
I tried to get rid of the stuff I hate in the survival genre, but realized why they exist in the first place (I think)
I'm making a survival game and I wanted it to be fresh, free of the annoying "chores". But paradoxically, I realized these things aren't as useless as I thought.
- I got rid of slow early progression: you start the game already with a gun because gun combat is the core of the game.
- The result: Players never get to feel the power spike of earning the first ranged weapon
- I removed ammo limits and durability: farming bullets always annoyed me so I always played as a mage or smth and don't get me started on durability.
- The result: There is no endless material sink so scavenging loses meaning over time
- I removed the hunger meter: I hate it when games slap the hunger bar as an afterthought. I though in my case it would only distract you from the actual gameplay.
- The result: Players lose an obvious motivation to explore.
- No searching for the place for you base: my game is about a moving base so you never settle for one place.
- The result: well I'm not sure tbh but I think that it removes the beauty and emotional attachment of finding your place
So I wanted to make a frictionless experience, a fresh look on the genre, but paradoxically this friction slowed down the steep learning curve. Doing familiar stuff like in all other games (cutting trees to build a crafting table) gave you time to understand the game while doing something you already knew.
All in all I don't regret it, I still want to make it feel fresh and will find other stuff to fill these holes eventually, but do you agree? Or am I dramatizing too much? Do you also hate these tedious mechanics? Or do you love your second job?