Player Genetics

If you had type 1 diabetes there is no way you would survive in an apocalypse situation. Also, how would you feel if you couldnt eat until you gave yourself a dose of insulin? How would you feel if you couldnt see anything anything for like an hour because glasses have no randomly spawned yet? How would you feel if you spent all that time getting them, get kosed, then have to start the process over again? Most of these are horrible to add, Especially if you get a crappy one and have it forever (like what you said with the S64ID).

1 Like

Thats something more along the lines of what I was thinking. For each percievingly bad trait you’d be given a percieingly good trait. /shrug

I agree

As I said in earlier comments, obviously some genetic diseases (like Hemophillia) would be terribly bad if implemented exactly like their real-world counterparts (so sometimes balanced>realism, common sense?). My idea on the T1 Diabetes was you would, over time, suffer the effects more gradually until you found insulin in a pharmacy, hospital, or civilian household. Same for other diseases such as sight - you would A - not be blind as soon as you spawn, and it would gradually get worse over the course of multiple hours and B - sight obviously will have some limit to how bad it can get. Nobody would be able to play or enjoy the game if they were as blind as me irl.

Instead of taking my suggestion head-on for what I proposed, think a bit broader about the whole concept entirely. I never said you had to go out and get a dose of insulin everytime you wanted to eat or what not.

I’d appreciate challenge and survival. Not another arcade shooter. Even if that means adding some more survival and human-health systems such as genetics and/or traits. Sure 4.0 could probably be neat on it’s own, but some extra small ideas could make it neat. Perhaps, as others have said, (and especailly the system @NeedlessMemeing proposed) for each negative gene you could have a positive gene / effect. Perhaps players could choose to be bland, standard players with average physique and genetics - perhaps they should be given the choice between the two.

Nice straw maning. real nice.

Again, you could think of this a bit broader and in different ways. Obviously there could be a limit to how bad eyesight can become. And obviously a player wouldn’t simply spawn with the worse eyesight ever. You’re making it out to seem like an unnecessary challenge (like Carpat did with EXP+Inventory space) rather than what it is / could be.

RNG? Not familiar with that wording.

Guess what I had specifically thought of and added to the suggestion? Wanna take a wild guess at what you didn’t read? Hmmm :thinking:

Other people in the post have also suggested a system of choice, rather than pure random chance.

Other people have already mentioned or thought of the idea of bad debuffs giving good buffs. and really bad debufs giving really good buffs. Or simply having the option to choose between being an average joe or what not.

People with the supposed ‘artificial advantage’ you’re talking about would also have an ‘artificial disadvantage’. And the player you call into question that they’re up against would have a similar problem. One could have Achondroplasia and its harder / takes longer for them to reload magazines (but because of their disorder they’re shorter, which may be handy when behind cover), while the other may have Farsightedness and an iron-sight may be a little more difficult to use (and may have a positive gene allowing for such as increased muscle memory = ADS slightly quicker). Of course things could be more balanced than just that. But it’s simply an example.

this post was made by good legs gang

1 Like

Imagine having Tourette syndrome, using a bolt-action sniper and firing at a group, then get stuck in a constant loop of pulling the bolt back over and over

1 Like

Nah, fam, you gotta find your own wheelchair (just like insulin and glasses)

Yep. Gotta crawl around blind and disabled. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

1 Like

What the fuck is this suggestion.
I have just two question about this suggestion. ONE, do you think players will enjoy having permanent defects that they can’t change? (Note CRISPR is not just something you can just put into yourself and expect it to fix your problems)
TWO, do you think this is a meaningful addition to the game that will make a positive impact on gameplay?

2 Likes

these suggestions are getting dumber and dumber, we need to be creative again. Actually no, we don’t, this suggestion IS creative it just isnt smart. No one would enjoy this except roleplayers, and even then I don’t think they would. The only games a genetic mechanic like this would really work is a rouge like, because it has been in a rouge like and it worked. Maybe if unturned was singleplayer only this would be neat

keyword: Neat

7 Likes

And just because it’s balanced doesn’t mean it should be added.

It’s pure RNG. Either that or even if it isn’t, then people will pick a “meta choice” where they get one bad trait but one good trait that is the most effective.

It’s just a bad idea overall and I can’t believe people are even remotely considering adding it. It’s just like cannibalism; it won’t be added to II.

5 Likes

As someone who enjoys RP I object

1 Like

wait… for RP? oh hell yeah. if we can change our genetics then definitely make me autistic.

Because then, when i drive a Firetruck through 5 houses and when the RP Police come by, it’ll be simplified for them.

1 Like

Alright last Comment here

SEIZURE WARNING
SEIZURE WARNING
Seizure Genetics
SEIZURE WARNING
SEIZURE WARNING

balance=/=realism

Of course. Never suggested something that wouldn’t had been meaningful, obviously.

Excuse me, but I never Roleplay. I hate Roleplay. Just because you see this only appealing to such a crowd doesn’t mean me, a survival enthusiest, or others, will see it purely as a roleplay aspect.

