someone has serious issues that may lead them to commit suicide they shouldn't be playing a video game about killing people and divorces.
Your logic leads to covering everything in pillows because someone might hurt themselves.
Actual gameplay implementation can be thought out to make it balanced and meanigful, but if you begin the conversation with but muh someone's potential feels I have little hope in having constructive discussion.
This times a hundred. I've always tried to keep my personal life out of the public view but I think this is important. I've had Major Depressive Disorder aka chronic depression since I was around 8 years old. And it would not "trigger" me in the slightest if a pawn attempted or successfully killed themselves in a videogame. If you need everything covered in trigger warnings and pillows in a virtual space to not have a mental breakdown your problem is not depression, it's having the mind of a baby throwing a tantrum.
Stop trying to play the part of content police of what "might offend people". The whole world is offensive. Grow up.
Thirite, this may come as a surprise to you, but you're not the only person on the planet. Nor are you the only person who has gone through depression. There are others out there who may not respond in the same way that you do. Grow up.
yet again.
This is an idea with a potential drawback, possibly a very BIG drawback. It also has almost no positive impact on gameplay. It adds nothing meaningful to the game other than "look at this real-life thing we added that doesn't significantly change the game in ANY way but might piss people off"
This isn't about losing potential new customers and players of the game, this is about taking the game in a direction that pisses people off that ALREADY PLAY. And you're trying to do this for NO gameplay benefit, and quite possibly, significant DAMAGE to the current gameplay (pawns just dying from low mood...argue it all you want, thats what you're proposing. If you played the sims and your sim just randomly died while walking around because they got sad, you'd be PISSED OFF! Despite rimworld being more in-depth and darker, the gameplay impact is still the same)
"Well just because you're not offended doesn't disprove SOMEONE might be"
What an unsurprising and predictable response. I suppose we should censor everything possible that might have the tiniest chance of upsetting someone. You know what upsets me? The fact that self-appointed censors like you think people with depression are fragile little eggs that need to be shielded from depictions of their condition.
Hey, I appreciate the discussion, but let's remember to focus on the topic of the thread, and not go into discussing the the people in the thread.
Small minds discuss people.
Average minds discuss events.
Great minds discuss ideas.
Right, sorry. I get carried away easily.
On topic, I think it's entirely a worthwhile addition because RimWorld is firstly a story generator, not just a videogame. Another mental break is simply another possible story. There's already drug-binging, wife-beating (I witnessed on my first playthrough no less) and all other sorts of dark subject matter. If RimWorld got an ERSB rating it might manage to dodge an AO rating due to its graphics alone. With this context I think it's quite silly to say, "Now THAT crosses the line."
My stance (from 8 months ago...?) still stands.
From Page 1Quote from: MikeLemmer on January 01, 2017, 02:12:59 PM
Quote from: O Negative on September 08, 2016, 01:52:30 AMOr, a mental break where a colonist tries to leave the colony entirely.
I agree with this one. It has the same gameplay effect as a suicide while avoiding the sensitive issues surrounding it. Not to mention there's a precedent for people marching off to their deaths in desperate situations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Oates). Letting colonists injure/kill themselves would require mechanic changes, and open the door to some scenarios with... rather disturbing implications. ("I got this hideously ugly colonist who wasn't good at anything, so I forced him to sleep outside and eat slop until he snapped and killed himself. My other colonists got a mood buff from his suicide because they disliked him.")
I think the only interesting
gameplay element suicide offers is: A mental break that leads to the loss of a colonist.
I
don't buy the argument of: We can do
some messed up things, why not
this messed up thing, too?
Why? Because, as messed up as some of RimWorld's mechanics are, I personally believe a line
should be drawn
somewhere. A lot of us just disagree on where (if anywhere) that is...
That said, I'm not entirely close-minded towards the idea. I'd like to see it as a mod before implemented in the core game, though.
Quote from: O Negative on June 02, 2017, 03:17:15 PM
My stance (from 8 months ago...?) still stands.
From Page 1
Quote from: MikeLemmer on January 01, 2017, 02:12:59 PM
Quote from: O Negative on September 08, 2016, 01:52:30 AMOr, a mental break where a colonist tries to leave the colony entirely.
