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.

Sucks how this is how reality works also. Snipers, ambushers, they're usually a lot harder to spot than in this simplistic engine. The following was written for A3, but it's even more valid for the SA: I think most of this complaining over 3rd person is about campers as well. Arma does a terrible job of simulating: dark interiors/HDR (they're usually as visible as exteriors - good luck seeing someone hiding in a darkened room, peeking out through a slit in some blinds from outside on a sunny day from just 100m away) diversity of clutter (in-game, I know what the clutter objects look like from having seen the same 10 or so bushes and 20 or so houses 1000 times over it's not hard to spot players when you know the exact floorplans -- in reality, a clump of bushes/grass/logs is always unique, and you have to actually LOOK at that for a bit to see if a concealed, shaded person is hiding amongst it) low texture/model detail for many players' clients (though player models are a lot higher in detail, and tend to contrast heavily in longer range scenarios with the low-res/LOD background) poor/no grass concealment (player models stick out like sore thumbs since there's no blurring of edges or background noise - a player is basically ALWAYS silhouetted) exterior clutter (a lot less noisy than in reality, mostly reduced to a flat, uniform terrain grid at a distance, even with the special midrange textures in the mod) exterior shade (none past 200m tops, only limited camouflaging compared to reality within 200m) exterior/interior movement (whether foliage or curtains or whatever, there's next to none, and a moving player is super easily spotted at any distance by comparison to reality) self-camouflaging (I can't jury rig a ghillie in Arma, but it only takes 30-60min to attach a bunch of clutter to yourself in reality, and maybe 6 hours to do a proper ghillie with materials, which I'd do ASAP if I ever found myself in this sort of situation (or just break out my premade one)) You know, when you take all these anti-camper, anti-ambusher things together, the "crutch" of 3rd person invisible camping starts to be a very fair compromise between gamey-obviousness and reality-concealment. Regarding just general peeking: Also, ALL movement in Arma is "twitchy". A good part of not being seen when peeking around corners or scoping out an area is in making slow, smooth movements. The human eye notices movement as much if not more than it notices the actual human form. I can't smoothly peek around a corner in Arma, remaining unobvious to someone not otherwise focused on that corner, but in reality I could just edge the corner of my face/eye out slowly, look, and then go back without making a jerking movement, or having to go out an extra half foot more than I wanted because such are the clunky controls we have in-game. Not only does 3rd person make interior movements easier, reduce 1st person headaches from the clunky, unsmooth movements, and also just is more enjoyable (personally), but it helps counter all of the above in making spotting people harder at all distances and especially in camping situations.

Regarding popularity of 1st: for the mod, BMRF had 2 hives: 1st-only and 3rd. I recall there was only 1 server for FPV, while TPV had like 6 or 8 servers. I think the FPV servers were generally less full also. You could check with the admins to make sure I'm remembering it correctly, but that was a decently large community that should've been fairly representative of the whole. I think Breaking Point in A3 also has this dual mode approach, and the hardcore server's alone against another 6-8 TPV servers. And just like BMRF, the FPV server guys have to keep drumming up support in the forums to try to get more players on. I don't doubt FPV is popular with a small minority, and there's no reason we can't have separate "hardcore" hives with FPV-only for the SA, but it's silly to force it for everyone. This is the best compromise I can think of, because it really doesn't hurt either side, and it's fully possible right now. For TPV, I would like it if it was a bit more constrained in how far from the player the camera was rotating. The camera can get 5+ feet away from the player's head, and that gives it a huge advantage in PvP. I think there should be a minor amount of "peeking" possible in TPV, because that would be possible in reality but very hard/impossible given the engine's constraints. Something around 1-2 feet of TPV distance is a good compromise between "hardcore realism" and "playability and peekability".

The hell does this mean: "but I can't even play this game" Can you be specific at all?

