Are the creatures too aggressive?

AweFilafilOsophyAweFilafilOsophy Join Date: 2016-10-05 Member: 222877Members
At one point, the game went from a few stalkers that you can run away from to having a pack of 5 following you everywhere. Which do you prefer?
«1

Comments

  • subnauticambriansubnauticambrian U.S. Join Date: 2016-01-19 Member: 211679Members
    That's one of the bits I like about subnautica- it's definitely a very hostile world. Although I think, as with all things, there's a balance between passiveness and aggressiveness that can be achieved.
  • ReefseekerReefseeker Finland Join Date: 2015-05-21 Member: 204740Members
    edited October 2016
    I don't mind the current level of aggression in general.

    Although otherwise the creature behaviour types are too simple, roughly being either aggressive, passive or elusive (never curious for example). I think differences in behaviour between species is quite well done at the moment. One can pretty reliably predict how a certain species will act and it should be so. But there could also be minor differences in behaviour between individuals of a certain species. We know this is a thing on Earth so why not in Subnautica? Who knows, it might even serve to make creatures more lifelike.

    Also creatures should have more than one behaviour type per species. I mean who's to say a Sand Shark must be a raging nutsack 24/7? Does it never sleep, rest or something?

    And what about behaviour individually vs. when in a group?
  • 0x6A72320x6A7232 US Join Date: 2016-10-06 Member: 222906Members
    how about aggressive, but more prone to wander off if they don't notice you (so they're not just hanging around the same spot that you want to get to).
  • AweFilafilOsophyAweFilafilOsophy Join Date: 2016-10-05 Member: 222877Members
    0x6A7232 wrote: »
    how about aggressive, but more prone to wander off if they don't notice you (so they're not just hanging around the same spot that you want to get to).

    That would work, because before they would chase you off and then go back to their territory. Now they just hang around where they lose you. also if less spawned that would help.
  • StoutmanStoutman California Join Date: 2016-10-27 Member: 223395Members
    0x6A7232 wrote: »
    how about aggressive, but more prone to wander off if they don't notice you (so they're not just hanging around the same spot that you want to get to).

    The critters do not wander, 'tis how the engine is designed so I doubt this will happen anytime soon. If ever.
  • subnauticambriansubnauticambrian U.S. Join Date: 2016-01-19 Member: 211679Members
    @MrRoarke I see your point, that's very well thought out.
  • AvimimusAvimimus Join Date: 2016-03-28 Member: 214968Members
    Actually I'd take a different line:

    Their aggression is too predictable

    IRL, what makes sharks terrifying is that they are usually safe... but... you never know...

    Imagine letting your guard down around a well fed Reaper Leviathan... because usually they are not hungry.
  • VoilodionVoilodion Join Date: 2016-10-18 Member: 223230Members
    Creature aggression is fine when it adds gameplay time and value. Give me a reason why I should try to defeat or get past this creature, and the tools to do so, and you have an interesting challenge that extends gameplay. Stalkers patrolling the kelp forest work this way (though getting them to drop teeth is a royal pain and needs tuning).

    However, too much of the creature behavior, especially with recent updates, just tells the player, "Go away. You can't get rid of these things, so find another spot to look for resources, and don't build here." Sand sharks, bonesharks, and crabsquid come to mind. Now we have a newly fleshed-out zone that includes crabsquid and aggressive river prowlers. They already shut me out of the Deep Grand Reef, and I guess now I won't be building in the Lost River either.

    Adding content that the player is expected to avoid is a waste of development resources and reduces gameplay scope and duration.
  • Morph_GuyMorph_Guy Join Date: 2016-04-21 Member: 216034Members
    edited October 2016
    Right now the creatures are way too aggressive.
    Hopefully they change the creature behaviors in the future to make them more natural.
  • ShuryCZShuryCZ Czech Republic Join Date: 2015-07-07 Member: 206047Members
    It's struggle, it's fear, it's frustration, it's SURVIVAL where you got to watch your step ! :D I am sure they will calm the creatures down a bit in the future tho.
  • AweFilafilOsophyAweFilafilOsophy Join Date: 2016-10-05 Member: 222877Members
    Avimimus wrote: »
    Actually I'd take a different line:

    Their aggression is too predictable

    IRL, what makes sharks terrifying is that they are usually safe... but... you never know...

    Imagine letting your guard down around a well fed Reaper Leviathan... because usually they are not hungry.

    actually that's a great idea. There's already a message you get from the PDA when you first enter the Aurora, warning that human remains have been found in local fauna. having it so the scanner can alert you if a stalker is full or not would fit right in line with that!
  • AvimimusAvimimus Join Date: 2016-03-28 Member: 214968Members
    How about randomising aggression and randomsing locations of predators? That's be unpredictable.
  • FluffersFluffers United States Join Date: 2015-05-22 Member: 204749Members
    I'm fine with the aggression levels, if anything some creatures aren't aggressive enough. What I have a problem with is how many predators there are. There's something a lot scarier about knowing that predators are nearby, but not knowing where exactly. Sure, it's scary when you go to the deep grand reef and see 5 crabsquids all in a group, but it'd be a lot scarier if you only heard one but couldn't see where it was. It's scary when you go to the underwater islands and see 3 million bone sharks, but it'd be scarier if there were less, because it would make exploring the wrecks there feasible, but still nerve wrecking because you never know if a boneshark is gonna ninja up behind you.

