Food rots

[jock]

Food rotting is dangerous and could be taken very poorly if handledwrong. Imo the best way todo food decay would be in 2 systems:

1. is a best by date: dependant on food that food will give food a protected state for a period of time.
2. Decline in quality each day by 1% of quality or 1 ql whichever is highest.


This gives us decay without it being a constant concern.

[Fostik]

Food rotting is dangerous and could be taken very severely poorly if handled poorly. Imo the best way todo food decay would be in 2 systems:

1. is a best by date: dependant on food that food will give food a protected state for a period of time.
2. Decline in quality each day by 1% of quality or 1 ql whichever is highest.


This gives us decay without it being a constant concern.

Thanks for your input

[Zentetsuken]

remove food

[Massa]

man fuck you op

[noindyfikator]

XD
we need fridges to store our food

[Mysia]

https://www.havenandhearth.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=53564&p=709929&hilit=spoil#p709929
please use search function

even has a comment by jorb!

Then why did you repost it on one of your alt accounts, shubla?

As for the suggestion itself,

Farmville is not a good game. While Caillois tells us that games offer a break from responsibility and routine, Farmville is defined by responsibility and routine. Users advance through the game by harvesting crops at scheduled intervals; if you plant a field of pumpkins at noon, for example, you must return to harvest at eight o’clock that evening or risk losing the crop. Each pumpkin costs thirty coins and occupies one square of your farm, so if you own a fourteen by fourteen farm a field of pumpkins costs nearly six thousand coins to plant. Planting requires the user to click on each square three times: once to harvest the previous crop, once to re-plow the square of land, and once to plant the new seeds. This means that a fourteen by fourteen plot of land—which is relatively small for Farmville—takes almost six hundred mouse-clicks to farm, and obligates you to return in a few hours to do it again. This doesn’t sound like much fun, Mr. Caillois. Why would anyone do this?

One might speculate that people play Farmville precisely because they invest physical effort and in-game profit into each harvest. This seems plausible enough: people work over time to develop something, and take pride in the fruits of their labor. Farmville allows users to spend their in-game profits on decorations, animals, buildings, and even bigger plots of land. So users are rewarded for their work. Of course, people can sidestep the harvesting process entirely by spending real money to purchase in-game items. This is the major source of revenue for Zynga, the company that produces Farmville. Zynga is currently on pace to make over three hundred million dollars in revenue this year, largely off of in-game micro-transactions.[10] Clearly, even people who play Farmville want to avoid playing Farmville.

(The Real Reason You Are Addicted To Farmville (And Zynga Is A $5 Billion Company))

The players log in regularly to live out a virtual farmer’s life. Such games are designed such that it demands lots of time and dedication on behalf of the user. The crops on Farmville grow on real time and tend to wilt if not taken care of in a proper manner. I have heard people saying that they wake up in the middle of the night to tend to their crops.

(Farmville: Virtual Farming Or Addiction?)

Now that I think of it, I can’t believe I chose to plant virtual crops and wait for hours (or days) for them to bear fruit instead of slaying dragons or taking a virtual McLaren for a spin. Sure I did those too, but none of those games kept me on a leash with timers and promises of more rewards for consistent play. It’s a pity that these chains form the foundation of a good chunk of videogames today. The advent of mobile gaming ushered in a tide of games that tried to replicate what Zynga did, with varying degrees of success. After the success of FarmVille, most of Zynga’s games were merely cosmetic reskins with the same tricks underneath, racking up millions of dollars in the process. The same can be said for most of its competitors.

2009’s Facebook was a very different place. Few platforms have gathered such a wide audience, one that had very little to do with gaming. And with tactics that seem downright predatory, Zynga found itself at the brunt of criticism every now and then. Engineering a sunk cost fallacy while offering paid options that gave players a competitive advantage didn’t exactly sit well with gamers. Nonetheless, it's surprising to see a game subvert expectations: an escape from reality soon became one of dread over missed obligations.

(Farewell FarmVille)

Negative 'spend time to use this or you will lose what you have' mechanics trigger loss aversion bias and result in compulsive playing; players will play longer than is fun for them, and play in ways that are not fun to them, just to avoid the loss of the virtual resources they've acquired. It's extremely unfun (not just as a matter of opinion, it's proven to cause people to continue playing even when not having any fun) and, if significantly impactful, potentially genuinely unhealthy as people will choose to sacrifice sleep so as not to have to sacrifice their virtual resources. Especially for something as common as food, this should never be implemented.

is farmville not a formula for success? am i missing something here
the articles you posted are purely speculation and take a very negative approach of video games as a "waste of time"

i always like to compare video games as a hobby to people who have spent millions of dollars on their stamp collections, or baseball card collections. People who have spent thousands of hours perfecting shooting a ball into a hoop, for no real purpose.n Watching Judge Judy, or some other crap. I certainly would find farmville a more rewarding incentive structure then these hobbies, and therefore would gravitate towawrds it. but saying the only reason people play is addiction? that they play even when they want to quit? sounds like their own problem, why don't they just quit if they would rather be doing other things?

the biggest waste in my life, i feel, is not doing things to accomplish stupid virtual video game crap, because i actually enjoy doing that, even if its meaningless ( so is everything )
rather, the biggest waste is the amount of time i have spent doing things for other people. mainly work, so many hours spent making other peoples lives better, for little gratitude, just so i can buy the things i need to survive... smh

real life is the shittiest video game xD
but then agian i dont expect computers to grow on trees, if i want to computer i need to be contributing to society in some manner

i think the big problem here is the drastic difference between what people think they want, versus what they really want. For example how mainstream news is extremely toxic, yet successful, because they "give people what they want" i.e headlines, controversial opinions, shit like that

you will have people that are over achievers, obsessive compulsive, so no matter what the game requires of you that will make that sacrafice, but they are going to be obsessive compyulsive about something no matter what, thats their personality not the game. The game is designed to give them what their brain wants. If they so choose they can re channel that energy somewhere else. You don't have to complete the game, you don't have to get all the best stuff, you can just play for fun. Oh my food rotted let me make some more, but no. Everybody wants to be top efficency, well, that takes effort,. the larger effort required the greated diversity you will find in the achievments of people playing

[DonVelD]

nigga balls