Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I agree completely and i'd prefer that they keep dispersion. But what i'm thinking is alternative methods that can serve one of dispersion's purposes which is determining what weapon is better (sawn off vs normal). Such as stronger recoil, slower bullet speed, more sway, larger visible muzzle flash etc. Just throwing ideas out there that can help alleviate the outcry that is removing dispersion. Because the current systems they have now can be tuned to the point that it makes dispersion not such a requiring factor for weapon balancing. I don't believe its much work too. Heck i can probably mod dispersion in a day given all the proper values for weapons. It's as simple as altering the initial bullet's trajectory when firing. I'm just throwing out possible objective reasons as to why they would remove something rather than subjective reasons such as "over the top". Because without an objective reason we still have a chance to change their minds about it. If they end up deciding they will add it back but cant right now because of time restraints then this thread has served its purpose.
  3. I don't believe it can be much work. If stumped on research they can look at ARMA 3 values, lots of similar weapons, and some identical ones. If by "missing implementation" they mean it's not working at all, I'm sure they can fix it. In the end it is just picking a random number within a specified range. We could speculate about time constraints and dropped features, but this is not the reason stated in the status report. Also, if I recall correctly, which I might not, they claimed they will support the game for 5 years after release... this leaves plenty of time for patches.
  4. Today
  5. I would have to disagree with this. The reason that the AK74 was made, is that the 7.63x39 round had poor enough ballistics that 400+ meter engagements with 5.56mm were statistically unfavorable by a significant margin. In response to this, they opted for an intermediate calibre, high velocity platform that could compete with the NATO rounds in common usage. Compared to an M16, the AK47 made groupings 27% less tight at only 100 meters. At 300 meters, the grouping is on par with the width of a torso. Beyond 400 meters, when combined with skill of the operator and environmental conditions, it was arguably a waste of ammo and concealment to even attempt to take a shot, regardless of what the opposing forces were using; and if the enemy forces were armed with a more accurate system, it would be extremely foolish to start an engagement at these distances. Here's a handy little bit of article that illustrates this concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_AK-47_and_M16#Range_and_accuracy At 200 meters the M16 and AK47 are on par at 100% and 99% of a single-shot hit-probability on Crouching Man (E-Silhouette) Target. At 300m, the M16 is still at 100%, while the AK falls to 94%; at 400m the score is 96% to 82%; and at 500m it's 87% to 67%. Realistically, the prospect of engaging someone at 400 meters with an AK47 for a first strike attempt is far less attractive than with an M16, and at 500+ meters it could best be characterized as "why bother." Interestingly enough, according to the table from wikipedia, the AK has a lethal range 656 meters greater than the M16, due to the much greater weight bullet. Good luck hitting the target, though. This might remind you of how it felt using an AKM in DayZ in many cases. Personally, I hardly ever carried the gun, and never voluntarily engaged anyone at ranges of less than 200m with an intention of actually hitting anything. Some people feel differently, and I know a few who can hit players pretty consistently at ranges of 400 or 500 meters, but not always on the first shot; in these cases they are operating it as more of a SAW than an AR, or sometimes as a battle rifle with a large magazine. Now let us get down to the bones of what this inherent accuracy by design means for each weapon and its unique character and feel in DayZ. Would you regard the FNX as being slightly superior in accuracy to the 1911, irrespective of magazine capacity or iron sights; and the 1911 greatly superior to the Derringer? Imagine if they introduced a couple more variants of the Magnum, with a 3-inch and 8-inch barrel in addition to the standard 6-inch barrel. Would one expect these to perform identically, and if so, why? With the new inventory matrix, I could clearly see the benefit to carrying a snub nose to save weight and only take up a 2x2 grid, in comparison to the likely 2x3 grid of the base model; on the other side of the spectrum, some players might choose the 8-inch barreled model with a 2x4 inventory footprint as a semi-primary weapon, or even add a pistol scope and make it take up 3x4 slots. Without a dispersion value, all of these minor changes in the character of different weapons would be rendered pointless to the player, and ultimately we would lose a significant amount of variety and realism, for which the playerbase likely chooses to play this game in the first place. @DannyDog I get what you are saying, that when you combine sway with bullet drop and automatic fire, the dispersion is the least significant variable in play. And this could very well be the case. But for some of the examples I listed above, it doesn't really make sense. I'll give one more example to try to prove the point -- Sawn-off rifles. Assuming that sawing off a rifle would not interfere with the ability to mount a scope, we should expect the shorter one to be inherently less accurate. Currently they remove the front sights and magically veto our ability to attach any optics, but if this were to change, what is to keep everyone from chopping off 10 inches of their Winchester so it will fit inside a vest, yet maintain the same accuracy due to lack of a dispersion value?
  6. It "being over the top" could be that there are already many factors affecting accuracy that it will be such a miniscule impact for a lot of work. You would need to work on it like you would for recoil (specific weapon values) but it would have much less of an impact on gameplay. In the end it will probably come down to time and if they said they needed to drop it for more time to work on say vehicles or damage system then ill be completely fine. (Remember they plan to have 1.0 out by this year) It just means they can always implement it again in the future so long as they dont mess up the modularity of how weapon firing works.
  7. Melee System needs balance/tweaking

