mr_chabowski@live.co.uk

Ummm... You can't just say "matter of fact" and then talk bollocks. ^_^ If you use "left-handed" anything, then you didn't do any adapting. On that note. We're going to need left-handed hatchets, left-handed handcuffs and a pair of thick rubber-gloves (so we don't have to risk catching left-handed) :P

I'd guess the lack of bullets would be a bit of a deterrent. Not to mention attracting a horde of Zeds with a gunshot. But yeah. There's nothing stopping you from taking your victim's gun and killing him. Or just panning their head in, if that's your thing. :bandit: It's a wait and see sort of thing. I'm secretly hoping some of the changes of pace and gameplay will lead players away from the "High-score to win" attitude. But that's probably giving folk too much credit.

@Fluxley. Wasn't the stance-adjust thing mentioned before? They're not using the exact stances from ArmA, but they're using the same principles. IIRC it was at a Q+A session. Hopefully that High-crawl is our replacement for sitting on your arse to snipe. Would give poking your head over stuff a slightly less attention-grabbing animation.

I was talking about "situation". As in the situation the game places you in. I don't get what's so complicated in that. It's, without a doubt, a matter of design. GTA is an action-packed, fast-paced run and gun game. Designed to be played from a 3rd person perspective, with no thought put into concealment, patience or tactics. ArmA is a battle simulator, based around gaining the upper-hand using method rather than brute force. GTA is (mostly) set in built up cities and densely populated urban areas. ArmA is......not. What I'm saying is, the two are barely comparable. And that's due largely to the fact that they are designed with entirely different styles of gameplay in mind. I'm fairly certain that playing Pac-Man in FPV would also result in an apparent net-disadvantage.

I don't get why anyone has cause to complain about what we've seen. Per-object location damage aside. Is instant destruction of the contents of your pockets intentional, do you think? It's hard to tell from viewer-side if it's meant, but the devblog seems to be showing us that it's the act of destroying the "Red Check Shirt" which causes the magazines stored inside it to break. If they can assign statuses to objects and also have objects assign statuses to players when equipped, couldn't the pockets on a coat a player is wearing get a sort of "hitbox" detection, to decide whether or not pocket-contents get damaged/destroyed? If general wear and tear can damage your clothing, I don't want to have to worry that my clothes becoming tattered from age will break everything that I was carrying at the time.

I wonder if we'll be able to do a little patch-job on clothing items. Any fiddly, technical bits an bobs will just have to stay broken, but I'm sure most folks could stitch a coat back together with some scraps of material, or darn a hole in a sock. The more I see of SA the more I get the scavenger, salvager, survival vibe.

The locational-bleeding, depending on the point of contact, shows that they already have the ability to detect a "hit" to a specific zone. As a proof-of concept, I'm happy to see the stored-item damage and point-of-impact detection both working. I noticed that although they have the ability to show varying stages of degradation (as show with the 3 pairs of boots), the items stored inside a damaged piece of clothing went straight to being "destroyed". I'd guess the whole setup was just to give us a rough idea, with damage-values accelerated for demonstration purposes. Suppose it's all just guessing ATM.

It's not shaping up to be a "happily ever after" :P

Yeah, at least in DayZ you can pop your head out. But as I was saying, it's still entirely designed for 3dp. DayZ being designed to be both makes it a different kettle of fish in terms of situation. Honestly, I think if focus had shifted earlier in development the debate would be less heated here. At least "Rocket says so" still flies. When the "chop or not" call is made, everyone has the right to STFU and GTFO.

All Perspective-Wars aside. The condition of your gear/model will at least show up on your inventory screen. Everybody be cool.

@YZ. Nice edit :P "Come back and tell me. The post will still be here" Mum's the word. ;)

Plausibility can be stretched pretty far when there are zombies running around, I reckon. I'm willing to bet you'd struggle to collect the whole set in-game. Greater variety (and rarity) can only be good IMO. Even if it's not entirely accurate, it adds options.

The fact that the entire game is designed with nothing but 3rd person in mind probably had a wee part to play. With the Euphoria animation-blending it's a pain in the arse running around sometimes, even without the FPV mod. EDIT: While I'm thinking about it. An officially-endorsed FPV for R* games would be cool, but with GTA-online being a thing, they'd just end up with this same argument.

See while you were watching and raging. There was a fella talking about what you were looking at, quite clearly telling you; "Might be a little bit overpowered, for this demonstration here. But you can see where we're going with the concept" and "I need to play with the values quite a lot, to get them working right. But you can see the basics of the concept" What's the point though? You probably aren't even aware of the folk here pointing out how daft you're being. :P

Then how do you know you can't be bothered with it? :P That's sure to show up at some point. It was like one of the very first things you thought of when you played DayZ, right? :lol: Would be an ace little touch. Also, sort of on-topic. Why, if Zeds are living, breathing, infected humans, do they not all have beards?! (The men, I mean) Or at least stubble. EDIT: I'm not sexist. The ladies can have beards too, if they want.

We're getting 4th person view only. Somebody, in a secret location, vaguely describes what's going on, down the phone. No more peeking round corners.

I look forward to seeing how shock and pain are implemented. In terms of injury, they're just as important to the victim's physical state as the amount of blood they have left.

I'm sure folks could figure it out.

I know what I'm going for when Rocket adds dual wielding. Get on it.

There is the Gallery thread. It serves its purpose pretty well, as far as I can tell. I've never been able to get to grips with Reddit TBH. A forum just makes more sense to me. But, it's all personal preference. Horses for courses

I never was keen on the numbers. ^_^ **blissful ignorance**

I quite often rock a Benelli. Depending on the mood. Usually keeping pellets loaded means I can control zeds in a pinch and attempted peek-a-boo KOSers get their legs broken. With slugs, considering most engagements tend to be at less than 300m there's no noticeable disadvantage in "range" against an AK, for example, just rate of fire. It actually seems to me that I gain an advantage, since most players seem to think a scope makes your weapon generally more effective, not realising that they're obstructing their own view. The attachment system will mean the pump + torch combo is no longer unique. Really, it's not a case of what's better or worse. Just what's suitable for the job at hand. Personally, for SA, I'd like to see it get to the point where players are thankful that they even have a gun at all. :D

More like Geraldo Rivera and executioner.

I like that. A broken leg should mean you could roll a bike downhill, but you're never going to be able to pedal. You should also be able to use a bike sort of like a crutch, if you need to.

There should be ticks / mites in long grass with an increased % chance over time of being bitten and a chance to get Lymes disease, or some kind of fever. And spiders. None of those outback, mountable Godzilla-spiders. Just the shitty wee right-side-up-part-of-the-world ones. Cobwebs around doors etc. means nobody has been there for a while. No cobwebs means watch your ass.