dnk

If you're talking about Breaking Point, you're pretty wrong. I'm not saying there are no hackers, but it's a whitelisted community with active admins and custom anti-hacks. If they're there, they're fairly restricted and non-obvious.

Yes, I've been wanting to suggest this for a while. It would be awesome, but i'm thinking it would cause too many performance problems for the minor improvement.

There can still be server hopping, I think. Depends on how the privates set it up. Another big plus I forgot: having more than 1 character at a time. If I lose my experienced well geared guy on server 1, and I'm not in the mood for a fresh start, I can log on to server 2 and continue play with decent gear. It removes some of the sense of frustration with death. And BP has a 15 sec logoff timer, and only when zombies are around. I don't think they've taken on CLing much yet.

How am I "jumping ship" by using a private hive? It's not like I'm abandoning the mod or SA. Also, my definition of combat logging may be different from the norm. Different communities will have different definitions, and should be able to enforce their different opinions on their own servers. If the Dev response to CLing is, say, a 15 second timer, and mine is a 5min timer, well, I don't disagree with the quality of their work, just the values they're using. I'd like a private hive to be able to whitelist and enforce a stricter rule for that, or no rule if players prefer. I'm happy with this (we'll see what happens over the next year, though). Others won't be. It works both ways: I'm not defending private hives' different loot tables just when they work in the direction I personally want. I see nothing wrong with others having superloot hives, if that's what they desire. So long as their superloot characters don't get on my lowloot hive, I'd prefer they had the choice of experience. Eh, it's still bloody Chernarus. Again. And I'm sure I'll be sick of it after a couple months. Again. Private hives will keep it interesting by regularly adding new areas or retouching old ones. For a map this ungodly dated, that's crucial. It's a community thing, too, where the community can decide on and design the new areas. We had that in one of the modmod communities, and it was nice seeing everyone pitch in to improve their common map, then getting to play on that map. It added something that you can't get from the devs. Also note that my comments weren't just aimed at the SA but also at defending privates on the mod.

If you've ever experimented with .cfg files in A2 and changing grass density or draw distances, you'd know it's not possible with current hardware - ANY current hardware. Upgrading won't enable it. Just pushing full grass out to 100m brings my computer to a crawl. I have championed the above technique a lot. It shouldn't be hard to implement, and it'd add a lot to stealth.

I wouldn't play on a public hive. I want a well-administered, whitelisted private hive with a sense of community. I quit playing public hives very early on in DayZmod, and I won't go back once I have a choice about it again. Whether it was a modmod community or a larger private one like BMRF, the experience was much better, if not solely because of the lack of hackers and the punishments for CLing. They also kept out things like thermal vision, NVGs, AS50s, and other ultra-high-end loot that sort of ruined the game in the pubs. The 3rd-party AC stuff helped a lot as well, they improved loot spawns, added new areas to the map (like a NEAF), and generally upgraded the game experience from what was a terrible public hive situation. By all means, the privates were sometimes more "hardcore" than the pubs, so enough with this "100000 vehicles and ALL THE GUNS" rubbish. Besides, if you don't like that, fine, it doesn't affect you since you're committed to the pubs. I played on the more hardcore hives, others certainly chose the lootastic ones. I never felt it affected me that other private hives were committed to different play styles. Better for me also, since I didn't have to deal with those players on my hive. Everyone was happy. Or hate people for wanting choice because they have different tastes from you. Full of yourselves much?

Looks good. I like most of the ideas there for restricting it but still allowing it. Having it be less in prone/crouched is also a nice touch, as is restricting the vertical angle. I wouldn't necessarily want an over the shoulder though since I like the avatar being center screen. Not much else to discuss here. It's clear that TPV is going to stay, and the somewhat hilarious complaints of "nobody plays FPV servers so nobody plays" will just keep on in perpetuity. Like with 100,000s of players, you can't find a few hundred to populate a couple FPV-only servers. Yeah, okay... But, I mean, GOOD GOD COMPROMISE WITH COD KIDDIES WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU GIVE THEM CHOICE THE WORLD IS ENDING IM SO SUPERIOR BECAUSE I PREFER A DIFFERENT VIEW PERSPECTIVE LISTEN TO MY SMUG (not directed at all FPV proponents, but you know who you are)

@bad_mojo No, because that doesn't make it an "exploit" by the terms most people understand that word as. If Rocket wants to remove it, that's his prerogative, but there's no way in hell I'm paying to play a 25-35 FPS game in first person on this engine. I will stick to the A2/3 mods and be content. No, I haven't bought the game yet - I'm waiting a couple months and playing wait-n-see. For now, I'm sticking to the mods. Since my position is based purely on 1) personal preference, 2) my concept of "reality" of PvP, and 3) aesthetics (also personal), and not at all on 4) one other guy's opinion (Hall's), it would not make a difference in my position, no. Note the edit from last post: And, I'm not "making points anymore" because the 10 or 20 points I made were barely responded to. How often per page should I repeat myself? http://forums.dayzga...sion/?p=1608111 http://forums.dayzga...sion/?p=1608056 http://forums.dayzga...sion/?p=1608545 @SoulFirez Yeah, I've said that a few times. I think others as well. A far more restricted TPV + FPV-only "hardcore" (whatever they like to call themselves) servers should be all the compromise needed.

