hoik

But you can't deny, all the tention/fear or uncertanty you are getting from the game is not coming from the environment - its coming from unscrupeles mo-fos who do not give two shits about you, your friends or you values - as much as they may be loathed they are also essential to make dayZ authentic - maybe the issue is with people doing 'questionable' things without being told thier being bad...

I like the direction your taking. You might like this thread: http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/20352-rethinking-actions-assistance/

I don't think anyone (...well there are always execeptions) would like to see children being killed - but I think thats the point. In order to get emotional feed back from the players (both love and loathing) there has to be choice and concequences. Also I think that alot of cencorship, even self cencorship, is too often taken out of context. EG: A: A game whos premise is to launch babies like clay pigeons for LoL's is obviously abusive and sick. B: A game (like DayZ) where children would play a key role in a game by controling core mechanics that determine the survival of humanity (eg. servers) is in no way offensive - and without the possibilty of their deaths there is no tension/dread that we may fail, through our selfish impulses, to act in such a way as not to destroy ourselves. (EDIT: also see the last sig-link for this exact mechanic) Of course the flip side is you would NEED players with no scruples in killing a effigy of a child to make the game fun, as twisted as that sounds. I guess what Im saying is that the majority of us are mature enough to deal with issues like this -

The emotional connect is limited by our expectations of this as a GAME, rather than a sort of reality - there will need to be a fundemental shift in our thinking as much as there will need to be a shift in gameplay/mechanics or cencership (IMO). Of course our thinking can be shifted by clever game mechanics - but this will take time. It will take time because we (gamers) have been, for as long as I can remember, dictated to by games - this trend is getting stronger (in the mainstream) along with every cooky-cutter AAA title designed to be so easy/inoffesive/f'ing dumb so not to isolate anyone who might've bought into their million dollar advertisement campaign/ movie tie-ins - so as long as there is this push for simplification, there will not be the emotional building blocks with which games can be given more depth. I think DayZ is a start, a cornerstone of you will, on which subsequent experiences and expectations of how a game can engage emotionally (and here is the kicker) without being directed to a scripted outcome/emotion. So what I think im getting at is that connecting emotionally involves alot more than cencorship (IMO). There have been a couple of 'borderline/taboo' suggestions that I think would add alot to the game - that is 'canablism' and 'reproduction'. I think the idea of reproduction makes alot of players uncomfortable (even though it is THE reason for survival IMO), so having children in the game has absolutly no chance of getting past censors (as things stand ATM). If you are interested in 'family' groups forming around children - to effect a very solid game mechanic - please see my third sig-link,

Bump & BEANS!

Emmm beans, a very good idea that deserves attention - also I agree with ZedsDeadBaby that 'memory' should be erased on death!

Give you a bump, and some beans!

Yes, that would be very interesting.

Claytonaj - Yeah, lockouts are very contentious - I mean people in this thread disliked being locked out of 1 server for 2-3 hours - and thats in the context of ENDING HUMANITY!! Lockouts are a way to give lives value, but IMO it is a obvious, and very harsh punishment (Though, I wouldn't mind a trial run of it) :P . For me the two ways to give players value is A: Directly associate players with loot (as currently that is the only thing all players can agree has value), and B: Associate the players with a secondry value beyond loot (the best example of this IMO is skills/perks, how they are implemented is where the question). I'd love to hear other angles on this as its the most interesting/important topic IMO. The first link in my sig relates to associating loot to players, I think you might like having a readd of it.

So say there are a limitied amount of items in game, I think the key would be to have all the items (that is ones that are aimed at creating story/factions) reacting with eachother - say every item can interact with other items in 1 way - in such ways that even though there are a say 50 'faction' items there will actually be infinate possible interactions between them...(I think?)? Claytonaj, I haven't played 'The Stanley Parable', but might have to install HL2 and give it a go - I've also read a thread highly recomending the game 'Pathalogic' as good guide/reference to DayZ but its a bit hard to come across. As an end note, I think if dayZ had seasons/phases, factions based on Items, solid comunication sytems (both diecet and indirect), a well designed surrender mechanic, player-perks of some sort, random loot drops (be they player driven or not), and player driven end games (including the possibility to save/kill the server) - well, it would be f'ing awsome...

You would think so, but unfortunatly being 'human beings' translates poorly to virtual world/scenarios (IMO) - it will require a shift in our (gamers) thinking more than anything else.

Unfortunately, unless you paint a very clear picture alot can be lost in translation :( . I had a re-read of your scenario and conclude that, after the initial report of the lost convoy, everything else is what COULD happen if the players chose to investigate? But it does require other assets such as the lost convey and control station (which are presumably randomly located) placed by the game - could others try using these items if they stumbled across them?? If not, I can see it as an oportunity for co-operation between factions. So heres my twist on the scenario: Instead of being randomly told of about a convoy - the convoy is randomly spawn into the game like crashed-helicopters. Then if someone come across it they get word to the military faction (prehaps you'll choose to say thanks with ammo or protection). Maybe this is the backstory you skiped over, but, as is, the initiation of the mission seems arbitrary. So from there many scenarios can occur - the ones you mentioned just a sample. For me I would suggest 1 tool that I think would make this entire scenario mesh in a player-driven DayZ kind of way - A command center/military comm system. This is a solid way for the commander to create objectives that can be viewed/heard by military faction members - they are missions but user made (maybe this is what you were getting at all along :) ) So prehaps there are "special spawns/items" for each faction - they in themselves will not dictate a mission, but once they are located they could provide many scenarios, from co-operation to sabotage or conflict. What do you think?