I agree with this one. It has the same gameplay effect as a suicide while avoiding the sensitive issues surrounding it. Not to mention there's a precedent for people marching off to their deaths in desperate situations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Oates). Letting colonists injure/kill themselves would require mechanic changes, and open the door to some scenarios with... rather disturbing implications. ("I got this hideously ugly colonist who wasn't good at anything, so I forced him to sleep outside and eat slop until he snapped and killed himself. My other colonists got a mood buff from his suicide because they disliked him.")
I think the only interesting gameplay element suicide offers is: A mental break that leads to the loss of a colonist.
I don't buy the argument of: We can do some messed up things, why not this messed up thing, too?
Why? Because, as messed up as some of RimWorld's mechanics are, I personally believe a line should be drawn somewhere. A lot of us just disagree on where (if anywhere) that is...
That said, I'm not entirely close-minded towards the idea. I'd like to see it as a mod before implemented in the core game, though.
A mod already exists for this, if I'm not mistaken.
I'm 100% on board with not "including one messed-up thing because another messed-up thing exists in the game!", too.
The problem with topics like this one are that we've got SJWs crawling out of the woodwork, and entitled gamers demanding more realism in their megaspider-den killbox with triangle shaped stick figures simulator. It's difficult for anyone to have a strictly objective opinion on a subject when you have to wade through a topic where 80% of the posts are ad hominem.
That said, O Negative's got the right idea. Between leaving and suicide, the end result is the same, and doesn't carry the ramifications of using "the bad word". Similar examples exist in "hide in room" or "sad wander" replacing "depressed stupor" and "psychotic wander" replacing "self injurious behavior" (dropping clothes outside during bad weather may not be the same as smashing your head into a wall, but the point is there).
But do we even need to waste man hours coding something into a game that already has a spectacularly steep learning curve and known bugs to fix doing something whose only purpose is to make it
harder?
The only place I'd honestly draw the line for something would be rape or similar sexual fetishism- and not necessarily because it's dark subject matter but because RimWorld isn't supposed to be a hentai-game. It would attract the wrong kind of people to it.
That said, imho suicide is not really dark in the same way. It's sad, but it's not vulgar. It's the end result of untreated depression. Like asphyxiation is the end result of untreated asthma. Like death is the result of untreated cancer. Having a "Depressive" trait yet dancing around what actually happens to those that go untreated is quite frankly somewhat silly and from a certain view even irresponsible. It reminds me of the whole absurd "fan death" myth in Korea, where they are so adamant to never admit that suicide happens they cover it up, pretending it was the fault of a fan magically cooking them in their sleep. I'm not by any means saying it's Tynan's intention, but that's how it could come across. Bad things happen. And by pretending they don't for the sake of "not upsetting people" you're not doing anyone a favour. The way to prevent real world suicide is by bringing it to light. By stopping it from being that "taboo subject" people aren't allowed to talk about. Imagine if someone with cancer refused to seek treatment because they worried it was a "taboo".
That's my 2 cents.
Quote from: Sola on June 02, 2017, 05:28:54 PM
... waste man hours coding something into a game that already has a spectacularly steep learning curve and known bugs to fix doing something whose only purpose is to make it harder?
I call that Dwarf Fortressing.
But seriously, an event that punishes the player with the loss of a pawn without any way to save the pawn is just anti-fun. The current game already has that in the "Just gave up" break and it's disabled by default for a reason...
Although it's handy to use (from the dev menu) on any Pyromaniacs that show up.
I wouldn't like suicide in the game. I deal with people close to me who are suicidal or often get suicidal, and it's a painful thing. Everything else that happens in Rimworld is so comically detached from the real world that there's no problem but suicide isn't. There's also people who might play the game to distract themselves from their own suicidal thoughts and it can't be good to see it depicted as an 'inevitable consequence' in the game.
I also agree with people who say this adds nothing to gameplay. It'd be just as unfun as mental break spirals. If people really want this in their games, I think there are mods for it. This is definitely a case where it should STAY in mods.
Alright, I'm going to try to cover a few things here as clearly as I can.
