hoik

It is arbitrary :P. Well first of all I'd like to point out this is a very old thread made back in the good ol days when everyone and their velociraptor was trying their hand at 'fixing' DayZ. This Idea was also purposefully aimed at giving DayZ 'hard and fast' rules and restricting freedoms - it is was an attempt to give the illusion of freedom within a framework of black and white rules. (It was intentionally the opposite of the 'life/death calculator idea). But that doesn't mean the purpose wast to dictate to the players, as in TYS's example: 'You drink whiskey or you don't' It would be more like: 'You drink whiskey, but are made well aware that if you abuse alcohol it will come back and bite you in the liver.' Yes the SA is making strides to give players freedom and choice as well as consequences. And yes, I was directly contradicting myself when I was talking about games dictating to gamers and then coming up with my own black and white rules - it was intentional :). For me what they do with loot distribution and zombies, and how players may have influence over these aspects, is where I think the most innovative game play will emerge. ---- On the subject of the game having a 'mental' aspect, I have this issue with it - if you consider this mental aspect to be implemented by the game, in response to the actions you have taken, then it is a mechanic telling you, you should feel this way or respond that way to this given situation. In this light the implementation of 'mental' aspects is actually a 'black and white' decision made by the programmers with a limited number of responses to a limited number of situations. IMHO you shouldn't try to implement 'mental' aspects into the game but rather implement logical cause and effect mechanics which will hopefully make people think. The way items take damage and the new options such as a proper surrender mechanic are both great examples of this - it lets things that are logically black and white (shoot something and it gets damages) influence peoples often less than logical thought processes.

Yes having a consistent player base is a key part of this idea - I'm not sure but I think this idea (which is a further iteration of the life/death calculator, or what I prefer to call global causality) could help in balancing out the influence of nomadic players - http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/105714-global-causality-within-the-scope-of-dayz/ It is a major issue with the idea, but I don't think it is detrimental to it. To embrace all types of play is at the core of the idea - all I could really hope is that it made some people think for half a second before pulling the trigger... Well the idea was never aimed at stopping people from server hoping, it is aimed at giving the player value - i can understand that by 'cultivating' a empty server you are in essence preforming a 'anti-social' act (in the context of this idea) you are skirting the system and are able to influence other servers without feeling the impact of your actions - this is actually quite detrimental to my idea :( . I think we need to take into account the abilities of the new loot drop system in SA. I believe they are capable of dictating the number of any particular Item that can be spawned across all servers. To me this implies that it will actually be possible to implement this idea not on a server by server basis but as a truly global scale. So rather than our actions influencing just the single server, they effect everyone everywhere and there is not escape!! The statement of 'breaking realism' I don't quite understand. This idea simply takes into account that the player is living multiple lives, over and over again, in a relatively small area. It tries to lend the game and the player a slightly larger perspective of their role within this world over time - If anything I feel it tries to add realism to a quite unrealistic situation. ---- The main problem I wanted to solve was to give the players a definitive 'gamey' value that is intrinsic to themselves - I think this idea achieves this. All the other impacts this idea may or may not have on how people play the game are purely theoretical.

