BeefBacon
-
Content Count
1389 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by BeefBacon
-
-
3 hours ago, emuthreat said:This is not reddit. Why do you think anyone here can fix it?
I don't think it's necessarily about fixing it, I think he just wants to know if other people have experienced this.
I don't really use Reddit so I don't know if the mods here are the same as on Reddit. There will be boats, by the way. Not sure exactly what kind of boats, but I'm pretty certain there'll be boats.
-
10 hours ago, scriptfactory said:Once minimum durability is reached stuff should just start falling out of your bag.
I can just see that getting annoying, but I did consider it. I figured lower weight capacity is a good way to simulate that without actually losing items - you'll suffer some serious debuffs (what exactly those debuffs might be I'm not sure) so you'll want to get rid of items anyway. I could probably get along with losing items from a ruined backpack, however - it is ruined after all.
-
ORIGINAL POST
The inventory system in DayZ is famously not great. It's a symptom of the grid-based system, a pen or a piece of paper is the same size as a can of beans. It's silly. I'm writing this with the (probably wrong) assumption that this is how it's always going to be - if somebody knows otherwise then feel free to chime in.
We know weight will be a factor, but the issue of limited slots persists - so here is my suggestion:
Do away with limited slots all together, and instead have weight and size values for items.
All items that have inventory space (clothes, bags, etc) should have infinite inventory slots, but they should be assigned weight and size limits where weight is, obviously, the maximum weight of the combined items and size is the actual physical size of those items, regardless of weight. Storage items should have two bars that you fill up - when either bar is full you cannot place any more items in that storage. Physical capacity should be the main restriction, with weight having more of a soft cap (with a high hard cap that you'd be unlikely to reach unless you're some sort of pack mule). If you have a bag with a weight capacity of, say, 20kg then you should be able to carry 20kg without any problems. As you go over 20kg you start seeing major speed reductions and other debuffs until you hit the hard cap of, say, 40kg - by which point you'll suffering massive debuffs anyway. Physical space, as I said, should be much more straightforward. You can stuff as many items into storage as you can until there is physically no more space available. You could stuff half a dozen puffer jackets into a bag and still have a low carry weight, but reach your physical capacity - or you could put (for the sake of the demonstration) an apple-sized 40kg weight into your bag, meet the maximum weight but still have a ton of physical space remaining.
Some storage items should have a lot of physical storage but low weight capacity, and vice versa, and some should be fairly balanced. A small, sturdy bag might be better for carrying lots of, say, heavy ammo while a large flimsy bag might be better for storing a lot of clothes (for whatever reason.) Military storage should, obviously, have the best size-weight ratio. An improvised bag might be the same physical size as a taloon backpack, but its weight capacity should be significantly lower.
The durability of a storage item should affect its weight capacity, but not its size capacity.
This removes the silly Tetris minigame, it removes the need for limited item stacks (you can just stack items until you hit either the weight or size capacity instead of only being allowed to stack 6 rags or 40 rounds or whatever) and it means that very small items can actually take up less space without having to increase the resolution of the grid system.
I hope the idea is clear. I'll admit, I just sort of blurted it out - it's late and I didn't want to forget it. Keen to see what, if any, discussion comes as a result. I might neaten the wording up later on. Might even add pictures.
The current inventory system is extremely flawed because it is just a basic grid system. While I'm sure this system will evolve in some way (with the introduction of weight to items for example) I'd still like to put forward my own idea.
In short, do away with limited storage slots and instead assign size and weight values to items.
Storage items (clothes, backpacks, whatever) should have weight and size capacity limits where weight is, obviously, the weight the storage item can carry and size capacity refers to the volume of items it can carry. A quilted jacket, for example, should have a low weight but also be quite physically large. A car battery is relatively small, but extremely heavy. A pen is very small and very light. While storage capacity has a hard cap (you can only stuff so many items into a bag) weight has a soft cap, meaning you can exceed the weight limit (to an extent) but will suffer penalties as a result.
