Food and Puzzles don't mix

[Azel]

jesus azel stop being obtuse on the "direct food" thing.

I'm not being obtuse, I'm being correct. A monster is not a ham sandwich. If you think they are the same, then you're the one being obtuse.

a snail respawning is food

That is incorrect. A snail is a monster that has a chance to drop food after you kill it. That is different than the actual food that gets dropped. Arguing otherwise is being obtuse.

you are high level by the time you would go back their and kill a lvl 1 monster in 1 hit stop acting like it's somehow different then grabbing a fish out of the water.

Killing a monster is completely different than putting a piece of food in your inventory.

I would say it's easier to kill a lvl 1 snail with a lvl 10+ party then it is to chase a fish around underwater.

Whether it is easier or not doesn't mean it's the same thing.

starting to sound like you'r being purposfully difficult.

No I'm just being correct. Grimrock 2 has re-spawning food, direct food, whereas Grimrock 1 doesn't. Pretending that monsters are the same as the food they drop is being purposely difficult for the sake of trying to win an argument.

The fish in grimrock 2 only respawn in 1 area and the developers never made the claims you are saying, so you'r basically lying, atleast about the developers statements.

Nowhere did I lie about anything, I simply re-canted something that was stated in this thread. Re-iterating something that was stated is not lying, if you think it is then you are being obtuse.

[minmay]

starting to sound like you'r being purposfully difficult.

No I'm just being correct. Grimrock 2 has re-spawning food, direct food, whereas Grimrock 1 doesn't. Pretending that monsters are the same as the food they drop is being purposely difficult for the sake of trying to win an argument.

Fish aren't the same as the food they drop either. The fish that swim are "small_fish" objects that have a model, animation, swimming controller, and a clickable component that destroys the object, creates a "silver_roach" object and sets the mouse item to its item component.

[Azel]

In the actual game the fish are not dropped, they are food that is caught. The code may use different objects to achieve this desired effect, but it is this desired effect - the end result the user encounters in the game - is what we are talking about. This discussion is not about how the game is coded, it's about how the game is played. And when it's played, the fish are the food that are caught and placed inside the inventory.

Did you notice that the small fish swimming have a virtually identical graphic to the fish that gets placed in your inventory? That's probably because the code is trying to simulate the effect of catching fish, making it appear that the fish swimming are the same as the food they become in your inventory.

But if you prefer to make an argument from the perspective of game code instead of gameplay, then how can you not know the drastic differences between "small_fish" and monsters that have attack and drop rates? Does a Snail or Lizard have a Click Method that instantly destroys the object? Didn't think so.

You must be really bored if your plan is to resort to script to try to prove that food and monsters are the same, all because you don't want to admit you were wrong about food limitations in Grimrock 1 compared to part 2. Silly.

[Anurias]

Just putting it out there for those that might have difficulty following humor via a text based medium, the following is a joke: Azel, while a snail isn't a ham sandwich, escargot is a delicacy. So the snails in Grimrock 1 are food that you just pick up and put in your inventory.

[Azel]

LOL well I stand corrected. Furthermore, it's been far too long since I had some quality snail. Escargot will officially be the first appetizer I enjoy in the New Year. YUMM

[Dr.Disaster]

Now that sounds like an interesting thing to try... play through the game without eating anything. You would probably need to have an alchemist or 2 for potions for both health and energy, but would also have to be careful about fights so as to not waste your health since you wont be able to get any back from resting.

Huh? Is that the same person who once stated this:

In theory, yes you can get through the entire game without drinking a single potion of any type. In practice though... Highly doubtful, and that's pretty hardcore in my opinion.

Playing without food will result in a potion-micro-managing- and crystal-jump-heavy playstyle. Of course you can max the ingredient generation for additional 40-70 health and 35-65 energy potions per alchemist (*) but you will also badly need them because resting becomes pointless and the prolonged combat will gnaw away your patience with every weapon damage being permanently halved and each Special Attack and Spell eating away your now limited energy supplied only by potions and crystals.

And you think playing without potions is hardcore? IMO that's pretty funny.

(*) numbers are based on 35k to 60k tiles walked.

[sapientCrow]

Just to chime on this fairly odd thread which made me laugh at times...

I have played both LoG1 and 2 and a plethora of Mods from 1.
Now in those mods there were some that did in fact cause issues because of the lack of food.

In LoG2 food is infinite... literally
There is not a puzzle in the game that has you walking so many steps that you deplete an entire bar of food resource either.
All puzzles are mostly contained to a certain area. Food is not depleted to a great degree unless you are in combat (swinging) and walking.
Standing in one place thinking about a puzzle does not deplete food.
And as I said most puzzles do not require any really lengthy walks.
So puzzles and food are not mixing...
Food usage is actually mostly paused during the puzzling challenge because you are thinking and trying to figure out what to do.

In addition to that if you are low on food when you begin a puzzle hit f5. Then solve the puzzle then hit f9 and there will be as much loss as it takes to repeat your solution.
As far as the added stresser of having food loss while using higher mind faculties that is part of strategic management

again just some thoughts on a fairly popular topic it seems in this forum for LoG2...
btw...
the obtuse dialog in this thread and the snail talk really had me laughing a lot.

all this energy could be better spent making a mod and populating it with so much food that your characters are too fat to swing weapons or move...