This thread and those like it are all trying to bring to DayZ an important and missing element, (one of) which is consequences for our actions. I know a lot of that is provided by the engine (shoot a gun, attract the attention of other players/ zombies etc), but there are no social or moral consequences for players. I think its understandable that the many ideas that try to fill this gap are quite quickly shot down as too imposing on the players freedom, or feel like they dictate to the player black and white notions of right and wrong. This is against what I feel dayz and the survival/horror genre are about which is the grey areas of morality and the hard decisions. But currently these type of hard decisions are missing entirely from dayz, there needs to be something to fill this gap. MY (rusty) TWO CENTS For me there is relatively simple solution. Dayz needs to implement some sort of consequence for our collective actions. If we are given a reason to care about each others actions and how we as a group are effecting the game world, but are not forced to care, then I think all the stuff like narrative, morality and the intrinsic value of players, will become emergent game play. Ask yourself what do all players value and how can you directly relate it to their character? The simple answer is loot. Now ask yourself how you can relate loot to each player intrinsically. My solution, have the average life expectancy (over x amount of time) of players in a server influence both the quality and quantity of loot spawns on any given server (or all the servers). For example: The average life expectancy is low (over x amount of time), this means there is a lot of deaths be it by PvP or otherwise - logically this means that there is fewer mouths to feed and that knowledge (and by extinction technology) is being lost or forgotten. So the loot spawning will reflect this - there will be a high amount of 'low level' loot. Plenty to keep you alive, and plenty to keep you killing - but very basic gear of extremely low quality. So players band together 'for the good of humanity' and start helping noobs and looking out for each other (when it suits them) in order to bring up the average life expectancy. They are very successful and the average life expectancy sky rockets - this logically means that there are now a lot of mouths to feed and that knowledge is being retained (and by extension so is technology). So the loot spawning reflects this - there will be a low amount of 'high level' loot. Not much to keep you alive, and increasing concentration of good quality weaponry. I think you see where this is heading - eventually the essential resources for living will not be enough for everyone - people start killing each other for food, the carefully constructed society that has been built collapses and the cycle begins again. (If your interested at all in how this idea could be implemented please see the first link in my signature) ----- Now I've come up with many iterations of this idea and I am quite convinced of its merit. I think it could work, but I can't say for sure how it would play out or if people would buy into it. For me the question of whether people would buy into the over arching story is actually what makes the idea so good - there is nothing forcing you to 'join in' with the overall narrative, but there will be people who do 'join in' and they in turn will want to influence how others act because of how it effects themselves (and their groups). This is where a type of 'morality' can emerge. There will be social consequences to our actions. There will be a narrative and the world itself will be a major character reacting to the shifting 'mood' of the players. So yeah, I get where the OP is coming from, the current iteration of Dayz is missing something - it still has massive potential to be a truly groundbreaking game but for me it is not there yet.

Thanks to the new loot drop system and the new zombie spawning system that has been introduced in the SA there are many, many possible directions that Dayz can take in order to achieve unique and engaging game play. IMO it comes down to two words - Dynamic Causality. That is: - All actions (by the player) have consequences - These consequences are neither positive or negative, they are simply the logical outcome of a action. - These consequences will have subtle effect on what has value in Dayz For a detailed look at where I think this Idea can go please have a read of these: http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/105714-global-causality-within-the-scope-of-dayz/ http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/8616-lifedeath-calculator-intrinsic-valueculture/ http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/24410-server-death-the-end-game-to-end-games/#entry240216 Not all these idea involve dynamic loot or zombies but they all overlap in some way in order to promote interesting and complex global dynamics in order to give the players value as well as provide an overarching 'endgame' for those that choose to pursue it. Why do I think this is important? Well this idea of 'Dynamic Causality' stems from a much harder question: How to give players intrinsic value in DayZ? (Its important to note that this question has to take into account the unique framework that Dayz makes you work within - that is: Freedom of choice, 'authenticity', non-traditional RPG (no skills or perks) etc. These factors must (IMO) be taken into account when trying to 'solve' issues such as giving players lives value or extending game play.) Myself, I found that solving the one problem also solves the other. Simply put, I feel there needs to be something that ties all the players together, a common fate that is larger than our individual whims and selfish impulses, but at the same time is driven by them. IMO this is how we give players value, this is how we give the game longevity.

@ Tek Yes, people will play as they want to, you have freedom and choices: you also have consequences. This thread is one of the consequences of being a KOS bandit - KOS gameplay is the most disruptive and least interesting (for the other player/victim anyway) type of play there is in DayZ (IMO). That is why it get's so much hate. If you play KOS bandit, you have to except the hate that comes along with the territory. EDIT: Edited to be less inflammatory...

You will find all your answers here: http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/153994-early-access-important-information-known-issues/

"wunderbar" he cried, with great relish!!! EDIT: Whats the variety like with the servers? Any FPV only ones?

I didn't mean I was concerned with this impacting the release (though I understand why you assumed that's what i meant...) Just that it has been a long time since I have heard anything about night time in SA. So when I read something like "removing the rendering from being bound to simulation" it raises a lot of questions... just wanted to know if this peaked anyone else's interest, or if there is some info out there about this that I don't know about.

