Poll

How important you find adding marriage feature to the game?

Very important, high priority.
49 (22.7%)
Would be nice but I'd like to see some other big features given time first.
107 (49.5%)
No opinion really, when devs feel like it.
30 (13.9%)
Not that important, low priority.
17 (7.9%)
I wouldn't care about it all.
13 (6%)

Total Members Voted: 214

Topic: Adding marriage - poll about how you find its priority  (Read 25152 times)


StefanPravda

« Reply #45 on: March 11, 2020, 01:33:20 PM »
For starters I'd love the marriage thing even just for the fact of having someone always with me, I don't really care if she would help me or not. Will liven up my cabin. Anything else comes as a bonus.

jonottawa

« Reply #46 on: March 11, 2020, 04:01:23 PM »
I'd rather not see politics in the game. I play the game in part to escape politics and introducing 21st century SJW orthodoxy into a late stone age game would ruin most of its charm for me. So for that reason, I think introducing marriage is a bad idea.

Roheline

« Reply #47 on: March 26, 2020, 09:47:05 AM »
I think it's possible to add this feature without it becoming political. I'd like to second for the notion of more complex "bonding relationships" between characters as suggested by Dr. Hossa above. If the relationship isn't directly spelled out, then there's no need to be overly concerned with being PC, as people can fill in the gaps as they like with RP (isn't that what we do anyway?).

I also like the idea of PC's relationships with NPCs going beyond just the "marriage" definition. Maybe an old man comes to live with me and I roleplay it's my aging father. Or a child is an adopted orphan. Or a fellow woman is my sister or my cousin or my weaving apprentice...you get the idea.

Perhaps a feature could be added where if a young man and young woman (either one being the PC) live together for at least one game year, there's some percent chance a baby appears. If some players feel strongly against this, it could even be a toggle on/off option.

To be honest, for me personally it's less important to have the game be a marriage simulator than it is just to have some kind of more complex social interaction so my world feels less empty and lonely. Just the addition of villagers remembering and greeting me made a huge difference, having a complex companion option would be icing on the cake. Even before adding a marriage feature, I would adore it if we occasionally ran into village events like harvest festivals, solstice ceremonies, the weddings of the villagers themselves, etc. Or if the replies to "How's it going" gave more answers than "Fine" - perhaps things like "It's great, we just had a baby born" or "What terrible weather, the crops might fail!" (which could prompt extra gratitude if the PC gifts food) or "Where did you get your fancy axe (shirt/shoes/etc)?" or "I'm fine but you're looking hungry, have some bread!" if the PC is a tribesman/woman with a good relationship with the village and is starving.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2020, 09:59:42 AM by Roheline »

StefanPravda

« Reply #48 on: March 26, 2020, 11:30:55 AM »
Since when marriage is something political? Let's leave out 2020 drama out of this, this is a game in another period of time. The elks should decide what to add, if they decide to add something, based on what happened then, aka history, not politics.

I personally definitely want somekind of marriage and even the possibility to have toddlers, even if they will never grow up. For an added challenge and for the fun of it. Since little cubs have been implemented in the game, why not have a few kids too.

jonottawa

« Reply #49 on: March 26, 2020, 06:34:48 PM »
Since when marriage is something political? Let's leave out 2020 drama out of this, this is a game in another period of time. The elks should decide what to add, if they decide to add something, based on what happened then, aka history, not politics.

If they decide to do that they will be called nasty names. Most people who get called those nasty names capitulate to the people doing the name-calling. Rather than that happening, I'd rather see things remain as they are.

StefanPravda

« Reply #50 on: March 26, 2020, 06:46:41 PM »
If they decide to do that they will be called nasty names.
There is a simple solution for abusing people. It's called banning them. So if someone becomes like that, bye. I don't see why the rest of the people have to be punished because of a small minority of aggressive persons.

Labtop 215

« Reply #51 on: April 05, 2020, 09:13:27 PM »
If they decide to do that they will be called nasty names.
There is a simple solution for abusing people. It's called banning them. So if someone becomes like that, bye. I don't see why the rest of the people have to be punished because of a small minority of aggressive persons.

I think I get what Jonottawa is getting at.  Social Justice Warriors.  Essentially people that can leverage a ton of bad press and possibly get the game "cancelled" as far as the mainstream is concerned.  Potentially anyway, but not necessarily.

If this did happen, I don't think such a campaign would be successful if Sami sticks to what is historically accurate and doesn't give in by apologizing for doing nothing wrong.  Him and his team would also have to be careful not to fan the flames of outrage if this came to pass, but I think URW would get through the drama unscathed.

Marriage is on the development table, what form it will take, we don't know.

http://www.unrealworld.fi/urw_development.html

JP_Finn

  • Honorary Lifetime Supporter
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 368
  • Total likes: 140
  • Thawed Finn in SoCal
    • View Profile
« Reply #52 on: May 02, 2020, 09:20:52 AM »
Is it still an issue, if people play female player character who wishes to marry a strapping tribesman from nearby, or faraway, village?

Anyway, marriage already was in game in mid ‘00
It was pretty expensive to woo someone. I recall silver jewelry, and some fine hides, then a fine knife. Not sure where the goods went, I’m pretty sure the goods didn’t stay/come with them. Almost like backwards dowry.

@Roheline, the NPC were really chatty in the past. They got converted to more Finn-like communique though. Most of the NPC response lines when translated to Finnish is what you’d hear in Finland, today. “Mustn’t grumble” “ei voi valittaa” (alternate direct translation “can not complain”)
Finnish folks unless talking with immediate family, don’t do ‘small-talk’. It’s short, to-the-point-of-being-blunt/frank”.
No one uses similar phrase to “let me be frank with you:...” in Finland. It’s the default setting.

 

anything