Firstly, the argument of "Well this horrible thing is already in the game and no one cares, so why not this?" is imho a perfectly valid argument, because what it's doing is pointing out hypocrisy. If you believe that suicide is "too dark" and "over the line" when spousal abuse, drug overdose (resulting in death), cancer, and similar other "dark" things are in the game that naturally upset many people in reality, you are by omission saying "Oh but those don't really matter." If you are playing the card that "This will upset someone and make their life worse." then you need to justify why the existing horrible things don't. Drawing an imaginary line at one topic but not another is entirely arbitrary and hypocritical. Either you care about people being hypothetically offended or you don't.
Adults do not need protection from "scary ideas". Not only are you patronizingly presuming that someone might be upset from the content of a videogame, you're presuming to know you know what's best for them. As I said in my previous post, the topic of suicide should be pushed more into the light, not out of it. Depression is a condition much like any other severe health condition, with a particularly high rate of mortality. By saying, "This should be censored because it's bad and will upset people." you are simply keeping the topic a taboo. How do you know you're not harming rather than helping?
"It's just a videogame." is a much stronger point than you realize. From what I said in my first paragraph, let me give an explanation why no one cares about all the completely horrible things that can happen in the game already: it's just a game. Videogames do not affect people anywhere near what you presume they do when you say "That will upset people!" Then why hasn't a man beating his wife to death in a drunken rage in RimWorld caused endless hordes of people to cry about how terrible and evil of a game this is? Shouldn't there be thousands of people complaining about how offended this game made them? Well, no. Because it's just a videogame. Only SJWs like the morons at Rock Paper Shotgun pretend to care about the allegedly offensive mechanics of a videogame, and in reality even they don't. They just needed something to be offended at, otherwise their clicks and meaning of existence goes down the drain.
Quote from: Sola on June 02, 2017, 05:28:54 PM
The problem with topics like this one are that we've got SJWs crawling out of the woodwork, and entitled gamers demanding more realism in their megaspider-den killbox with triangle shaped stick figures simulator. It's difficult for anyone to have a strictly objective opinion on a subject when you have to wade through a topic where 80% of the posts are ad hominem.
To give credit to this game's audience (at least, the ones I see on the forum), people don't actually seem to get offended by many things with this game. In fact, I see more people complaining about people getting offended by things than I do actual offended people.
The only things I've regularly seen people cautious about are rape scenarios and suicide, but to their credit these people usually provide arguments against implementation of these things that are better than merely "because they offend me". Whatever a person's personal opinions are on the matter, one can certainly see how the issues may be contentious.
Quote from: Thirite on June 02, 2017, 09:24:58 PM
Firstly, the argument of "Well this horrible thing is already in the game and no one cares, so why not this?" is imho a perfectly valid argument, because what it's doing is pointing out hypocrisy. If you believe that suicide is "too dark" and "over the line" when spousal abuse, drug overdose (resulting in death), cancer, and similar other "dark" things are in the game that naturally upset many people in reality, you are by omission saying "Oh but those don't really matter."
While I can see one's inclination to view things this way - "X is in and it's bad so all bad things must equally be in" - most of the game's content doesn't simply operate on a binary "good/bad" basis. Not all things are created equal in this regard. There are many factors that go into stuff like this, things like: how prevalent the issue is in real life, how many people are affected, the nature in which they're affected, etc. etc. The phrase "X is in, therefore everything should be in" really closes the door on rational discussion. Not to mention, given the obvious differences in resistance levels to these ideas on this very forum, the statement is objectively untrue.
PS: When you talk about the SJW's at Rock Paper Shotgun like they're some sort of epidemic, are you still referring to that one (singular) article written over a year ago about homosexuality and gender roles that basically everyone disagreed with? Because that seems to garner a lot more attention than it's actually worth. Or have a bunch more cropped up and garnered a bunch of support without me noticing?
thirite, you can stop presuming we're talking FOR someone. -I- would be upset if this made it in game. I've a few too many friends who took their own lives to want to see it in a game i play for fun. I'm not presuming some theoretical "someone" would be upset, i'm stating fact that I would be. The people saying "no one cares about all the completely horrible things that can happen in the game" seem, by far, to be more presumptuous; thinking they know everyone's reaction is a certain way. To the "i don't know of anyone who's killed themselves over a game" crowd, that's because if it happens, ITS TOO LATE, it never should have gone that far. By that reasoning, you could leave your door unlocked with a sign that says "unarmed people and valuables inside." You won't be murdered in your sleep. After all, it hasn't happened to you before.