Doesn't this (the highlighted) part of Deans reply make anyone else stop and think - wait a minute... I know night time is a contentious subject, but what exactly is the plan here...

Mr Dixon, I don't think the OP means the zombies will be disarming you Jakie Chan style, just that it is reasonable to think a zombie could knock your weapon free from your grasp if it got all up in your shit... I like the idea, but I think that if there was some way for Z's to disarm you, to make it interesting ( and a game mechanic rather than a dice roll) there could be some sort of grip mechanic that the player could directly influence (thorugh key input, somehow... :P ) as well as it being effected be things such as weather conditions and physical state (of the player).

The point was (I think...) that Dean generally avoids making exaggerated claims just to build hype. ...anyway... yawn... this conversation is as stale and pointless as a eighty year old woman's womb...

IMO the answer could be some sort of 'global' or 'collective causality'. Try to make a system that has natural ('realistic') consequences for individual actions which effect the community as a whole - try not to make them good or bad, just logical. eg: High KOS = increased zombie population, but more loot spawned.Low KOS = decreased zombie population, but less loot spawned.Logical, gives consequence to our actions, relates players lives to something tangible in game.

I was a bit disappointed to find no campaign in Arma 3 - but it is coming, for no extra charge. I find the frame rates to be about the same as I get for Arma 2 (around 30 fps). Zombies - Rocket has said that the current zombies in the SA are not up to scratch and has proposed new, simpler, zombie AI/ pathing mechanics which isn't boot strapped from existing (soldier) AI. Implementing the network bubble will improve performance. As is, the client (I think) gets updated when anything happens anywhere in the map. As rocket has said, this may not be a problem now but with the addition of the new loot system, persistent item damage system, etc, as well as thousands of zombies and potentially 100+ players - the network bubble will be a must for performance. I understand you're frustration comes from a love of DayZ, you have to realize that the original concept has over time become twisted by modding into an array of different beasts. Dean is making the game he originally envisioned. Though I would like to see some modding possibilities for dayz in the future.

What about being able to adapt/modify clothing accourding to you're needs? Shoes too small? Cut off the toes! Its raining, you find some trash in trash bags - empty out the trash and cut holes for arms and head - you got a waterproof poncho, etc.

For those late to the conversation, this is what you have missed thus far:

This is some of the worst sentiment... if things don't make a profit then they aren't worth doing??

Ok, here's a genuine suggestion. Its not so much about the actual mechanics of fixing TPV to be less prone to exploitation and more about implementation of two perspectives as two distinct choices within a single server. It works on two provisos: 1. TPV has been 'fixed' as much as possible while still remaining fluid and immersive. 2. The game implements a diverse range of stance options, such as in ArmA 3 - but tailored to DayZ. With those two features implemented, upon starting a new character, you get to choose between two perspective modes: - Third Person Prerogative - First Person Prerogative If you select Third Person Prerogative then: - you're perspective is restricted to TPV. You can not switch to FPV on the fly. - you will still go to first person when using scopes/iron sights and can stay in this view as long as you like. - but, all the advanced stance mechanics are disabled. Not even leaning left/right. - basic stances (standing, crouched, prone) are of course still possible If you select First Person Prerogative then: - The Player gets to utilize the full range of stance options. - You can also switch to a highly modified TPV on the fly, but it is has restrictions, e.g: The player will not be able to manually control the TPV camera (or at least have very limited control of it). Rather the camera will be more of a 'cinematic' mode - it could slowly rotate around the player. - I think this modified TPV could be switched on at any time, just as FPV can be used at any time by those in TPV. At the start of each new life you get the choice of perspectives again. I think this could add an interesting balance, and genuine choice, between the two perspectives. Making this choice a primary decision is actually very important IMO, you immediately bring to the players attention that there is a difference between playing in each perspectives (in terms of how you experience the world, though this does not have to specifically stated) and that it is significant enough for it to be one of the first things you must decide. Making players aware that there is a difference is half the struggle! So this spreads awareness, people who haven't even thought about the issue before now hopefully will, out of curiosity people will try FPV (if nothing else) and being 'locked in' to a perspective for one life can give players a serious taste of what it is like to play in a given perspective.