The animation below better highlights this. The jacket is large but light, so it fills up a lot of capacity but not much weight. The pen is extremely small and light, so it only really affects your storage capacity when you have a stack of 100 pens. The battery is quite small, but extremely heavy - so much so that it fills the taloon pack's weight capacity. Once a second one is introduced, the weight capacity is exceeded, as represented from the weight bar changing from white to red. The second animation shows the courier bag which has a slightly smaller size capacity but a much lower weight capacity. As such it can carry a quilted jacket, but it cannot carry a car battery even though the jacket is physically larger.
Backpacks should have pros and cons. Some should be physically small but capable of carrying considerable weight. Others should be quite large, but have a small weight capacity. Others, military packs in particular, should have a good balance between size and weight capacity.
Item condition should also affect weight capacity.
This system would remove the Tetris minigame, would more accurately represent the physical size of items without increasing the resolution of the grid system, would remove the need for limited item stacks and would diversify gear choices, with players needing to strike a balance between weight and size capacity.
-
7
-
1
-
-
I'm pretty sure Rust doesn't use BattlEye.
Have you tried changing your name? You can edit it in the bottom right of the screen on the main menu (last I played).
-
On 07/10/2016 at 10:30 PM, Whyherro123 said:Not our fault if you are too stupid to remember your blood type.
You do realize there is a note-taking function in-game, right? Grab a piece of paper, a pen, and write down your characters's blood type, then keep it in your inventory.
Problem solved.
Some people play on multiple servers, and thus have multiple characters. They can't necessarily remember the blood types of all of their characters. Why should you have to keep an in-game note of something your character should be able to remember anyway?
I don't see why this is such a contentious issue. You use a blood test kit, your blood type appears in the inventory screen. This doesn't create some new meta gameplay or anything like that, it just helps you to keep track of multiple characters.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Just Caused said:If you are good at something, you should be able to do it quickly
If you're good at something you should be able to do it well. Is BI doing a good job? Arguably yes, arguably no.
45 minutes ago, pkactus said:JustCaused. I would warn you about saying anything that the hordes can mistake as criticism. They're as vicious as a Reddit community, but with less organization.
Criticism is fine. "omg behmia ur a bunch of fucking scamers i want a refund, dean hall can suk my rocket" isn't.
BI should get rid of the timeline. They've already stated that it's no longer accurate to DayZ's development, and hasn't been for a very long time. If it's no longer relevant, it shouldn't be described as such. Having said that, I'm having trouble finding it so maybe they have taken it down.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Hicks_206 (DayZ) said:Hey guys - 0.61 is not on Experimental yet, however - given as we are focusing primarily on addressing must fix issues, I thought we could start discussion on it - and I could share my thoughts and experiences during internal testing.
Oh you tease. I've been checking the forums every day to see if "Exp Update 0.61" has popped up.
I guess I wouldn't mind seeing a night battle - everyone equipped with flashlights on their weapons and so on - let us hear the new sounds and see the new lighting effects.
Also, I'm curious how the new dynamic shadows will be affected by shadow quality. Presumably we won't be able to just disable shadows and be able to see lights through walls again.
-
2
-
-
I'd love to see more of these kinds of video. Just little snippets that you've been working on - maybe you record some new AI behaviour while testing and upload a 30-second clip or something.
Somebody brought up how audio will reverberate inside of buildings and so on, but I'm wondering if objects, such as buildings, will block sound? For example, will we be able to hear footsteps inside a building when we are outside of it? If we are in an underground area (like that little bunker thing in Tisy) will we be able to hear sounds outside as though they are right next to us, or will they be muffled - or even completely silent?
Oh, and on that subject, will voice comms be affected by the new audio tech? As I understand it, the audio quality for voices is pretty bad even if you're using a good mic - is this something that will be addressed?