    Melee isnt difficult. It just feels weak. Remember old dayz where the melee was actually left handed? It was crap but it felt really powerful with its fast attacks, hit reaction and collision. Not to mention you can actually aim for the head. You cant even in this one which is like taking a step backwards.
  8. Of course. But it seems strange to remove inherent dispersion, something that just happens automatically, when they are doing things like changing it so you need to take every item into your hands before being able to perform any functions with it. It's not even worth talking about being "too realistic" as inherent dispersion doesn't affect gameplay in such a way. As I mentioned a few times, even CS:GO, the benchmark competitive game, has weapon dispersion. It's a Source game so it can be easily disabled, but they put it in by default. I don't play a ton of games but still, I can't think of any current-gen or last-gen title that lacks weapon dispersion on all its weapons. And going sillier, you don't see Tracer mains complaining about the dispersion of her blasters. It's just how they work. If titles like PUBG and Fortnite manage to have weapon dispersion and thousands upon thousands of casual players enjoying them, while DayZ says realistic dispersion ruins gameplay, despite having had realistic dispersion and just about zero complaints about realistic dispersion, either in ARMA or DayZ, since the first day DayZ mod existed... I don't know what to say.
  9. The Ability to IV yourself

    It seems like a pretty cool thing to add, being able to administer saline or blood bags to oneself. As I read your duct tape idea, a couple ideas came to mind, one of them quite silly. I realized that armbands would be an easy way to implement this, perhaps adding duct tape afterwards to prevent it from falling out if you have to sprint with it a bit. Balancing this self-administered IV mechanic could add all sorts of fun things; like the adrenaline from having been shot recently, or another bullet whizzing by, would unsteady your hands. If you bandage up and pop an epi-pen to buy yourself some buffer shock damage in case you get hit again, there would be a 1 minute cooldown in which trying to administer the IV kit would fail because your hands are unsteady. In this way, it would further reinforce another player needing to administer the IV, given that they have not just been shot at and now have unsteady hands too. Okay, now for the silly idea for how to improvise a mobile IV stand for the injured survivor on the go. Combine Saline Bag IV with cowboy hat, Use Saline Bag IV, put on cowboy hat. And with that, I think I just won the internet for today. Just for good measure, I decided to finally take my most rudimentary first steps of using GIMP to make you this wonderful abomination:
  10. It's possible that the console port had no influence on their decision to remove dispersion. Maybe I'd go so far as to say it's likely. They have been nothing if not deliberate in everything they have done thus far. They redesigned the entire engine so the game could do the things they wanted it to do. I don't really think they would allow the console port to influence any aspect of their game design after so much effort to get it right. But the thought still scares me. I only talk about it as a deterrent, because the possibility exists. But realism hasn't always worked out for DayZ. I think realism within reason should be the goal. DayZ had overly realistic features in the past, but they have slowly removed them one by one from the alpha. Players used to go unconscious for realistic amounts of time, which is stupid. Players would commonly break their