I agree with this. I think TPV will always be more susceptible to 'exploits' than FPV, and countering this by purely focusing on the players control/positioning of camera without also taking into account level design is IMO futile - the map will also need to take into account TPV and be designed to minimize potential exploits - this is why I see the attempt to 'fix' TPV will not be met with much success. There is no point in putting a lot of effort into 'fixing' TPV if you end up with a gimped hybrid, which in the end will still offer (I have no doubt) some dubious tactics. FPV is obviously the easiest solution to this problem, but only in the way that it completely removes TPV...so it doesn't really fix it, just discounts it all together. So I can see how this gets on the nerves of the pro TPV. But as TPV is going to stay, IMO, make it as fluid and immersive as possible while minimizing potential exploits - but keep it third person and don't gimp it to retardation. Secondly - put equal amounts of effort into improving the FPV experience, including a variety of stances such as in Arma 3. Twice the work, but fairs fair :P . I think fans of FPV will have to start sticking to their convictions and actively seek out, play and encourage others to play FPV only servers when the SA comes out. ------- Personally I don't see the need for separate hives - all gear that is obtained, no matter the kind of server be it TPV or FPV, will be done so on a level playing field... jumping between the two types of servers makes no difference in terms of taking an advantage from one server to another...

Agree. Well, this has been an interesting thread. I've concluded that choosing between FPV and TPV is not just about a preferred perspective, or even the tactical 'exploits' that TPV potentially offers, rather it is about what should be the fundamental experience of Day Z- so I can understand why people get worked up about it. IMO FPV offers a lot of subtly and tension that is lost is TPV - for me Day Z is a survival horror game first (PvP falls in this category too) and a first (third :P ) person shooter second - this means that any 'feature' that makes Day Z a better survival/ horror experience will win over other equally valid features, which don't bring as much to the table. That is, if it had to be one or the other and not both. Unfortunately, for this issue, I think it does come down to making a clear cut decision on one or the other. Making this decision is IMO equal to deciding on what the core experience you want to give your players - it is not a light decision, and I think that Dean realizes this. I admire Dean for trying to compromise, but I feel the same as Mojo, the time spent trying to 'fix' third person can just as easily be spent making FPV more engaging and visceral experience.

I blame these :P (not that I really care about people calling mags, clips. Just that the word makes me distinctly remember the first time I found a pair of these "clips" and wondered what the hell they were for... I was young and naive :blush: ) http://www.wikiraide...x.php/Uzi_Clips

I ran across this omni-diectional treadmill the other day while druling over the occulus rift, this definatly needs more attention on the dayz forums - its quite amazing where things are heading! heres someone playing TF2, while I don't think that this type of shooter is where this type of divice shines, I think TF2 has really good support for the Occulus rift which is probably why they are experimenting with it. (thought I'd put the vid from the first link in here too)

Radios will likely need batteries, batteries will likely be a commodity you won't use lightly (hopefully). On another note: As far as I've seen or heard there has been no mention of the possibility of characters developing immunities\resistance to diseases. IMO this could add a lot towards creating realistic 'character development' that is intrinsicly connected to the player, unlike loot which is a commodity that anyone can take from you and utilise. I hope the idea is at least on Deans raidar.

Hi all, I can't blame my lack of activity all on my new work, though I'd like to :P... everyday I stare at the couple models I got going and think I really should just make those LOD's and upload that shit... this weekend I swear! Hold me to it!

Very good! You might like having a read of this, this and this. These might be useful in fleshing out ideas for game modes (promoting causality/consequence and over-arching themes of survival as a species) as well as making social interactions dynamicly influence the state of the game world, specificly loot drops. Anyway very impressed with your dedication and persistance (wish I had a little more :) ).

Yes the global loot table is very exciting - it makes me want to dust off these two ideas from all the way back in June-November last year, it seems they would be very doable (at least as game modes/server settings) in the SA!