Darkness at Night

[Pengman19]

Most games use: 1 minute (in game) = 1 second (in real life). Like GTA 5 and Fallout 4. It’s pretty standard.This ratio means a full day cycle in game passes in 24 minutes (in real life). No reason to use any other ratio.

This is kind of a poor argument. So, because everyone is doing it (“standard”), that, by default, makes it the best and most logical method for every type of game? I happen to disagree with you here.

Kingdom Come is aiming for historical realism, and several other “hardcore” realistic elements (needing to eat, sleep, etc.).

It only makes sense that day/night cycles follow along this realistic path. 1 sec = 1 min is kind of ridiculous, especially for a game that casts shadows. You see sudden shifts in shadows, which should, in reality, be more gradual, to the point of being unnoticeable. This is just one annoyance.

Now, I do acknowledge that the game will most likely be beaten in 50-100 hours for most people. So 1 minute = 1 minute is probably not an option. I would argue for something reasonable; 1 day (in game) = 1 hour (in real life)

[tuseroni]

why is 1 minute=1 minute not an option?

there are time skip methods and cut scenes move time as needed, so if you need to do something at night you can just time skip or sleep til then.

i think 1:1 is the best ratio for time.

[snejdarek]

it is taking many times longer to move between our small collection of hamlets/villages than it would in real life.

I spent whole day moving through a small part of the game area in real life and I was using a car to get between the “filler” places!

Traveling to the game area and beyond [quote=“hexicGrind, post:14, topic:27559”]
because really, how many people back then always got 3 squares
[/quote]

Basically everyone. Just not with that much meat as we do today.

[Lieste]

I just walked and jogged (in game) between the gates of Talmberk and the Merchant in Samopesh. Took around 2hrs (8 minutes) jogging and 5.5hours (23 minutes) walking.
(Added: Walking horse 4hrs (16 minutes), trotting horse 1.5hrs (6 minutes) - which makes a canter around 30km/h, in actual time spent, but only 2km/h in game time… walking on foot around 7.5km/h (or so) in actual time spent, but only .5km/h in game time - Fartlek style running is similar to a cantering horse, while ‘galloping’ with cantering during recovery is about 50% faster than canter alone).

This journey (in the real world) would be around 3km (though not all the paths have the same layout, so I approximated the more direct route over the hill out of Talmberk.

Of course, I am aware that the in game map isn’t a 1:1 representation and distances taken from a modern map may be inconsistent with the in game world… also that my measurement of both in game and real world times were ‘rough’ - full minutes only and estimates from the inventory clock. They have the appropriate magnitudes though IMO.

Rates of movement seem to be better than I first estimated. But the 15x compression does make travel take far too long.

I know that it is possible to move faster, using the horse and by running, so I’m not bothered -too much- by the rate at which the player crosses the map in terms of time spent at the keyboard… but I am bothered by the time the character spends moving very short distances.

[hexicGrind]

As I said in my last post… Lieste was right. The 1:1 time scale problems are addressed if you can arbitrarily “wait” wherever you are to make it be whatever time you want, whenever you want. If you have to go find a bed though, because the only quick time passing method is sleep, then the problems remain.

The concept that there is a standard method that most games use, just means that we know that it works, not that we have to use it. It does however make it a very logical choice because we know that most issues with using that system are worked out. Therefore Pengman19, when looking at an array of possible methods, the most commonly tested method is generally the best, because we have the data points to back up every aspect of it’s usage and not just theory.

That being said, there is currently no “wait” mechanic in the game. If they add one, then 1:1 time scale would work perfectly. Otherwise, the ideal option is to go with the “tride and true”, 1 minute (in game) = 1 second (in real life).

Also snejdarek, if you think everyone got 3 square meals back then, then why do you think that they found fat people attractive? It was because getting enough to eat, or too much to eat, was attractive. It was difficult to do. Nowadays with a plethora of food it is harder to stay in shape, which is why we find that attractive.

[Lieste]

What is “T for wait” if not a method of passing time at will?

[tuseroni]

bring up the inventory, press t, wait as long as you like.

[snejdarek]

This journey (in the real world) would be around 3km (though not all the paths have the same layout, so I approximated the more direct route over the hill out of Talmberk.

It would take 7 minutes with car according to google maps. My personal experience is that it takes more since google maps count a speed just below maximum, but these small roads are anything but a pleasant drive at 90 km/h.

[Lieste]

This is the route that I roughly follow in game…

Talmberk-Samopesh

It would take around 25 minutes to walk this distance.

(Going the longer way to the south will obviously take longer, but I’d assume a speed of around 30km/h rather than 90 for these minor roads to be honest… even in GoogleMaps)

From scaling the in game map (with the assumption that the map is ‘around 4km’ and has a ‘round’ scaling per pixel…

1.75m per pixel: 4.1km x 3.6km map. 2.21km route, 5.76km/h walking
2m per pixel: 4.7km x 4.1km map. 2.52km route, 6.58km/h walking

This gives a little compression of this region, but far lower than is typical. (Of course, Stribrna Scalice is moved much closer than it would really be and Savaza is moved to a different location than it really has. because the map size would be roughly doubled to include these in their correct locations (for little gain).