-
On 18/09/2016 at 6:28 AM, Hicks_206 (DayZ) said:Ray cast occlusion might seem like it would work on a purely technical level, but on a gameplay level it can be unintuitive and confusing for a lot of users. I'd compare it to putting a shock collar on your pet to stop him/her from engaging in unwanted behavior.
I do not like the idea of providing 3PP users a potentially confusing and frustrating gameplay experience in order to try and force them to use 1PP.Yeah, that makes sense - I hadn't thought of it that way. Thanks for the reply.
I'm keen to see what you come up with to address the issues inherent in 3pp even if, as you said before, it's just to make 1pp more popular.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Hicks_206 (DayZ) said:To be clear, when I say it is easier - I mean even with the gains we have made trying to balance 3PP - from a tactical standpoint, it is MUCH easier to get the upper hand with 3PP.
I know this must have been asked before, and even then it's probably best left to one of the dev Q&As, but have you looked into... ray trace occlusion? I think that's what it's called; when stuff that you can't see in 1pp doesn't render in 3pp, as a means of eliminating 3pp wall-peeking. Assuming it was something that you could implement flawlessly without any bugs, is that something you'd do? I guess I mean that both in the personal sense (is that something that you in particular would like to see added?) and in the wider sense (would that be on the cards and actually have a chance of being implemented?)
I mostly play 3pp because other people mostly play 3pp - including the friends I play with (I don't think they've even tried 1pp). The wall-peeking annoys me, though, and I don't like having to do it just so I'm on an even keel with everybody else. If wall-peeking was somehow eliminated I would have no problem with 3pp, and I think that's a view shared by most people who prefer 1pp.
-
A shove would be nice, like in Left 4 Dead - though not as powerful of course.
A simple solution to the one-punch thing is just to nerf fists. They're stupidly powerful. Hell, I've seen healthy players killed with a single punch to the head - fists are more powerful than a crowbar, it seems. That doesn't seem right at all.
-
On 09/09/2016 at 11:14 PM, -Gews- said:Modding—that is the big one right there. That will make or break it. Wolves? Bears? Helicopters? Even survivor bases? Haha, nope. Maybe for a patch or two until folks get bored. Ancient history says it's the mods that will draw the crowds... or not.
Unfortunately, I never much cared for the mods of the mod, and I expect the same thing will apply to standalone.
(the biggest problem I had with all those mods was the addition of countless ridiculous and inconsistent weapons packs, or worse, stupid changes to existing guns. I seethed at DayZero and quit playing that one in large part because they 'nerfed' the Lee-Enfield and other weapons for 'balance'. I'm picky about that stuff)
I never played the mod. I watched plenty of videos, though, and it looked neat. Saw mods that added a lot of STALKER content, and I'm super keen on a STALKER-themed mod for the standalone. I expect that vanilla will have a pretty short lifespan, though that isn't necessarily a problem. I'm looking forward to how DayZ evolves when the community gets their hands on it.
On 11/09/2016 at 0:56 PM, scriptfactory said:Since when is 4 to 5 years standard in the gaming industry?
The majority of games take 1-3 years to complete. The longer a game takes to develop the more it costs. The longer a game spends in development the less likely it is to recoup development costs. Many games take 1-2 years to break even.
Edit: Where are you guys getting your information about game development?
If you'd said this a few years ago you might have been right, but this isn't 1995 any more. Hell, Half-Life 2 started development in 1999 and was released in 2004 - that's a good 4-5 years right there for a game that's practically ancient. As others have pointed out, Skyrim and Fallout 4 took many years to develop, as have many other games. Some games take 6 months. Some games take 6 years. Most big games tend to take longer - indies are usually smaller in scope and so often require less development time (unless they're unfunded, of course). BI isn't a huge studio, and the scope of DayZ is fairly large. Just throwing money at the devs doesn't magically make them work faster, in fact - as I've pointed out in the past - it actually made them work slower. The huge early access sales lead them to make DayZ a bigger, more ambitious game rather than just a version of the mod that didn't require Arma 2, which was pretty much the original plan.