2 things: 1) get fine with not having the best of everything. The game still is quite fun without being decked out. Come to find that adequate loot is "good" and anything more is just icing on the cake. That way when you lose a lot of better gear, it doesn't matter. When your baseline is whatever you can get in 1hr of grinding, then dying isn't so bad. 2) don't die so much. It sucks a lot more when it happens a lot more. If you don't like losing stuff that much, play safer, and once you get bored of being safe, then you can risk and lose it all by having actual fun.

If you can jury rig a suppressor, then assuming the weapons/ammo are both 1) abundant (relatively) and 2) small in storage and 3) very quiet, then they're perfect zombie-killing sidearms. I'd use them a ton, because for zombies those are the only 3 metrics that are really important.

Elitist "realism" asshole complains that everyone disagrees with him and that makes them "stupid" and unable to make good choices. Doesn't realize this means nobody agrees with him, so he pisses everyone off and insults them while trying to convince them to totally change their play style. Leaves forum and never returns. Everyone is happier.

I'd normally sling the weapon behind me than leave it dangling in front. I'm not sure how that's supposed to work - if it's tight enough to not constantly smash your balls, then you won't have quick access to it; if it's loose enough to be readily taken into hand, it's gonna smash your balls. Also, a sling should increase accuracy/decrease recoil a bit if you wrap it around your extended arm (which could be an optional action you could take with the sling).

People will do everything in their power to kill and camp. You don't get a high K/D by being passive and long-lived...

I can still gamma jack in my nVidia control panel. If they take it out of the game, the only difference is HOW I increase the gamma. That said, I try to avoid excessive gamma, but I do need to see.

Huh? It's a sandbox, and there are no clear aims, especially not of this sort. Well, shooting at someone who doesn't know you're there isn't really what I'd call an issue - it's shooting at people who do know you're there and are trying to be friendly or worse yet shooting at people who you've tried to befriend just to backstab. I do wish there were more consequences to those sorts of things, but it's quite hard to code for. Well, the game was ruined because you (and your friends) reacted negatively to it. Your reaction defines the experience. If your isolationist-KOS approach happens AGAIN, it's because you have made that choice to eliminate a large part of the experience because you're worried someone's going to take all your grinding goodies away. Really, what's more important to you: grinding up some gear or human interaction? Well, the former it seems. That's fine, but don't then go off and blame the game because you don't want to lose your grinding goodies to the high variances of stranger interaction. In the end, an m24/FAL/otherawesomegear is only useful for killing people. So if your approach is to not kill people that much, why would you care if you lost your high end gear? This is the thing, people get so focused on being MAXGEARED SPECOPS SUPERSOLDIER (whether this is you or not, I'm not sure) that they don't want to risk that status and the hours and hours of grind it took to get there. Or they want to KOS others to get there faster. You focus on the gear and forget the people you're playing with, and then you complain because the game/community isn't friendly enough... It's your problem as much as anyone else's, certainly not the devs'. Other than gear, there's not much reason to care that much about being killed. If you're in a group, it doesn't take more than 5, maybe 8 minutes to regroup with them after dying, unless you're running way north of course (where PvP is generally to be expected). And you can just set it to autorun and get up from the computer for that jog anyway (well, maybe there are some alpha issues with it right now, but it worked in the Mods easily enough). Given you'll play the game for an hour, two, or more, 3-8 minutes for a respawn is a really minor inconvenience. If you're going to throw away such a large and rewarding part of the gameplay for the chance of having such a respawn, well... you clearly don't value it that much, and maybe you should just stick to gear grinding and mass murdering KOS. Really, if you want meaningful and friendly human interaction and then you spend almost all of your time in banditry (what I've read from your post), I have about 0 sympathy for your "plight". Own your situation. Also, guys camping an area are clearly different from guys running around said area looking for loot (in general). No, you shouldn't try to team up with campers and snipers - they're clearly not friendly. Also high-PvP areas where such camping would occur aren't the best places to meet COOP-interested players - that's just selection bias at work. ***** You can bloodbag your friends. Some extreme overreactions from people here, which just perpetuate this. "Random people do bad things to me, so I do bad things to random people." I guess this is the crux of societal breakdown, and it's nice to see the game accurately modeling that without even trying.