You have a fundamental misunderstanding of this post. The purpose was to give a comprehensive list of different fuels that could be added throughout the game’s various maps and updates, not to suggest that all of these fuels, (along with corresponding tools, generators, land vehicles, sea vehicles, air vehicles, and railroad vehicles for each,) should ever be added to any particular map.
Just because food won’t be such a laughably irrelevant issue as it was in 3.X doesn’t mean it’ll be impossible for a player to ever aquire enough food that they could choose whether to eat a candy bar to help provide energy for mental activity or a protein bar to help provide strength for physical activity. I didn’t particularly like the some of the specifics of anonimoanbu’s suggestions in that thread, but you’re just echoing some of the weakest criticisms on that thread.
Baseless assumptions you’re making about Unturned II or this suggestion for Unturned II that your argument is predicated on:
- Vehicles will be sparse
- It won’t take time to steal vehicles
- It won’t cause sound to steal vehicles
- It won’t require hardware to steal vehicles
- Vehicles won’t be upgradeable to resist or deter stealing
With the possibilities of far greater map sizes, more hands off map making tools, bullets hitting targets through vehicles (instead of having to destroy vehicles) and modular damage and upgrades to vehicles already being explored by Nelson, I would argue that it’s more reasonable to assume that vehicles will play a far larger role in Unturned II than in Unturned.
And how did you read this:
- Stealing, in order to steal a car you’d need to find some sort of equivalent to a stealy wheely, to picklock the car and hot wire it to steal, this tool hopefully would be rarer than the stealy wheely in 3.0.
And think it meant this:
The way Unturned II is coded, we can have base clothing variety and additional modifiers to base clothing items. The two are in no way mutually exclusive.
So the problem here is that you don’t understand where the inspiration came from or why it was suggested? Did you miss the part about Ground Branch? Is that even an argument? How does that (or any of the preceding points) support (what seems to be) your attempt at a main idea; that these posts you’ve singled out are bad because “realism for the sake of realism?”
If there’s problem with the forums, it surely falls more on low effort and thoughtless posts that suggest or criticize without having done even the barest of research, not with any of these posts I’ve defended here.
Oh, and about realism for the sake of realism, I’ve one thing to say: Do not cite the Deep Magic to me, Witch. I was there when it was written.