Presence-

I second this. I think this issue deserves a feedback tracker and I don't know if it has already been addressed. I currently have a closed barrel next to a tree that can't be opened unless the tree is chopped down.

It should be authentic (as far as the systems allow it). It's not about us wanting. It's about the fidelity of the content to itself. Let's not disperse. This is a thread where the OP is voting against the recent change of the inventory and storage system. I know that there's many other unrealistic aspects that should be treated too with the effectiveness of one step at a time and as long as you start listing you will only list and miss. Even though you can (to a certain extent), It's not necessarily about an exact copy of reality but being able to look at the bigger picture, creating and delivering an authentic experience and to do this: There might be a compression needed to fit the context and there is the limit of the systems capabilities. - The compression of time and space to fit in the context of the content is also a valid example. - The short despawn timer for the different elements dropped and left by users can be implemented for server's performance issue / to avoid adding extra stress to the server and it is a valid example of the systems capabilities. Please read my comments again. I already mentioned the issue of an authentic compensation in my previous comments in this thread. Those changes might not be motivated for realism because we don't know what's in the mind of the devs behind those changes and we can give opinions, assume, guess, speculate or whatever about the motivation behind the change. However, those changes don't invalidate the result that this very specific change is more inclined toward the aspect of the official description and by extension, compressed realism. Even if it's incomplete, timid and/or a cautious step forward. If we vote with all our capacity to literally stop them at this first little step toward the official description elements for the name of not messing up the "gamified" balance then we vouch for them to keep the latter the way it is and that we accept to tolerate it. We risk vouching for not supporting the content's potential going on par with its identity, to settle for the actual incongruent mess and not being productive in the bare minimum congruency that is required for a certain maximum congruency. The unrealistic permissiveness of the inventory system is a source of another symptom but it is also a symptom for another source. The mess got you confused to the point that you start defending a "gamified" balance that is not on par with the official description of the content and by extension, you reject a congruent element with the official description to defend and keep the incongruent aspects. Instead of vouching and supporting the vote against the recent change to keep the inventory extra permissive for the example issue of having to carry and being able to carry (among other things) the leather kit that takes a lot of place (6 slots because it's maybe a kit - compressed visuals and low-fidelity realism), We'd better vote for it and next to that we'd also point the inauthentic durability of the shoes, the boots, etc and ask to be looked at with an authentic lens. Treat the source first, not the symptom. It will mess up other things because those other things shouldn't be here and/or there in the first place anyway so why do you seek to keep those other things? Why are you eager for that? I seek to justify the content rather than the engagement of the player. Regarding the present case, the missing up is another key opportunity for redirection provided in a way to draw the curtain toward those other affected issues and that we do something about those affected issues along the way with a rational lens of what concerns the commitment to the official description and the roots of the content.

I understand anticipating and thinking about what it can affect later to avoid unwanted surprises but let's not skip the effectiveness of proceeding one step at a time because this is something that can be assessed and dealt with later. The first thing I'd correct is the carrying capacity of the storage (the pockets in a worn cloth, the carrying capacity of a backpack, etc). The concealment system that you thought about is justifiable and it sticks with the nature of the content but it is (in a part, not completely) independent of the issue of the carrying capacity of the present storage system. It is part of the inventory system but I'd qualify this to a part of the inventory system that is related to the carrying capacity in itself and the carrying capacity of a worn cloth or a carry-able/cartable storage. Assessing the carrying capacity of a worn cloth or a carry-able storage to be a dependent system of a concealment capacity or a carrying capacity that should be independent of the latter in itself will exaggerate the nature and the purpose carrying capacity of a worn cloth or a carry-able storage and will limit and obstruct a carrying capacity that should be independent of the latter in itself. It will also be inauthentic. To better understand this, we can take the example for the interesting "under t-shirt concealment" that you mentioned: What is a carrying capacity in a worn cloth? Pockets. (as far as I know. You may have another trick that I'd be interested to read about) Does the t-shirt have a pocket? No. Carrying capacity = 0 Can I put something under the t-shirt? There's a possibility. How? For example, I'll see if can make it a possibility to use a duct tape gripping and sticking a paper, a lighter, a knife or even a Glock concealed under my worn cloth. I just need to get the tools that will allow me to do this. Do I need a t-shirt to do (carry) this? I can still be naked and carry this. I can still wear something else and do it. However, the t-shirt as any other worn cloth is a tool that may help me conceal it but it does not carry it. Thank you. This is key of a good authentic aspect. This is ridiculous. It simply shows a non-commitment and non seriousness to the nature of the content from the devs who accept this kind of aberration. The inventory system that we currently have is already a way of concealment that is inauthentic and forgiving. It will be good if they can rework this concealment. The possibility of concealment should be (as long as its done realistically) and I agree that it is an important and authentic aspect of survival that should be treated with meticulous care but one step at a time. First the carrying capacity and how much capacity items combined or a certain item take in the targeted storage, if it can. Another issue with an example is the concealment of the container. (They recently removed the possibility of quick slotting and taking out a content from inside a container in the inventory system, which is good) but should a certain container be carry-able in clothes at first place? Maybe in a certain backpack but certainly not in the pants, jackets, shirts, etc. That's why if we skip that and proceed to look at concealment first then we will base the concealment on an inauthentic and forgiving carrying capacity (which is already is) and by extension, an inauthentic and forgiving inventory system.