Just a shameless self bump - I WANT SOME BEANS!!! (Also, I want my jesus pic back... :( )

I think what what could be interesting about this 'tiered' factions is that high leveled factions would provide interesting 'story' moments for those of lower tiers, and those that choose solo play. What I mean is they could provode 'randomised' events such as mentioned here: http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/47148-dayz-massive-overhaul/ (near the end of the OP) without using NPCs. If you find a way to give players tools to create stories (that is tools that by their VERY NATURE create a story - such as markers to indicate on maps places of interest, or player made journals) rather than dictating to players scenarios, I think this would be alot more in tune with the game as well as being ALOT more interesting. What if high level 'military' factions could get acces to medical supplies/trucks and could setup mobile treatment centers/safe zones - there is a possible story right there...but it requires imagination and a break with our (gamers) ingrained thinking, which I think is the problem with gamer driven story telling.

The thing is all gamers are so so used to being dictated to - you say you haven't killed anyone and you never will - that is your choice and NOTHING ELSE - it has been ingrained into us (gamers) that if you CAN do somthing in a game than you SHOULD (or at the least, there is nothing 'wrong' with it if the game doesn't tell you its wrong). To me you and everyone who chooses not to kill are infact implementing a 'high-morality' , and those who succumb to KoS (for whatever reason) are choosing a 'Low-morality' even if the game does not give you a "gamey" indicator to tell you. And as far as perks/values for high/low humanity they are self evident. Those who don't KoS have a value relative to others who choose to play the same style of play, ESPECIALLY seeing as they are so rare. Those that KoS have very little value as they over-saturate the market (EDIT: Actually their value is THAT THEY KILL ON SIGHT, they provide alot of the tention and uncertanty - though they are over-represented at the moment. What Im trying to say is that even random psychos have their place.) :) . The problem is this idea can not be translated to others in a gamey way - but, as you say, a solid communication system would allow individuals to asses others and take risks accordingly, letting those with a tendancy for 'high-humanity' to form groups with like minded people and reap the natural benifits of grouping up - those that choose 'low humanity' can continue on their merry way and infact ENHANCE the gaming experience of 'high-humanity' players, just as 'high-humanity' players enhance the game experience of bandits.

Nice, alot of valid points - I specificly like the perk/skills idea and there are alot of good threads on this. The reason I like this idea is that it gives the players a value that other players can value beyond the loot that they are carrying! Also both like/dislike the 'events'. I like their 'dynamic' nature (they should be quite random) to give PvE a much more serious sence of fear and tention, at the same time I dont like the NPC aspec :( . I would prefer tools that the players could use so THEY can be military bad asses scarring the shit out of players - (I saw a vid of this guy approaching a barn - hears a car, goes prone - then a hummer comes tearing out the woods and cercles behind the barn - no doubt it scared the shit out of him and it also completely f'd his plans as it attracted a huge no. of zombies - this is basicly the scenario you described with the military) I do really like the idea of seasons/random cold/hot spells! Found a thread on seasons here; http://dayzmod.com/f.../45512-seasons/

There, fixed!

As far as end games go - I wonder what your opinion would be of my idea (see the last link in my sig). It probably goes too far in some aspects, but what do you think of players influencing the life-time of a server??

Your right, this is really the key to your idea - and I really like it :)

I saw the interview and Rocket seemed very enthusiastic about player-made underground bunkers. He also suggested they could be KILOMETERS in length...he likened them to Capital Ships (I think) in EVE, but as I haven't played it Im not sure what he means - I guess that it is a end game device that will require ALOT of teamwork and involves things like advamced economies and social structures...this makes sence as a end game as it is either this or extinction (for the human race) - I think if there is the 'survival' end of the scenario, there should definatly also be mechanics tp implemented to achive the flip-side of the scenario!! Personally VAST underground bunkers, with hydroponics, advanced electronics and kilometers of intersecting halls and living areas "Like the resident evil complex's" (paraphrasing Rocket from the interview) is so far from how I view dayZ in its current state as to be alien. I will have to wait and see, but for now I will remain pesemistic about the idea.

Haha bump

I heard Rocket mention something about letting players create massive underground 'cities' (sorry I cant remeber the site), he likened it to how capital ships (I think it was capital ships??) are used in EVE. I've never played EVE so Im not sure what he means, but am in two minds about the idea - he theorised they could be kilometers long - this is obviously an end game scenario and by making them underground I can see how this could make bases more secure...personally I would rather see cities being occupied, power-plants controlled etc than vast bunkers - But Rocket seemed to be very enthiusiatic about it, I'll just wait and see I guess... Just found this Thread: http://dayzmod.com/f...+base +building And this one: http://dayzmod.com/f...g-ultra-thread/

Definatly like the season idea - as for server poulation and environmental impact, I recomend you read my first sig (fixed now) - it can create a highly dynamic, cyclicle scenario (but unlike season, they will be hard to predict). In the end this game needs to have more dynamic scenarios to maintain the intital tention and fear of the unknown. Loot maps kill the game IMO.

I agree with the weapon degredation - but would extend this to food items like meat, there should be an expiry date - even on items like beans. This would make cultivation of crops (as I've seen suggested elsewere) a interesting part of the game (people cultivating wheat, guarding it from raiding parties etc, barter economies forming...). I also like the idea of long term survivours looking raggedy-assed!

Yeah I like the idea of dynamic systems in this game - for me that is where its longivity lies. If you have a look at the first link in my sig, this is how I can see the PLAYERS having a direct influence on loot dencity/value - I guess it could also be made to influence zombi spawns. I'd also direct you to these two threads on dynamic zombies/loot: http://dayzmod.com/f...on-get-dynamic/ , http://dayzmod.com/f...ffects-in-dayz/ .