    So yeah, keep them as aggressive, and make some stuff even more aggressive, but lower those damn spawn rates and spawn caps.
  • AweFilafilOsophyAweFilafilOsophy Join Date: 2016-10-05 Member: 222877Members
    edited October 2016
  • ResolutionBlazeResolutionBlaze The Dunes Join Date: 2016-04-06 Member: 215392Members
    edited October 2016
    I honestly think it should depend on the creature. Stalkers should be territorial during the day and relentless during the night.

    Sandsharks should stay hidden for hunting during the day (still waiting for them to be able to pop out of the sand) but inactive at night (to balance, make biters more active at night). Biters should have medium aggression in packs but once alone run off. Or better yet they could utilize swarming tactics.

    Reaper Leviathans should honestly be a consistent threat, but they can enter certain regions or are active in some regions more than others at certain times of day.

    Aggression should depend a lot on situation. Are you impeding on territory? Are you yourself being aggressive, and if so, how does the creature respond? Are you in a machine? I think many aggression and population issues would be solved if creature intelligence were more individual, each creature being a completely special case and depending on the time of day and how fed the creature is, can determine how aggressive, if at all, the creature can be.
  • jpinardjpinard Join Date: 2016-09-17 Member: 222373Members
    Avimimus wrote: »
    Actually I'd take a different line:

    Their aggression is too predictable

    IRL, what makes sharks terrifying is that they are usually safe... but... you never know...

    Imagine letting your guard down around a well fed Reaper Leviathan... because usually they are not hungry.

    This is a brilliant post. I hope the developers read what you wrote and can make this happen.
  • EnglishInfidelEnglishInfidel Canada Join Date: 2016-07-04 Member: 219533Members
    edited October 2016
    This guy gets it;
    Avimimus wrote: »
    Actually I'd take a different line:

    Their aggression is too predictable

    IRL, what makes sharks terrifying is that they are usually safe... but... you never know...

    Imagine letting your guard down around a well fed Reaper Leviathan... because usually they are not hungry.

    So does this guy;
    I honestly think it should depend on the creature. Stalkers should be territorial during the day and relentless during the night.

    Sandsharks should stay hidden for hunting during the day (still waiting for them to be able to pop out of the sand) but inactive at night (to balance, make biters more active at night). Biters should have medium aggression in packs but once alone run off. Or better yet they could utilize swarming tactics.

    Reaper Leviathans should honestly be a consistent threat, but they can enter certain regions or are active in some regions more than others at certain times of day.

    Aggression should depend a lot on situation. Are you impeding on territory? Are you yourself being aggressive, and if so, how does the creature respond? Are you in a machine? I think many aggression and population issues would be solved if creature intelligence were more individual, each creature being a completely special case and depending on the time of day and how fed the creature is, can determine how aggressive, if at all, the creature can be.

    I just posted this in another thread, but it applies here too.
    I think it's both. Some creatures are too aggressive (or at least too easy to trigger the aggro) but others are not aggressive or enough of a threat.
    No option reflects how I feel. There are too many of some creatures and too little variation in threat level. There's absolutely no difference in threat between a Sandshark and a Stalker, and they're both dealt with in the same way. (Bullfight tactics mostly, let them charge then move at the last moment and swim off.)
    They need to make certain predators numerous but less aggressive unless you disturb them.

    But others need to be slightly less numerous but buffed, and highly aggressive, like really, really aggressive, and only come out at night.

    ie; Sandsharks hunting in big packs, but they don't attack you on sight like they always have, only if you give them cause or get too close will they all swarm you.
    And Stalkers are extremely aggressive and will actually stalk you when you escape them, but they only come out at night. They need to be like a really annoying pain in the ass that will kill you easily and chase you relentlessly. I want to actually scan my surroundings and make sure the way is clear before I continue into an area, instead of just heading over there and then dealing with whatever nasties are there.

    Basically, the way you currently deal with Reapers, (try to avoid, move cautiously through their turf) that's how we should have to deal with other creatures too. (Doesn't have to be Stalkers, but come on, they're called Stalkers, they should live up to the name.)

    You know that feeling or permanent worry or concern you get when you're in Reaper territory? That needs to happen in other places too. I don't want to feel "safe" anywhere, except maybe in the safe shallows, and even that shouldn't be 100% because a Stalker could have followed you.

    TL;DR...
    Less low-level "nuisance" threats, more terrifying and dangerous threats.
  • AweFilafilOsophyAweFilafilOsophy Join Date: 2016-10-05 Member: 222877Members
    edited October 2016


    You know that feeling or permanent worry or concern you get when you're in Reaper territory? That needs to happen in other places too. I don't want to feel "safe" anywhere, except maybe in the safe shallows, and even that shouldn't be 100% because a Stalker could have followed you..