The inventory system is currently inauthentic, ridiculously forgiving, puerile, extremely exaggerated, for one first major reason: it is big and unrealistically permissive. It should not be like this from the first place. The inventory system need to be reworked accordingly to the official description of the game: authentic and unforgiving. When I buy a content that is marketed as authentic and unforgiving and that content is coming from the root of a simulation then I expect at least to not be able to put a wooden log cut from a big tree in my inventory, a cooking pot in my jacket or that somebody pulls out a Mosin out of his clothes or out of his backpack (for the very least to mention). Whether you like the idea or not, if it came to me I'd still shrink it until you'll have 0 slot on your t-shirt. Any other cloth that doesn't have a tiny single pocket should have zero slot and I'll make sure that you can only put things realistically to the size and volume of the carrying capacity. With meticulous care: - I'll shrink it until you'll need a sling to attach another tool on you just like you need an attached holster for a pistol. - I'll make sure that the weight will affect your speed and comfort of your motions and movements with the things you carry. - I'll make sure that the type of terrain and surface will affect your motions, movements, fatigue and add to the things you carry. - I'll make sure to put a fatigue and need of sleep system that also take into account the weight you carry and for how long you carry it. People can cry and moan about it all day and night long until they get used to it or not... because at the end of the day I'll just be sticking to the nature of the content itself. However, when I do rework the inventory system then I'll have to rework every item that we can put in a storage realistically (as much as I can think of and as much as the power of the systems allow it). For example: a rag still takes 3 slots whether you have 1 or 6 rags combined while it shouldn't. Steaks still take their own slots (2,3,4) regardless of its remaining while it shouldn't. I'll block certain Items to go inside a certain storage depending on the size, volume and compactness of the items and the targeted storage. etc. I'll make sure to rework everything about the inventory system and what affect it directly and indirectly with meticulous care to be authentic and unforgiving because if I don't it will make me comprise myself and my content just to please people like you who want a different description of the content. The major difference is that I'm sticking to the nature of the content while you don't because you want an inauthentic and forgiving content. You want high-assistance. The moment the devs try to remember (just a tiny little bit) the nature of DayZ, you, your alike come here and elsewhere and start complaining about it. The moment the devs have a little cautious step at that (and they do it with meticulous caution because of you and your alike will certainly overwhelm with complaints). Instead of encouraging them in the authentic and unforgiving aspects of survival and enhance it in this direction, you choose to complain about it. And don't tell me to go and play another game or create my own mod. You are the one who should go and play another game or create your own mod even if you are many. Not me. Adapt or leave DayZ be what it meant to be. If you choose to stay then I shouldn't adapt to you. You should.

Guests like fish begin to smell after three days.

One hundred percent with you on this. Putting all those piew-piew fast-paced kids to sit-down and sleep for a little bit can only come with and for the greater good.