Anyways...
To your other points: Spousal abuse is a symptom of an indiscriminate social, and social fighting system. it is the negative side of the balance of the social system. Drug overdose is the negative balance of adding drugs as both a mood treatment and economic cash flow. Cancer was likewise added when the existing penalties of drugs weren't enough (addiction was so easy to avoid and so easy to deal with). Notice all YOUR examples, and EVERY OTHER dark thing in the game was added as a common-sense balance to another system or feature. Cannibalism is a staple of the genre and the often recurring "last step" in survival/food situations. Murder is the natural result of being able to do combat and have friendly fire.
The current penalties/drawbacks of the mood system ALREADY exist, from removing the pawn from activity for a time, to consuming theoretically scarce resources, to endangering oneself, and finally to attempting to harm anything near oneself. It doesn't NEED suicide added in. It ADDS nothing to the game and as has been said and ignored several times already in this thread, "dropping dead from low mood" detracts from gameplay and fun. That EXACT feature has been removed TWICE from the game already (the mental break that caused a pawn to wander off the map and leave the colony forever, and the one where they permanently became a hostile member of another faction). Even a gradual suicide or one that the player has to act to prevent is still just the "wander off the map forever" event all over again, which was already removed.
@Harold3456
When I say SJWs like the idiots at RPS, I only use them as an example because people here are aware of them. Hit pieces for "problematic content" that don't fit the regressive left's narrative are hardly rare (https://heatst.com/tech/kotaku-is-everything-thats-wrong-with-video-game-journalism/).
Quote from: Thirite on June 03, 2017, 01:02:33 AM
@Harold3456
When I say SJWs like the idiots at RPS, I only use them as an example because people here are aware of them. Hit pieces for "problematic content" that don't fit the regressive left's narrative are hardly rare (https://heatst.com/tech/kotaku-is-everything-thats-wrong-with-video-game-journalism/).
I don't see Rimworld mentioned in that article. Someone somewhere gets offended at video games in general, therefore there's endemic SJW-ness infecting Rimworld?
Quote from: Limdood on June 02, 2017, 10:49:21 PM
That EXACT feature has been removed TWICE from the game already (the mental break that caused a pawn to wander off the map and leave the colony forever, and the one where they permanently became a hostile member of another faction). Even a gradual suicide or one that the player has to act to prevent is still just the "wander off the map forever" event all over again, which was already removed.
To move away from the inane, repetitive argument, "wander off the map" was already in this game and taken out? It seems to me like it'd be a pretty good addition (only for the extremest of extreme mental breaks, eg where you've been at 0 for a whole season straight). Was the frustration factor of just up and losing a pawn like that simply too great?
There's certainly no epidemic of SJWs attacking RimWorld thank god. If that implication was made somewhere it was unintended. Videogames in general? Absolutely.
Suicide is not a bad idea for a gameplay mechanic, but the BIGGEST barrier I can see, is that the mood system is WOEFULLY simplistic. Its literally a static addition / subtraction to get the rate, then a slow move to that level, from the current level, as far as I can tell.
Theres no resistances, no factors, no complex interactions... and I can understand the ethos behind tynan for a simple system, or rather, simplicity but IMPLIED complexity (this is actually a mind blowing take at development) but frankly this doesn't fit the mental health aspect, infact it makes it seem overly simple and a LITTLE lazy. (no offense tynan)
I understand fear and such was removed because it was very broken (remember where the happiest colony was the one with corpses EVERYWHERE?) but revamping it with stuff like fear, anger, happyness, ect, as individual things would be an amazing addition : and would go a long way for complexity. It would also make much more complex stories, like an angry person over a death beating up an enemy, a sad person drinking themselves to a stupor, and a fearful person hiding in their room during a raid.