@bad_mojo Your definition of "exploit" is loose enough to fit in half the game. If Rocket didn't want this enough for it to be a real exploit, it'd be gone already. It's very easy to get rid of if it's really an "exploit", by forcing FPV-only on all servers. Typically, exploits consist of: - bugging into areas you shouldn't be able to get to and using it for an advantage - looking through things you shouldn't be able to - duping - other wierd emergent stuff that wouldn't have been clear to designers Like, glitching through a wall and then being able to shoot out of that object and kill people while being fully protected all the time would be an exploit. And, I'm not "making points anymore" because the 10 or 20 points I made were barely responded to. How often per page should I repeat myself? http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/157661-third-person-view-removal-from-sa-discussion/?p=1608111 http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/157661-third-person-view-removal-from-sa-discussion/?p=1608056 http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/157661-third-person-view-removal-from-sa-discussion/?p=1608545

@landfish So, you want a hardcore game where newcomers are on an even playing field with vets... good luck with that. Every serious game invovles an extended learning period. Hell, I'm still learning about DayZ mods so many dozens/hundreds of hours in. It's not an "exploit" when it's a game mechanic. Stop with the rhetoric. Except, you haven't made any attempt to argue any of my points contradicting your "realism" fetish, so I guess rhetoric and complaints are all you have left to fall back on? Prove me wrong, I'm still waiting for substantive responses from any pro-FPV-only advocates... remember the "parascope" doesn't need to be nearly so long as it is. I believe this is a feature tweak issue, rather than a feature issue. @bad_mojo That's all you have: This pointless tangent? You guys want to convince nearly everyone to give up a integral part of their gameplay, and most of what you're doing is just ranting and insulting. Good luck with all that. "we" (seems like 2 people right now) don't want it, so nobody should have it? Go to a FPV-only server. If the fact they're so poorly populated is an issue for you, then that just goes to show what a minority you're in. Deal. With. It.

"The path of least resistance", eh? Seems like you can't accept that ninety-some-percent of players disagree with you. When they do, it's their problem because they have different tastes than you. Welcome to being in a minority opinion. TPV vs FPV should not decide whether the game is "easy" or "hard" - if that's it, then Rocket certainly has failed either way. In the end, TPV makes the game harder for people such as yourself who only run in 1st person, so it seems to me you're complaining about the game being more challenging for yourself, and you want an easy mode where you don't get killed so much when you're running around in the open. You're free to play the game in a more challenging, more RP approach. But don't start trying to force that approach down everyone else's throat, and then go about complaining, ranting, and perhaps insulting "the masses" for disliking your personal preference. Well, if they're able to do that then the sniper was terribly hidden. At 1km with the highest non-scoped zoom, he's like 1 or 4 pixels large on a standard widescreen. Deserved to get spotted.

@ BelMarduk You lose the ability when you're in 1st person. I think 3rd person gives more realistic concealment/stealth and situational awareness (required for the former). 2nd paragraph: the 3rd person camera is too far from the player currently, allowing too much situational awareness. By restricting the distance of the camera to the player (1-2 feet instead of 4-6 feet), we would allow for stealthy "peeks" and "camping" while not having it be nearly ESP-level awareness as it is currently. I want some TPV peeking around corners, because the controls/animations are so clunkier in Arma engines than my own control of my body and positioning in reality (which would allow me to peek or camp in relative stealth). I disagree with raycasting because it completely removes this ability. We should just have a more restricted version of it: a closer TPV camera. If it was a lot closer to the player's body, you'd need to be very close to the corner/wall/window/bush/etc to peek past it, but you still wouldn't need to clunkily move around to peek. Also, it's more realistic because in reality concealment is far more effective than in the game. TPV allows you to effectively mirror this reality with a somewhat unrealistic ESP-like TPV. Limiting the TPV to a closer distance reduces the unrealism while maintaining the concealment. @bad_mojo Any attempted solution to this, and peeking around corners, and through windows, and through small cracks, and through bushes is already there in 3rd person. If we make TPV more limited, so it's not like a giant, 5-ft-long super periscope, we get the best of both worlds - first-person restriction and 3rd-person awareness - with a solid compromise. You can hide close to perfect, and that "little bit" of personal exposure is far less obvious/visible than in this engine. Far, far less.

Yeah, that raycasting would be nice, but then you lose the ability to truly conceal yourself and be sneaky. The game engine just isn't set up for it - limited shadows, limited HDR, limited visual clutter, very limited at longer ranges when LODs/textures/grass get downscaled or outright removed. I recognize that TPV in its current "wide arc" state is gamey and gives the player far too much of a view, but removing that view (around a corner, etc) entirely is also unrealistic. I cannot quickly or smoothly peek around a corner without twitching a large part of my body out and making a scene of it. I also can't camp in almost absolute concealment because that's literally impossible in this engine at almost any distance without a sort of TPV "cheat". The real solution is to just limit TPV to a closer arc around the player's head. 1 or 2 feet back instead of maxing out at like 4 or 6 feet back.

The benefits of mirroring reality's concealment, the benefits of moving indoors, the benefits of aesthetics (many people clearly prefer 3rd), the benefits of more realistic situational awareness from missing sense. I would like to see your proposed system added, or at least the grass occlusion method greatly improved upon. I have been very vocal about that in the A3 community (the first ARMA picture is an example of what I'd like to see). I recognize you were being sarcastic, but I still agree. Note I edited my post after you responded.

It's pretty close to that in a lot of real-world situations. Close enough that we're not losing much by switching from "near-impossible" to "impossible" for the sake of a major gameplay benefit by keeping TPV. REALITY vs ARMA (note that the "Arma" is actually A3 and not even the real game, but a demo of a possible rendering method to greatly increase concealment at a distance) REALITY vs ARMA In reality urban or wilderness snipers are an extreme menace. They can live for a long time. It's not like you can't ambush, snipe, or camp a place in reality without being spotted immediately. Some guy with a reflex sight isn't going to spot them within 5 seconds and blast them, and a simple pair of binoculars isn't going to be enough to spot a well concealed and expert sniper with all the time in the world. Even if the guy with the binoculars is trained in spotting them as well as they've been trained to remain concealed.