Mopa

True that man, Id rather die fast while having some interaction with other players then sit around doing nothing, meeting no one or sitting on a hill shooting others over and over for little to no reason.

lol what?

I feel like repeating my self would be pointless. *clap* done.

That makes sense (still you are bringing up grammar when it has nothing to do with the topic), yet I dont care enough to explain a simple topic in a complex way. If someone does not get it from just my sig then they are deluded enough to think this is close to a accurate simulation. In which case gg their intelligence. Your need to turn this to grammar has said more then enough about this topic hitting a end. Not my fault logic is hard for some. Nice reply haha.

yes, point? Like I said I would not carelessly write my paper or go to work and write like this, however it is the internet and I dont care anywhere near as much about grammar. Go grammar nazi someone who cares.

Talking on the internet or txting is different to writing a paper haha... Next childish throw out?

l2r Someone posted something to me earlier in thread, I replied, they replied and along the lines it came to something simulation and it being a reason for some action. Then simulation came up. Simple conversation that built up. Whats the point? *edit* I will not be talking about common sense and simulations anymore. I will only reply to other topics. Such a OP or stupid things like "you point that nothing sim blah blah"

yawn, read then post. He does more then hide.. can people not read on these forums?

Refer to last post. Said it because it related to my original post on the OP.

Last thing as I missed your post. Simulated a mesh or a item is far different to simulating a whole situation or apocalypse. Simulate a casino environment and give your simulated character a million dollars. Then have that person go around gambling. This will yes be a ok "simulator" in terms of maybe raising heart rate or being in a visual area BUT ultimately the money (risk) is not real therefore the action of betting and losing or winning (reward) would be a inaccurate determinant o the situation (going to a real casino). Simulation has some similar design properties to the real thing BUT ultimately lack and will always lack the main things that determine outcome in a real situation. Nothing can be more clear then that. If you dont get it then go do a degree on it or think more.. or something.. fuck its not hard to understand haha. Im done *claps hands then walks away*

I didn't noticed there was a page 5 to this thread as I was doing study all day and only had page 4 was up when I finished. So I may of posted the same thing by mistake. I deleted it to be a dot instead. Back to what was being talked about... even though you derailed it from the main thread to my sig. Yes in design principles it is pointless to make a simulation and its more a word given to something that has a few of the same qualities. In the end once again.. it is just a game for people to do what they find fun and not a simulation as they are impossible to accurate replicate for obvious reasons such as risk/reward/life/death/survival at its core on a real life situation. Simulation is nothing but a word for interactive entertainment designers. Done talking about it as you are unable to understand that this concept of "simulation" is a term in game design and not attainable to the way retards think it is on these forums..

Haha :p Exactly people will do what ever is fun or funniest.

I had to write a lot of papers on game balancing and "simulation" games. I understand the topic. Either way I don't care, as pompas as it sounds.. because I have done way to much research on this topic for uni.

Tbh I play as a bandit when I have my friends online and as a "hero" when solo and I agree. The ONLY reason that being a bandit is fun is because of the random things that can happen. Though its pointless (to me) to play this game if it was just for pvp as it is not worth the regearing time compared to games that have a instant load out. *edit* Id play hero all the time as for me thats more fun but my mates dont like that play style. I find it pointless to murder a bunch of people with no need for gear or anything. However I think he meant a spontaneous fight with another geared team. I dont think he meant setting a fight up. Not sure though.

.

Yea you are right in saying that but I am actually not even going off of just my experience and I understand its alpha. I am going off of game content and theory of rules. I am just saying that no matter how in depth this game goes at its core it is impossible to make a "true" simulation (going by game design principles). Only because in the end people dont die in real life while playing so the simulation is impossible to emulate (human behavior and theory of rules). Flight simulators lack death on impact of a crash for example so people will try flips in a plane without fear at 10 feet when in real life they wouldn't. You are told when you do interactive entertainment at university that using simulation for game design is more a market thing to say "sometimes similar". I guess the only way I can put it is.. you cant get a pilot licence from just flying the simulator.. It is a fun game, it has a role play possibility if people commit to that play style but in the end it is not life or death. People will and should play how they want, good on them being a bandit, have fun, good on them being a hero, also have fun. Just don't say that its for a reason other then fun, rage inducing, pleasure or something.

A wipe does not count as a death. He did not die IN game. Second sentence is not even worth a real response.

Ok its obvious you are incredibly good at simple logic. Not going to respond anymore as you are just derailing the OP.

It is not hard to understand, my sig is saying people can play and will play however they want. They just should not try and justify it with the "its a simulation and I would do this is real life" bull shit. The game is just a game that has tiny bits of survival in it. It is far from a good simulation. How is that hard to get haha.

Sorry for the double post but this really does sum it up. The game is not a good simulation. Its fun but really has no risk vs reward in terms of life or death which means it is TAA DAA just a game with small survival concepts..

That makes sense. Tbh though trying to say whats more skillful from two things that are so different is just pointless. Its like trying to say what takes more skill, baseball or tennis. The only thing that can be judged is if something is easily seen as easy like seeing a fresh spawn kill a zombie but they are bleeding so you bandage them.. (easy). Just like sitting 400m away with a moasin and hitting some random in the head without them even knowing it was coming (easy). True, fire fights are obv skill / RNG with lag and desync haha.

Doubtful.

Its far from obnoxious. It explains that this is just a game and how people play it relates to nothing but how THEY feel they want to play and NOT to a simulation. Otherwise why do fully geared players who can easily sustain life by staying in a forest go hunting for other players with no intention to loot them. Reason: Because it is fun. I play a bandit style with my friends when they come play and when I am solo I play a neutral style. I just dont tell myself that being a bandit and or killing people when I have everything I need to live or actively going to dangerous place to run into people is anywhere close to a simulation. Tbh the -> game <- would be boring if it was a real simulation. *edit* I have a bachelor in interactive entertainment. I done a major in level designing. I didnt say I made games I just got a university degree in the concept of game design.. No reason to act like a 9 year old and ask for outlandish things.

One admits the game has desync and lag problems that need fixing, one admits the game has a pointless system of helping when 99% of the time people dont need help. Thus leaving nothing but pvp and poor design of a simulation which also I might point out is one of the things a university degree will teach you in games design... "Games can never be true simulations because risk vs reward can never be truly manipulated to a real risk, aka death". Literally the first thing you learn at university for interactive entertainment studies. Anyways couldn't care less if you two are dumb enough to think the game is a good simulation and or that things would really be like a limited form of media... --- Also you brought up my sig that has nothing to do with the original post, congrats ---