Clumzy (DayZ)

I'm saying they are out of place for a zombie game, not an area with airfields. I think you'd be more likely to see tanks and jets there, I can't imagine that .50 cal rifles are just lying all over the place at a military airfield. And what are you talking about, anti-materiel rifles being bolt-action? The M107 and AS50 are both semi-auto, and what I meant was being able to sprint with them indefinitely, being able to hold them upright for as long as you want, operating them in close quarters effectively, and being able to use them effectively at a distance. The point is, I don't think that the .50 cals have much of a place in DayZ, because I think a more civilian themed arsenal would be better with things like military assault rifles being very rare, and a military sniper rifle would be an ultra-rare treasure.

I'm a very hateful person.

Nobody is saying that DayZ will have minimaps, or guns without recoil, and crosshairs do give you a rough idea of where you are pointing your gun, like you do in real life, it's just something that's not easy to model in-game. But even if you did find a tank or jet, what makes you think a random civilian could operate such a machine? And correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that anti-materiel rifles would be so easy for someone without the proper training to operate, either. I, for one, really don't think that these things fit the setting. It's not just about balance, because I think that guns should be a lot more dangerous in general. For me, it's about what belongs in the scenario and what doesn't. I'd much rather see more civilian hunting rifles, double barreled shotguns, and crossbows, than hi-tech military gear and futuristic death machines.

I don't really think that the outside of a zoom scope should be blurred, because the eye won't be focused on it unless you want to look outside of the scope. Seems realistic enough without the blur. But more importantly, I love this one guy on the first page: Good job everyone, for proving this guy wrong. Proud of you guys <3

You guys seem to be forgetting the Lee Enfield.

I think better rain in general would be nice, with more in game effects (eg vehicles not making big dust clouds, the rain is actually loud to obstruct hearing, and maybe some surfaces become slipperier), and storms would be cool.

Okay, King Tubbs, I agree with you mostly, but... By this logic, there should be tanks, fighter jets and nuclear subs in the game. I'm glad that the .50 cals are getting removed, because I don't think they belong in a zombie survival game, just like tanks, fighter jets and nuclear subs.

It doesn't even sound like you want to play DayZ, just some weird arcade zombie game made by business executives in suits. Sounds kind of awful.

Well, I know that's not my situation, I think you may be generalizing or assuming a bit too much. I don't believe that there is such a thing as being 'good' at DayZ. You play how you want to play. 'Being good' implies that the game is all about competition. Now, a tutorial on the very basics, as I've seen posts about, I would be okay with, just to make sure a person at least knows how to pick up an object and maybe add a little bit of story. The less it seems like a tutorial, the better. But everyone should be dropped in at first, with not much of a clue of what's happening or what to do. That's one of the best parts of DayZ.

I think the best solution is making it that people in third person can't see things that would be obstructed in third person, so it's actually balanced and we can all play together, nice and happy.

It seems to me that you're willing to accept feedback, you even said it in your first post: So, I stand by my arguments against your suggestions, and I feel like I`ve given valid reasons and ideas. I saw no ideas in your original post that would have made DayZ more difficult, they all seemed like their purpose was to make the game easier for both lone players and groups alike. And of course, I`m not saying that players should constantly dying in the first few hours (although, according to the DayZ website, that`s still above average), I`m mainly saying that I don`t think these ideas should be implemented because I don`t think they fit in a game like DayZ. Like I said, it`s supposed to be a brutal and unforgiving experience, and does not hold your hand.

And how is that a suggestion?

Wait... What's the suggestion?

I would prefer no tutorial, this game isn't supposed to hold your hand, it's supposed to drop you in unfamiliar territory without any sort of information at all.

I'm just hoping that lower settings doesn't necessarily give and advantage over higher settings. I'm sure that wouldn't be too hard to do, and maybe some (some) post-processing effects forced like blurry vision from pain. That sounds like a fair compromise to me.

Don't forget death by hanging.

As much as I hate posting in this near year-old, now-irrelevant thread, .50 cals don't fit the setting of a zombie apocalypse. At least, not in such large numbers that half the players in the north have one. That's why I don't want them. A KSVK would be fine by me but there need to be more russian weapons. And I will say once again, The .50s are being removed.

.50s aren't the only things that can blow up a boat. And before you reply about wasting ammo, think about how much more rare and AS50 is than a couple AK mags.

Well first, I want to say that just because a feature is in a game you don't like, doesn't make it a bad feature. Plenty of games use an attachment system. And second, you're in luck, because there are going to be attachments in 1.7.7 and the Standalone.

There should still be instances where wrecks catch fire and explode, but yeah, twisted hulks of metal seem better for an average crash. I do remember the phrase "GTA-esque damage visuals" being used once or twice in the devblogs.

I feel like most people in an apocalypse scenario would be moving into pre-built houses or buildings and not making their own. Of course I'm not sure, but every player in the game building a nice little cabin in the woods seems out of place. But, it doesn't seem like it's going to happen anyways, so what am I worrying about.

Okay, this thread is like 8 months old, and they are being removed. There's no need to comment on this any more.

I'm not sure about sanity meters. On one hand, there's no doubt that seeing things like the things you see in DayZ would change most people mentally, but on the other hand, sanity is kind of a hard thing to represent. We don't really know what would happen to an average person in these situations, so maybe some sort of subtle middle ground is the way to go.

Why would I make my own post? I don't want anything changed and I'm perfectly allowed to give my own feedback in the suggestions forum. Since I don't want something like these ideas being implemented, I feel the need to speak out against them because if noone speaks out against an idea they don't like, then the idea will appear to have much more support than it does. If you make a suggestion, be prepared for criticism. It happens. And just because this game isn't 100% realistic, doesn't mean they should go about adding more arcade-y and gamey features and completely changing the game. I wouldn't mind seeing the GPS being pretty much useless, as I've heard it would be in an apocalypse situation.

Aren't I allowed to have my own opinions, as well? Well, my opinion is that each of these suggestions just make the game easier for players and that isn't something I want to see happening to this game. You can communicate with your friends, hide things better and be more prepared for being injured. I still don't think it should be as easy as it is to get back to full blood just by killing a few animals. It should take real time.