But till more complexity is added, I'm afraid suicide simply wouldn't work well : no matter what you will get someone commuting suicide because they felt terrible, ate raw food off the floor, and got rejected in the same day : and nobody wants that.
Quote from: A Friend on June 02, 2017, 07:33:55 AM
If you believe that this mechanic can influence people in real life to kill themselves then I'd like to see studies about it. Otherwise, it holds as much proof as violent video games makes people violent.
Word, my friend, word... Yet still:
Quote from: cultist on June 02, 2017, 12:08:24 PM
Quote from: Perq on June 02, 2017, 05:06:18 AM
Let me remind you people one thing: THIS IS A VIDEO GAME.
That argument is at least 10 years too old. Probably more. The idea that video games is a cultural safe space that doesn't interact with the rest of society and doesn't have to consider the impact of their message died a long time ago. Most people have accepted that video games can be just as influential as any other cultural work, for good or bad.
Quote from: ReZpawner on June 02, 2017, 06:56:55 AM
Quote from: Perq on June 02, 2017, 05:06:18 AM
Let me remind you people one thing: THIS IS A VIDEO GAME.
It normalises it. It's a bad thing. Read a book.
So, it normalizes it, but you are playing a violent video game that also (according to some people) normalizes violence and murder. And organ harvesting. And cannibalism.
If you want to go with your
normalization or
influence you have to remember that there are plenty of things, that have been deemed terrible for anyone playing these games,
in the very video game you are discussing.
So once again, please discuss whenever this suggestion has a place as an gameplay mechanic element and not as culturally acceptable one.
Having a hard time finding studies on the subject of "Suicide in Games Effect(s) on Players' Mental Well-Being" or anything of the likes.
I don't think suicide in games is a common enough theme for this kind of study to exist.
I also don't think it's fair to default/equate apples and oranges. It's a bit of a strawman, really. There are studies on the subject of violence in video games.
Studies/Research on Violence in Video Games
Pro/Con (http://videogames.procon.org/)
American Psychological Association (APA) (http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2015/08/violent-video-games.aspx)
University of San Francisco (USF) (http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1062&context=honors_et)
Harvard (http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/violent-video-games-and-young-people)
They're all rather interesting reads, and anybody who's interested about the controversy should take a look at them (with an open mind).
In the end, it's common sense that violence in video games doesn't cause/influence most people to have a berserk mental break~ ::)
In the same respect, suicide being included in RimWorld may not impact most people in a negative way.
We don't know this, though. And you can't just assume by making an argument from ignorance (logical fallacy).
You can't very well compare other games with suicide in them to RimWorld, either.
Suicide in other games are a rarity, occurring maybe once or twice throughout the entire story; at least, in the games I've played.
Mental breaks in RimWorld are a frequent thing; constantly pestering you with their various incapacitating effects...
We can sit here and banter back-and-forth all you want. But, it's not going to get us anywhere.
Which is why I think someone should make a mod for this, and get actual feedback from the RimWorld community.
The direction and magnitude of the community's reaction could easily answer our questions and concerns about this mechanic being in the game.
And, it would be O.K. because it would be an optional mechanic. People who are bothered by it can easily deactivate it by uninstalling the mod.
Something as risky and sensitive as this should be kept out of the core game until we have that feedback, though.
Edit: If a mod already exists, would someone be kind enough to post a link to it in this discussion?
To be honest, I think any mention of anything anywhere makes something more likely, when not controlling for other factors.
I do think violence in games CAN lead to higher aggression, but other factors are more important.
Likewise suicide being mentioned can cause it, but this never stopped the walking dead, or deus ex human revolution, or other games.
Quote from: mumblemumble on June 04, 2017, 06:39:56 AM
To be honest, I think any mention of anything anywhere makes something more likely, when not controlling for other factors.
I do think violence in games CAN lead to higher aggression, but other factors are more important.
Likewise suicide being mentioned can cause it, but this never stopped the walking dead, or deus ex human revolution, or other games.