-
I see the dropping player counts as more of a return to a sort of baseline. An alpha game should never have thousands upon thousands of people playing it - that fact that a game that hasn't even been released yet had that many players is pretty impressive. The people playing DayZ are effectively alpha testers. When DayZ hits beta or when it's released - certainly when modding becomes available - the number of players will shoot up.
I've not played DayZ in months. I play a few hours of each patch and then I move on. How people have managed to put thousands of hours in is beyond me.
-
I can see this being a mod, but I don't think it's in the devs' vision of the game.
To expand on this, and it really would never exist in the vanilla game, it'd be neat if the profession you chose affected your starting gear as well, and if spawns were all over the map. All classes should spawn with a weapon (with some getting better weapons and gear than others at the cost of more specialist skills) but it was very, very survival focused. Think the 'Misery' mod from STALKER. Again, it would never be in vanilla but I'd give that a shot if it was a mod.
-
1
-
-
Good idea. I have no idea how activated charcoal is actually produced - whether it just occurs naturally when you burn stuff or you have to do something special to it - but being able to produce it would be great. Could maybe be found randomly in fireplaces in houses too, assuming it occurs naturally without any sort of special intervention.
-
On 04/09/2016 at 10:24 PM, MaxTheSurvivor said:Thanks but no thanks,
I'm playing on full day/night cycle servers, and usually in the evening, this is how it would look like if they implemented your idea
-
So use a torch. Use night vision goggles. If it's so dark that you can literally see nothing without a light, I'm sure the devs will brighten the nights up a bit so you can at least see basic shapes.
I see no good reason why the gamma exploit shouldn't be removed if it is possible to remove it.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, nl said:Landlines are usually not powered by the regular power grid but by the telephone operator and needs very little power to work. (which is why landlines still work when there is a power outage)
Of course, Chernarus has it's telephone lines above ground so a large part of the grid would most likely be damaged after an X period of neglect and storms.
However, if you look at the pic in post #1 you can see the digital display is on, so I guess the landlines still have power :)
The (current) general wear and tear of Chernarus suggests that is hasn't been very long since the outbreak. That's subject to change, of course. It's probably been less than a year since society collapsed, so I could definitely see at least some telecommunications infrastructure remaining intact.
Having said that, the phone assets are probably just left over from Arma 2, when Chernarus would have had power. Probably just an oversight. You never know, though.
-
1
-
-
Huh. That's actually a really interesting idea. I like it.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty much certain that this is already a thing. Magazines can be empty. They can be half full. Certainly in .59 they were always full, but in .60 they are randomised - as are weapon attachments.
As for bullet crafting, I doubt we'll see that. I can't imagine that making a bullet it something you could do without specialist equipment. I could see a mod introducing ammo crafting, however.
-
Well. I guess just adding way, way more face options would make this a non-issue, right? Maybe even a couple of different animation sets so players each have a slight variation in the way that they move. I don't want floating names, and I sure as shit don't want any kind of reputation system, or tagging, or any nonsense like that.
-
1 hour ago, Parazight said:I've always favored a debuff penalty to run speed.
Well when there's stamina I expect travelling on foot will become more difficult - or at least slower. Certainly you won't be sprinting everywhere. But yeah, a debuff to stamina or perhaps movement speed (or both) would be good.
As a side note, I think players should spawn in a worse condition. We should still have bandages, a flare, whatever, but our clothes should be ruined and we should be soaking. First port of call should be finding dry clothes and warming up if necessary. So many items of clothing go unused because the clothes we spawn with are simply better. Spawn with ruined clothes, and people are more likely to want to find replacements as soon as they can.