[Anurias]

Now that sounds like an interesting thing to try... play through the game without eating anything. You would probably need to have an alchemist or 2 for potions for both health and energy, but would also have to be careful about fights so as to not waste your health since you wont be able to get any back from resting.

Huh? Is that the same person who once stated this:

In theory, yes you can get through the entire game without drinking a single potion of any type. In practice though... Highly doubtful, and that's pretty hardcore in my opinion.

Playing without food will result in a potion-micro-managing- and crystal-jump-heavy playstyle. Of course you can max the ingredient generation for additional 40-70 health and 35-65 energy potions per alchemist (*) but you will also badly need them because resting becomes pointless and the prolonged combat will gnaw away your patience with every weapon damage being permanently halved and each Special Attack and Spell eating away your now limited energy supplied only by potions and crystals.

And you think playing without potions is hardcore? IMO that's pretty funny.

(*) numbers are based on 35k to 60k tiles walked.

I don't really understand why it sounds like you are taking issue with me suggesting that trying to play though the game without eating would be interesting. Unless you think that something hardcore can't be interesting. Nowhere are those two things exclusive of each other. So how about you enlighten us plebs and share your reasoning for why there's something 'funny' about the fact that I suggested both a run without drinking potions and a run without eating food.

[Azel]

There is not a puzzle in the game that has you walking so many steps that you deplete an entire bar of food resource either.

That is absolutely correct. Now that I have beaten the game, I can say that there were only 2-3 instances where the concept of "hunger" annoyed me, but never did I run out of food.

I did spend more than 20 or 30 minutes trying to figure out a few puzzles, and after I realized how much time passed I had to start checking food bars and/or re-load the saved game. Perfectly viable options. My personal feedback is that worrying about food or having to re-load a saved game to avoid hunger penalties takes away from the beauty and greatness of the "world" of Grimrock. In LoG 1 I was not compelled to come to the forums to post a discussion about the removal of food. This is because LoG 1 felt very much like a traditional old-school crawler, pure dungeon atmosphere with simulation features like "hunger"; so food made sense in that world. In my opinion, the same does not hold true for LoG 2. I strongly believe that Grimrock 2 has greatly matured from the first game, and as such I believe it has outgrown the 1980's concept of having to feed your party. Doing things like feeding characters (or even polishing their armor) falls in to the category of "simulation" as opposed to RPG or Crawler. The whole reason food/water/polishing was introduced in to crawler RPG's was to add "simulation" to the players experience.

Grimrock 2 is not really a simulation at all, it is simply a badass grid-based RPG that has left the dungeon and now lives in an open-world where Puzzle Solving and Character Building dominate the experience. Then again, I could be completely wrong since video games are a form of art and art is subjective; thus, this is just how I have experienced this lovely game. No harm, no foul. As I said before, even if he next 10 official releases of Grimrock continues to have food/hunger as a feature - or actually makes it even more critical a feature - I am still going to play 'em.

One thing worth noting is the fact that "food/hunger" seems to be the biggest complaint anyone can really have about Grimrock. That is a true testament to how fabulous a job the creators did with this game. It is virtually a grand compliment to look at the game in its entirety and simply have a single criticism of, "well maybe no more food?" Not many games can boast of such achievement.

all this energy could be better spent making a mod and populating it with so much food that your characters are too fat to swing weapons or move...

Damn right! I am about 12 hours in to making my first Mod ever. Not just the first Grimrock Mod, but literally the first Mod I have ever created. I have been a software developer professionally since the year 2000, and a dedicated RPG fan who loves classics like Elder Scrolls and the world of Baldurs Gate, Neverwinter Nights, and Ice Wind Dale. These classics offer a Mod community, but not until Grimrock have I ever bothered to consider using my Dev skills to create a game Mod. Even though I'm just a sole nobody, I still think it is a great compliment and testament to how awesome the world of Grimrock has become.

Speaking of which, at some point I want to bring Snails back to Grimrock so that they can drop Escargot (thanks Anurias).

the obtuse dialog in this thread and the snail talk really had me laughing a lot.

yay, glad someone is enjoying the much needed injections of humor

[Anurias]

In LoG 1 I was not compelled to come to the forums to post a discussion about the removal of food. This is because LoG 1 felt very much like a traditional old-school crawler, pure dungeon atmosphere with simulation features like "hunger"; so food made sense in that world.

So you didn't mind food in LoG 1 because it made sense to you there? I can only imagine that you'd feel that it makes sense because your characters are trapped in what amounts to a prison with 'no ready supply of food' so having to manage their hunger by scrounging for whatever scraps of food they can manage to find adds to the immersion. On that note though I fail to see how LoG 2 is any different. Your characters were prisoners on a boat and got shipwrecked on an island far from any traces of actual civilization. It's a wilderness and they end up there with nothing, so hunger is a very real thing that they would have to contend with, just like your characters in LoG 1 had to contend with it. Now if the game took place somewhere that had a village or other friendly area where you could reasonably see your characters stopping there to 'stock up' on food, then food would be less of a thing you'd need to manage as it's not a part of the survival of your characters.