legs and be unable to walk, which is stupid. The day/night cycle was actually on a 24 hour schedule on every server, which is preposterously stupid. If you have time, you should check this out. I think it provides interesting perspective on the development of realistic video games. This game is a perfect example of what I am speaking about. The devs had to completely redesign the game after realizing they had made it too realistic. It was so realistic that it was impossible to actually appreciate how realistic it was from the players perspective. The devs realized that they had to redesign many features of the game to make it fun and desirable to play. The result is interesting. It is universally accepted that STALKER is a flawed masterpiece. Fans acknowledge its shortcomings as a game, but are also incredibly impressed with its realism, enough to inspire a strong, but not entirely fulfilled, fan-base. My point is that this is a real possibility for DayZ right now. The risk of being too realistic exists, but at the same time the game's realism is absolutely critical to its success. There must be a balance between the realism and the game. Personally, I am a fan of the removal of dispersion, because it makes shooting less random. All competitively viable games have one thing in common; they are consistent. Random elements don't make for good games generally, as far as competition is concerned. If the same player puts his cross-hair in the same spot, with the same gun, under the same conditions, I think that bullet should do the exact same thing every time. That's not to say the shooting shouldn't be dynamic and realistic, but I think there is definitely a limit to how realistic shooting can become before it just stops being fun and starts being stupid. This is what I think the devs were referring to when they said dispersion is nonsense. From a game-play perspective, it sort of is. If every weapon had it's own unique dispersion that was predictable for that weapon, maybe it would be different. But the way they had previously implemented it, it was random. Still, I am not totally opposed to the implementation of dispersion. Many people seem to care about it on these forums. I could take it or leave it really.
  11. You're preaching to the choir here, but that is quite a large interval of time between those sources. Regardless, the inherent precision should differ between platforms of the same caliber. A quick browsing of the relevant discussion boards came back with a figures of about 1 MOA reported for the T/C Contender (Longhorn analog), and 0.5 to 0.75 MOA for the Model 70 in .308.; unsurprisingly, people reported the .270 models to have a precision of as low as .25 MOA. Personally I'd be tickled pink if the Longhorn shot like a laser gun, but it would be pretty cheesy from a realism standpoint. Why not do away parabolic trajectories while they're at it, eh? Surely raycast trajectories would free up some resources... I wonder just how many of us players with more stick-with-it-tude have bought a second or even third copy of the game in the last year or two. I've bought four copies altogether myself, between my twin characters and a couple gifts. Ahhh, nothing beats logging back in with a different steam account in the same location, and getting a second trip back to the coast within 5 minutes. But seriously, they've already mentioned that cross platform hive compatibility was technically possible, but not feasible, because PC and XBOX One would have obvious imbalances that could not be reconciled. So in light of this, why not give PC players what we want? It just seems janky to remove at this point.
  12. Status Report - 22 May 2018