-
2
-
-
7 Days to Die has a system where if you die your maximum health is decreased. With soft skills, perhaps death could mean players suffer a skill reduction. Obviously when you die all your skills will probably be reset to 0, but maybe if you die again your skills should be decreased even further - meaning players are unlikely to want to keep dying since it'll just make the game harder and harder. This means that even players who have only spawned 10 minutes ago will want to stay alive, rather than just saying "fuck it" and letting themselves get shot because all they have is a child's backpack and a farming hoe. There should be a cap, of course, it'd be stupid if you died 10 times in a row and then couldn't do anything because your skills are so low - and it would make geared players on the coast killing freshspawns more of a problem - but it would make death more impactful than "you died, now wait an hour or join a different server."
-
13 hours ago, Mookie (original) said:the huge $60m windfall BI received was not reciprocated through investment in development
Well, it was. The DayZ dev team used to be pretty small, and was originally going to pretty much just remake the mod as a standalone game - clean things up a bit, add a few improvements, things like that. When the standalone proved extremely popular, the dev team and the scope of the game was expanded, and they embarked on a more ambitious project.
Yeah I'm hoping the alpha won't poison the well, as it were. I know a lot of people are whining saying they're giving up or whatever. I expect that when 1.0 eventually arrives they'll change their tune. I play a few hours of each patch, then wait for the next one. I don't get how people can plough thousands of hours into a game that isn't even finished yet.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Nathaniel912 said:Hey, aren't we waiting for 1.0 for like 5 years now?
Wait, considering the MOD as well, isn't DayZ, all together, in development for like 10 years now?
I... what?
2 hours ago, Nathaniel912 said:You sure, mate? I think Battlefield and CoD games are being released every 2 years. Or 3, MAXIMUM.
Fallout games are of quality that's INCOMPARABLE to that of Dayz or anything basically. We literally did not get any major update at all since the beginning of DayZ standalone. Only some minor crap and objects and animations and so on.
CoD and Battlefield are extremely iterative and are produced by very large studios. They do not have the scope of games like DayZ and Fallout, and they have teams dedicated to making sure there is a new CoD game every year - I'm sure you've heard stories of how those developers are being ground to the bone so they can meet deadlines. Why the fuck would you want BI to be a videogame sweatshop?
As for Fallout - please do regale me with stories of major content updates that Fallout regularly got over its lengthy development cycle. Fallout is not the pinnacle of gaming - it can be compared to many games quite easily. Skyrim, for example. Basically any Bethesda RPG.
If DayZ had just been released in 2017, or whenever, without early access then nobody would complain that it took so long to develop. They wouldn't complain because they wouldn't be privy to the game's development. Let's say Fallout 4 had announced it's release to early access back in, I don't know, 2009. Do you think that every week there'd be a game-changing new feature? Do you think there'd be a major new feature every year? Developing a game is one thing, but making sure the game is always in a playable state so random people can test it is another. That's why you hear about the devs doing internal testing and seeing that there are 'blockers' preventing them from releasing it to the public. Most of the time you don't have to worry about that. If anything this is an indictment of the early access model - sometimes it's too early.
-
4
-
Identify players with Binoculars, Longrange scope etc.
in Suggestions
Posted
I just use Steam's voice chat feature when I play with my mate, but same thing as Teamspeak I guess.
We use it to just chat shit for two hours, or however long we're playing. It's no fun playing in silence, and the voice comms in-game aren't exactly conducive to lengthy conversations about TV shows or the depressing hilarity of US politics while we run across the map. We're not going to turn it off just because we've spotted someone. In an ideal world we would, sure, but it isn't practical.
Third-party comms are definitely an exploit, sure, but I'm not convinced there's some sort of malice behind it. I like to chat with my friend when we play games - especially games like DayZ where there are extended periods where nothing really happens. It certainly creates an issue when a group seems to be able to communicate telepathically, but I don't think there's any way you can prevent people from doing that. People would probably be more willing to use the in-game comms if they were better.