I hate to be so blunt but this really couldn't be any more incorrect. Studies have shown games allowing players to engage in violence have a beneficial effect in not engaging in aggressive/violent behavior in real life.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/12/study-finds-no-evidence-violent-video-games-make-children-aggres/
http://www.delcotimes.com/general-news/20141001/villanova-profs-study-video-games-may-reduce-violence
Research that suggests the opposite has been WIDELY criticized and described as "deeply flawed".
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-33960075
On the whole YES : I agree with this in a large scale, but this is not always the case : in cases of severe mental illness, depression, ect, it can be uses as a means of acting out something which is more than just a separated fantasy. But like I said, this is more an issue with severe mental illness.
Similar to columbine, yes, doom was NOT the cause of columbine. But i believe it did play a factor in it, and I think doom should of been removed from the guys so the thoughts of killing would of not escalated in seriousness via digital means till they got help. But there's a big difference between an average joe, and someone on the brink of insanity.
It also depends greatly on the depiction. Suicide depicted as careless, a solution, and care free is more damaging than one which is a tragedy. Same for violence.
So thirite, I agree with the large context, and agree other studies are flaws : a larger focus in the world needs to be focused on peoples emotional and mental well being, and causes of damages to it (rape, abuse, assault, drugs, ect) rather than other things like bullying and videogames, but I don't think it hurts to recognize where it can play a factor, even if no direct action is taken
for the record, I don't think games of any sort should be banned : I play postal 2, the game where you use a cat for a silencer on a shotgun - so I think things should be allowed, HOWEVER, mental health should be taken into account, and for instance, game like gta5 probably shouldn't be given to people who have severe anger issues to begin with. This is because emotions can form habits : and venting anger, when used as a form of enjoyment CAN build more aggressive tendancies. It all depends where the mental focus is : if its viewed as pure fantasy, separate from reality entirely (which is 100% ok) or if people start self inserting to a large extent : which can be extremely unhealthy.
I understand you still might not agree, but I hope you at least consider these factors. Mental illness is a primary problem, and certain games, while harmless for most, can be risky for people with them.
think of it like drugs in rimworld, and normal people / chemical interest. One group is completely safe around them pretty much, another is extremely dangerous. This doesn't mean yayo and smoke leaf are completely awful in moderation, but it DOES mean chemicals are a risk to those pawns.
Quote from: O Negative on June 04, 2017, 06:29:24 AM
Having a hard time finding studies on the subject of "Suicide in Games Effect(s) on Players' Mental Well-Being" or anything of the likes.
I don't think suicide in games is a common enough theme for this kind of study to exist.
I also don't think it's fair to default/equate apples and oranges. It's a bit of a strawman, really. There are studies on the subject of violence in video games.
Studies/Research on Violence in Video Games
Pro/Con (http://videogames.procon.org/)
American Psychological Association (APA) (http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2015/08/violent-video-games.aspx)
University of San Francisco (USF) (http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1062&context=honors_et)
Harvard (http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/violent-video-games-and-young-people)
They're all rather interesting reads, and anybody who's interested about the controversy should take a look at them (with an open mind).
In the end, it's common sense that violence in video games doesn't cause/influence most people to have a berserk mental break~ ::)
In the same respect, suicide being included in RimWorld may not impact most people in a negative way.
We don't know this, though. And you can't just assume by making an argument from ignorance (logical fallacy).
You can't very well compare other games with suicide in them to RimWorld, either.
Suicide in other games are a rarity, occurring maybe once or twice throughout the entire story; at least, in the games I've played.
Mental breaks in RimWorld are a frequent thing; constantly pestering you with their various incapacitating effects...
We can sit here and banter back-and-forth all you want. But, it's not going to get us anywhere.
Which is why I think someone should make a mod for this, and get actual feedback from the RimWorld community.
The direction and magnitude of the community's reaction could easily answer our questions and concerns about this mechanic being in the game.
And, it would be O.K. because it would be an optional mechanic. People who are bothered by it can easily deactivate it by uninstalling the mod.
Something as risky and sensitive as this should be kept out of the core game until we have that feedback, though.
Of course you can assume things. Given that these two things share some similarities (causes are somewhat similar, but different people act in different ways due to their problems), you can assume that they will have similar (which is
no or
little) effect.