Still don’t know what this means.

Just because it makes sense, would add to the game, is balanced, and some players would enjoy it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be added. As we said, we even suggested that you could choose to be the ‘average joe’ and not suffer any bad genetics in return for no positive ones. This solution literally appeals to you, someone that doesn’t want it, and players that do want it.

Cannibalism is a completely different story and the basis of which why it will never be added is due to Unturned’s nature as a free, blocky kid game. Genetics are not bad for kids. If anything they’d learn a thing of two for once.

RNG means Random Number Gods Generator

1 Like

I’d break down the post, but honestly, it isn’t worth my time; nor others.

You have never changed your mindset on any suggestion you have made on these forums ever, judging by the ever so growing number of comments. To anyone trying to debate his points, I don’t want to come across as rude, but it’s really pointless. Just leave your thoughts and move on, like I’m going to do myself.

Anyways, I’m sorry, but can you seriously expect Nelson to go “Oh yeah, let’s add diabetes to Unturned!”
The mere concept is laughable.

“guys achondroplasia is the best choice, make sure you go for that” - new reddit post after II launches

Anyways, the mere idea that you said

yet the entire suggestion is completely game changing, ranging from affecting hitboxes in pvp to adding new items completely based around it, to even the mere fact that it heavily changes player vision, stats, etc, and even just how players would interact with something as simple as killing Turned is entirely hypocritical.

3 Likes

Everytime you respawn the screen should dim darker and darker til its pitch fucking black and you can’t see shit and gotta find a new server, but guess what dipshit, Its tied to steam64id, haha baby now you gotta make a new steam account to play.

2 Likes

Just going to add onto the hottest of your takes here

Not really sure what you are trying to say here. Sure, if it takes place a decade or two in the future, you could probably find syringes full of CRISPR juice that cures common genetic problems, and this would be fine in a single player game (cdda has this) but it wouldnt in a multiplayer survival game for the reasons literally everyone else has mentioned. Also if you are going to be adding a unique trait thats supposed to impact your game, it probably shouldnt be straight up removable.

You missed the positive impact portion, probably because this doesnt create a positive impact. This creates people complaining on forums that they spawned with nearsightedness and now can not snipe with ironsights for the rest (because of the steamid) of their entire experience of the game. Do you realise how many people this would piss off? “oh boy cant wait to play UII, oh wait I am now at a pernament disadvantage in the early game of literally every server no matter what! how fun!”

This would be the instant meta, making your entire suggestion irrelevant

I mean by making all genetic problems diseases that ruin a players experience and something that must be cured by genetic modulation asap this is kinda getting into the eugenics side of things but hey :man_shrugging:

This sums it up. I havent actually seen you ever come to a compromise on anything,even when you are pretty much the only person who wants it.

Obligatory poll.

  • I want genetic disorders!
  • I do not want any genetic disorders.
0 voters
2 Likes

Guess I didn’t see those reasons.

Obviously it should / could. As I said, the CRISPR idea is debatable, not sure if it should or should not be in the game. But if it is, then obviously it should be rare and expire or what not.

People sign up for what they download. If Unturned II offers a big, in-depth survival experience and Genetic Diseases is apart of that players shouldn’t be complaining. They will learn to overcome survival obstacles. Thats as stupid as having Nelson add durability and people flying to the forums crying about it. Does that mean it should be removed because it’s a nuisance and unnecessary to them? Again, people have suggested that you don’t spawn with immediate 1/20 vision, rather it degrades over time, perhaps multiple real-life days of scavenging, hunting, shooting, and playing. It’s simply something to maintain and keep track of, just like food/water/rads/durability. People complaing about those 4 things, but we still see them present in the game.

Also, if you simply read, other people have suggested that diseases shouldn’t be based on S64ID, rather players can choose to have one genetic disease and get a corresponding positive benefit from it. Or, players could choose to not have any disease and be an average joe with no positive benefits.

No idea what ‘instant meta’ means. Though I take it you mean all players would choose this. Thats your take on the idea. In TF2 we don’t see every player using the default stock weapons - some players choose different weapons that have buffs and debuffs associated with them for different playstyles, advantages, alongside with the occurring disadvantages.

I’d rather have this stay a discussion, not some kind of vote that gets it locked for whatever reason.

you hear that fallout 76 players? you can’t complain about the game being vapid, buggy garbage because you downloaded it! this is some of the dumbest logic i’ve ever seen.

not to mention that you’ve been (seemingly) the first one to think of genetic disorders as a feature. nelson sure as hell never mentioned them. so if they show up in my game and they turn out to make the game shittier, then yeah, i’m gonna complain, because i was never told this would happen, and it has happened, and it sucks.

3 Likes

Food, water, rads, and durability. if they show up in my game and they turn out to make the game shittier, then yeah, i’m gonna complain, because i was never told this would happen, and it has happened, and it sucks.