I know in the pleistocen allow the human cross, but had occurred before.....
I imagine you will know better.. ...I know in pleistocene allowed humans to cross but i want to know if had happened before....
just wondering.
This idea is sort of the opposite of Oregon Trail: you're the first peoples moving into the Americas over the land bridge that will someday be the Bearing Strait, about 20,000 years ago.
I had this idea because I love wandering around in Breath of the Wild, hunting and gathering, killing the occasional megafauna, and I wish the map would go on and on, without any goal other than seeing the terrain gradually change from one type of biome to another. I don't know how many other people would be into this, but it would be immensely satisfying to just wander generally southward with a tribe, hunting to keep our stamina up, crafting clothes, housing, and weapons, looking for a gap in the ice sheet, and seeing the landscape gradually change. That provides a lot of opportunity to learn real history through the game, hence the allusion to Oregon Trail.
The difference from Oregon Trail (other than the obvious difference in era and historical situation), is that I'm imagining Breath of the Wild-style game mechanics. (Disclosure: BotW is my first 3D game after a few decades of not playing video games, and I haven't tried out Valheim yet.) I've seen that Oregon Trail's graphics has improved, but it's still not the sort of open world, run-around-and-shoot-things-with-arrows I have in mind.
The difference from BotW is (a) no goal other than wandering around North and South America and (b) no teleportation, and generally low-key magic, if any at all. It should fit the situation of what people of the time are likely to have believed. For instance, suppose there is a practice that is believed to cause rain: maybe in the game, it does cause rain with a relatively low probability. Keep the players wondering whether it really is effective, and whether they're wasting materials on itβthe rational decision anyone would have to make if they really don't know.
The idea of making a BotW-style map the size of North and South America is implausible, but it doesn't need to be filled with human-created puzzles the way BotW is. The map could be generated, using publicly available topographic data as a starting point. The hardest part would be creating appropriate flora and fauna for the different biomes. Or this game could be created and released in stages, expanding the map in response to demand. Or you could ignore this part of the idea and have the end of the game be when the tribe gets clear of the glaciers.
I haven't thought through how there would be a "tribe." Multiple p
... keep reading on reddit β‘
This is Beringia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beringia it existed 15,000 years ago, it was an ancient land bridge than connected Siberia with Alaska and it was the means of migration for the ancestors of native american people to come to America. Beringia still exists, it is just under 60 meters of water. I've heard of proposals to build a bridge or a tunnel connecting the two continents, but what if we did one better and actually rebuilt the land bridge? One way to do it is to build a wall to the south and another wall to the north and then pump out the water inbetween, and afterwards just build a road on the former sea floor? This would solve a lot of problems that a bridge might have, for example, no worries about the wind blowing cars and trucks off the bridge is traffic is between two walls separating the Pacific from the Arctic ocean, and this might have the added benefit of slowing down global warming as the warm Pacific waters would no longer mix with the Arctic ocean making the climate colder on the shore areas reducing the melting of glaciers and so on.
A long time ago, I read that there were generally held to be three great waves of migrations across the Bering land bridge to North America. The descendants of the most recent are the Inuit & Aleut peoples. The one before that was the Athabaskans. And the first resulted in all the other native peoples of the Americas.
I've been repeating this as Known Fact ever since, but it occurred to me that, with improved knowledge, prevailing theory may be different these days. Is this the case?
EDIT. I'm well aware that what I read would certainly have been a simplification. There had to have been some mixing between groups, for example. But is it a simplification of something still held to be true?