You basically are saying that there are no proofs that it causes bad things, but we also don't have a proof that it doesn't. So to don't risk, we shouldn't be making any moves. Ok now, how do you actually ever get to do those studies if you don't ever get to test anything? Lol. :P
My problem with that argument is that there is literally no way to ever argue against it. A some sort of
celestial teapot. And you can use it in any discussion about stuff that is
controversial. And this is the
bombing I have mentioned earlier.
I guess maybe my conclusion is its ok to have it, but the extremely feint of emotion or heart shouldn't play rimworld?...
I honestly hate the idea of pandering to the lowest common denominator : I'm all for warnings, if people aren't capable, but it should still be on them.
Its like the isle of man challenge with the motor bikes (speaking of suicide) where people die every year : granted, people die, but should you limit freedom because of that, if everyone goes in willingly into a risk of death?
Quote from: mumblemumble on June 05, 2017, 03:33:12 AMif everyone goes in willingly into a risk of death?
and there's your problem.
Why cannot people do something which is risky, if the risk applies to them only?
in the context of this suggestion, you're assuming everyone who has already purchased the game has no problem with this. This is not the case, thus this feature being added to the game would affect people who do not want it. That isn't the same as your example...an analogy would be to suddenly add a new danger into the motor bike race AFTER the participants have signed up and agreed to the terms.
Comes with the territory of both an early access game, and a story simulator : please tell me the moral outcry that happened when the walking dead had that one lady blow her brains out, rather graphically.
There wasn't.
Besides that, weren't you just saying people cannot do risky things? That seemed really off to me...
what exactly did you mean by "theres your problem"?
what i meant was that you compared the motor bike challenge to this specific situation in Rimworld and then used the phrase "if everyone goes willingly..."
Clearly this thread is demonstrating that everyone is NOT going willingly.
Quote from: mumblemumble on June 05, 2017, 03:33:12 AM
I guess maybe my conclusion is its ok to have it, but the extremely feint of emotion or heart shouldn't play rimworld?...
This is effectively the conclusion that researchers have found on the topic (of violence in games- at least). For the overwhelming majority of people videogames will not affect them in any negative way whatsoever; quite the opposite. However there are in fact a small percentage of people with extreme behavioral problems that it would actually affect. But the point is, the game is not the problem. They are. They are going to be nuts regardless of the videogame- if it wasn't RimWorld they are getting "triggered" at it will be some movie or something in real life that sets them off. The solution is not censoring the entire world but getting THEM the appropriate mental health treatment.
Self censorship to appease a minority of people who are going to be unstable
regardless of the censorship is
not the solution.
Quote from: Thirite on June 05, 2017, 12:39:37 PM
censorship to appease a minority of people who are going to be unstable regardless of the censorship is not the solution.
Amen
Quote from: Limdood on June 05, 2017, 08:37:23 AM
in the context of this suggestion, you're assuming everyone who has already purchased the game has no problem with this. This is not the case, thus this feature being added to the game would affect people who do not want it. That isn't the same as your example...an analogy would be to suddenly add a new danger into the motor bike race AFTER the participants have signed up and agreed to the terms.
We're in early access/alpha. Changes are expected and noted when buying the game. I would accept that argument for a game that has been fully released and then has some major changes that drastically change the gameplay, but to be fair we're going to have plenty of those yet to come.
And no, we cannot ask everyone to agree to those alpha changes. Not very practical. :V
That said,
having a problem with it has to come with sort of good explanation
why (at least in my opinion). If you don't give one (which most have failed so far, but there were so decent points too), your point is pretty meaningless.
I read the whole thread just to be informed before I ask this :
Are those stupid f*cks ( pawns ) not suicidal enough for you ?
I mean suicide and murder by stupidity are in the top ten of complaints about Rimworld.
( as in any other game .. )
In my oppinion true mental illness should stay in mod-territory, because I think the divide between fun and not fun is to large to really find a fitting solution.
And there are a lot more reasons for suicide than just depression. And not every depressive Person is suicidal .. I would go so far to say most of them are not. ( And yes .. I too have experience )
So I like the suggestion, but have to vote Nay.