    Thanks devs/all! I'm excited by the recent progress and look forward to more testing soon.
  13. Honestly, I would not have thought about it at all. I recognized right away that shooting felt a little more "solid" to me. It felt like my bullets went where I intended to put them more often, and I liked it. It doesn't feel like they've taken anything away from the shooting, it feels like they have added to it. However, I have feared this since the day they announced DayZ for console. They aren't porting DayZ to console because they think it will be good on console. All experience with console ports suggests the contrary. They are developing it for console because they ultimately need to profit more from the work they have been doing all these years. Which in my opinion underscores the major problem associated with releasing a game in early access. It is unreasonable to expect people to do work they aren't getting paid for, and I do mean GETTING paid for, not paid for in the past. The world doesn't work that way. The massive amount of work that has been done turning DayZ into a redeemable project did not come free, and anyone who thinks the Alpha profits are sustaining their current work is naive. No one wakes up in the morning and decides to spend their short, precious, life working for money already earned. The decision to overhaul the engine was calculated. They planned out how they were going to pay for this a long time ago. My biggest fear is that the money is in the console version of the game. This terrifies me. If they do in fact compromise the integrity of the PC version for the console version, they will have definitely proven that early access is the most sinister concept to ever assault the industry. But it was a necessary evil to port to console because they chose the route they did. The work just would not have gotten done without profit potential. But again, it does bring the whole notion of early access into question. I really wish they would just let go their death grip on the whole early access thing. No one associates early access with good things. It isn't good to be associated with it. Early access does not define DayZ. It is so much more than that. But for what it's worth, I think DayZ is slowing turning into a masterpiece and I applaud the work that is being done. They haven't done anything to suggest they are making drastic compromises yet in my opinion. I think it is important that DayZ is not just a simulator but also a game. We already have Arma. I'll give the devs the benefit of the doubt for now. I am so happy with the work I've seen so far.
  14. It could actually take a good while, seeing as we don't have any magnifying scopes, and have only 60% of the eye zoom compared to DayZ mod or ARMA. And also what this implies is that dispersion not over the top. Ha. Found this in old status report: Status Report: Week of 28 July 2014 Firearm dispersion was also tweaked to bring accuracy of weapons back to sensible levels and there will be more balancing passes done in the future which will address attachments and projectiles as well. Again this statement goes against the idea that dispersion is somehow excessive. Different people writing the 28 July 2014 and May 8 2018 status reports, but dispersion can't be both "sensible" and "random nonsense" at the same time!
  15. Well damn, now I regret speculating on the reason for considering the removal of dispersion. Maybe when assigning tasks to the people working on the gun mechanics, they got to dispersion and just decided to skip it and see if anyone notices. It brings an interesting question though. How long into stress tests or experimental branch would it have taken one of us to notice that there was no dispersion? Maybe Peter should have just not mentioned it, and we'd be all the happier for it. That is, until some hapless killjoy decides to test a grouping and ruins the game for us all...
  16. why does the first timeline circle on https://dayz.com/ have the caption "Early Access Launch" and point to a status report from february 2015? early access launch was december 2013.
  17. I don't think so, most of those arguments pertain to the gameplay in some way. And as mentioned, I can't think of any game, at least in recent generations, without weapon dispersion—even CS:GO. Apart from the wacky days in early standalone, I didn't notice any irritating over-the-topness in the SIX YEARS of slinging dispersing bullets since DayZ mod. And I didn't see people complain about it either, in either ARMA or DayZ. And all this is a pretty strong argument that there's nothing "over the top" about a realistic dispersion, and if it is not over-the-top, their stated reason to remove it doesn't exist, no? I would like to see some response for elaboration on this idea to remove dispersion, that was for me a bombshell that was casually dropped and not mentioned again. Maybe some dev had a mental picture of bullets flying wildly left and right and all around and thought, we don't need that? I don't know.
  18. It is obvious that the devs are putting gameplay over weapon authenticity with this one, which kind of nullifies most of your arguments. Not to say that I think it is a great decision. They will probably readd it.
  19. Yesterday
  20. Melee System needs balance/tweaking

    Ya fists have always been too op compared to most weapons . That’s something dayz devs (sorry , pistol Pete) should really look into making work right . I don’t want to see 10 million Bruce lee survivors kicking ass in this game , leave that to unique survivors that can maybe specialize in more fighting techniques , speed , and combos via soft skills .
  21. The worst game ever

    Damn, this game plays like one of these Early Access games! Too bad these bad devs didn't put a notice saying that you're playing EA game that will most likely have bugs that damage gameplay experience.
  22. There is only one point I could imagine: Someone new to the game (0h on steam) gets the easier spawns in the first few hours of playtime. within sight of civilization. Dayz does not need more to experience it.
  23. The worst game ever

    @SouthUS. Yes I know. That's why the satire with the house. because: that's exactly the point.
  24. Dont wanna make new thread?Use this!

    maybe softskills? Nobody knows anything so far, because it was very quiet about the details. But surprises are the most intense in a game.
  25. The worst game ever

    But you also press "I understand" every time you want to play it. @Sqeezorz So that's not an excuse for him.
  26. Dont wanna make new thread?Use this!

    Also, does anyone know if the developers are planning to add stats buffs to the game. Like faster blood regen for performing the sleep animation for a long time or having increased stamina when you are well fed?
  27. Dont wanna make new thread?Use this!

    Bow is not implemented (wait for game/code-tech) Stresstestversion not compare with first 0.63 Exp.
  28. The worst game ever

    I feel with him. It would also be so if I buy a game without knowing what it really is. Luckily, it was not a house without first asking where it stood.
  1. Load more activity
×