    Agree. Going into reaper territory to get to the front of the Aurora is probably one of the most terrifying parts in the game imo.
    However, I don't think that feeling of dread is needed everywhere. I would love to take time and appreciate the beauty of the lost river, or the kelp biome, without being attacked by a pack of the ghost fish(forgot their names) or a pack of stalkers. I'm not saying get completely rid of all fear and danger, but maybe tone it down a bit in some areas :)

  • omegatauromegataur Spain Join Date: 2016-01-28 Member: 212240Members
    Yes, everything tries to kill me
  • MyrmMyrm Sweden Join Date: 2015-08-16 Member: 207210Members
    I would like to see some creatures being nocturnal and others diurnal.
  • BDelacroixBDelacroix Florida Join Date: 2016-04-08 Member: 215511Members
    They seem ok, but they are jerks.

    I notice, however, that ever new game I start for the last two stable builds the safe shallows isn't. I get those long toothy fish and the sand sharks in there before too long.
  • DurzannDurzann France Join Date: 2016-07-04 Member: 219575Members
    less creatures, more intelligence, bigger path.

    actually threat is everywhere, everytime.

    Threat really need to stay everywhere, but not everytime



  • SilkSpiderSilkSpider Join Date: 2016-10-22 Member: 223305Members
    Definitely... It's annoying how video games always think herbivore = friendly and passive and carnivore = mean and vicious. Carnivores don't chase prey to the ends of the earth, they would give up and look for something easier. Carnivores are also usually nowhere near as territorial as herbivores. People are way more scared of crocodiles than hippos, even though hippos kill way more people than crocs ever have.
  • brcaswellbrcaswell Join Date: 2009-10-30 Member: 69181Members
    the behavior of alien lifeforms on an unknown world is really whatever you want it to be.

    though I think this question is a bit misleading. the issue may be the number of aggressive stalkers, not the aggressiveness itself.


    I do think there are factors to the behavior of lifeforms that aren't being considered; age, hunger, pack mentality (their role/relationship in the pack).

    how threatened are the animals by me?

    are they curious of new things, or fearful. Do they approach or observe. (where I think age is a factor). Do they become acclimated to my presence?
  • ResolutionBlazeResolutionBlaze The Dunes Join Date: 2016-04-06 Member: 215392Members
    edited October 2016
    Honestly what bothers me more is that eggs are just layin about with no difficulty or challenge in collectin them. Any creature would know instincitvely that leaving offspring alone is stupid and is a great way to cause your species to go extinct.

    eggs, if left alone, should be in VERY well hidden nests or have mothers nearby or a defense mechenism. Gaspod eggs, for example, should secrete a poison, like the adults, one touched.

    Sandsharks can hide next to their eggs, three or four at a time, under the sand.

    Stalkers should have well hidden nests.

    So on.
  • subnauticambriansubnauticambrian U.S. Join Date: 2016-01-19 Member: 211679Members
    Any creature would know instincitvely that leaving offspring alone is stupid and is a great way to cause your species to go extinct..

    Many animals use a method of reproduction called "Broadcast spawning" where they release eggs into the water at random and hope some of them survive. However, your point still stands in this case because most eggs in Subnautica are laid alone, and there are relatively few of them. In contrast, the Atlantic Cod can produce literally millions of eggs.

  • RainstormRainstorm Montreal (Quebec) Join Date: 2015-12-15 Member: 210003Members
    Personally i dont mind the agressivity of the predators. After all, thats what they are, predators and are expected to go after you once they notice you. The small problem i have with them right now however is the fact that very often, upon creating a new game, you get predators spawning very close to the lifepod.

    The Biome is named Safe Shallows so there should not be this many predators right at the start of a game for the player. Plus, as time passes there usually is new predators settling in near the starting ones and before you know it, reaching your Lifepod becomes a high-danger run for your life!

    My suggestion is either remove Sandsharks/Stalkers from the vicinity of the Lifepod or rename the biome to somethin else cuz right now the word ''Safe'' isnt really fitting anymore.

    Beside this matter i do think that the number of predators and their level of agressivity is right on! Good job Devs :smiley:
  • TenebrousNovaTenebrousNova England Join Date: 2015-12-23 Member: 210206Members
    I'm fine with it, I feel that it highlights the situation you're in. You need to leave this planet as soon as possible and no doubt many of the planet's inhabitants want you gone as well!
  • sayerulzsayerulz oregon Join Date: 2015-04-15 Member: 203493Members
    Neither of the options are really exactly what I want. I have had some experience with large animals that could potentially kill me. Granted, they were buffalo, not predators, but the basic feeling is still somewhat similar I expect:

    "I sure hope I don't get attacked"

    and if you are attacked, then it's "oh shit, run!"

    This is not the experience that subnautica's predators provide at all. Indeed, I would equate how they feel much more to mosquitos:

    "Ach, go away."

    "Oh no, it's another one."

    " Not again. How many of these things are there?"

    "Quit bugging me!"

    Predators are a constant annoyance, rather than an occasional threat.
Sign In or Register to comment.