Rip and tear my body Eat my flesh before my eyes I'm the appetizer, I'm the sacrifice Chop me up for thee to feed Call me sick but this is what I need

Hi Lakevu, While I want to see more authentic, unforgiving, horror, survival, post-apocalyptic elements implemented in DayZ and no infestation of arcadness (including those that you mentioned: movements and gunplay, etc) I might disagree with you on the claimed part that DayZ is a simulator. (though I might not know that the original idea might be but let's proceed to continue reading to try to understand this because I might find myself unsurprisingly agreeing with you on the accurate matter that DayZ should be a simulator). I promise you. I'd definitely want it to be a simulator too and I do firmly believe that it would tremendously and absolutely enhance its experience (at least for me) but to my knowledge, it is not what Bohemia Interactive describe it in their official website. I do not criticise Bohemia Interactive unfairly on this because they do not market it as a simulator. Can you provide me the proof that DayZ is officially described as a simulator? We also need as much matter as we can about physics simulations that have been degraded by Bohemia Interactive later on, at least with videos, etc. Because the unfortunate part is that everything that you talk about can be cowardly claimed as hypothesis or subjective preferences by those who don't have any gain from it. Until then, the defence of Bohemia Interactive innocent until proven guilty is applied. However, I think that pushing more for authenticity, horror, brutal, unforgiving, survival and post-apocalyptic aspects are currently easily justified because the official description of DayZ is: "DayZ is a gritty, authentic, open-world survival horror hybrid-MMO game, players follow a single goal: Survive by any mean necessary." DayZ | Official website "Embark on an unforgiving journey in DayZ's Frostline Expansion, set within the icy Sakhal archipelago, covering 83km² of winter wilderness." DayZ | Official website "The post-soviet country of Chernarus is struck by an unknown virus, turning the majority population into frenzied infected. Fighting over resources has bred a hostile mentality among survivors, driving what’s left of humanity to collapse. You are one of the few immune to the virus - how far will you go to survive? DayZ is an unforgiving, authentic, open world sandbox online game where each one of 60 players on a server follows a single goal - to survive as long as they can, by all means necessary." GENRE: fps, survival DEVELOPER: Bohemia Interactive Welcome to Chernarus. A 225 km2 open world post-soviet state and one of the areas hit by a new and presently unknown infection which has wiped out most of the world's population. You are one of the few who have survived and now you must search this new wasteland in order to fight for your life against what is left of the indigenous population, now infected with the disease. Go Solo, team up with friends or take on the world as you choose your path in this brutal and chilling landscape using whatever means you stumble upon to survive. This is Day Z - This is your story. DayZ was created by Dean "Rocket" Hall, and is a trademark of Bohemia Interactive Details About DayZ - Official Facebook page Authentic, open world multiplayer survival game. Developed by Bohemia Interactive. - Official Facebook page I too find Bohemia Interactive is still too complacent, very soft and most of time even incongruent with its own official description and there's still a tremendous amount of things to do about it but let's keep things honest and accurate, question ourselves too and let's not judge Bohemia unfairly by using the word simulator for DayZ If a game simulates something, it is indeed a simulation as well because a game is what you make it to be (to the margin of the systems possibilities) but our unfortunate matter is that DayZ is not officially described and marketed as a simulation. We can only be grateful if simulation elements are implemented in DayZ but we can not blame and bash Bohemia Interactive for not doing it. However, we can read two words in the official description of DayZ: authentic and unforgiving Authenticity: Realistic works strive to depict reality as accurately as possible, avoiding idealizations or exaggerations. Dean Hall, best known for coming up with the idea created DayZ that was originally a mod from the roots of ARMA II ARMA II is officially described and marketed as: "Built upon over 10 years' of experience, Arma 2 thrusts gamers into the heart of the most realistic military combat simulation ever developed, featuring the vast, detailed Chernarus and Takistan environments, and a massive library of authentically modeled units, weapons and vehicles. Enjoy a wide variety of official and unofficial single- and multiplayer content, ranging from large-scale co-operative missions to total modifications such as DayZ. Arma 2 opens the door to one of the most dedicated community in gaming. GENRE: TACTICAL SHOOTER DEVELOPER: Bohemia Interactive RELEASE DATE: June 9, 2009 PLATFORMS: windows pc Did the modification DayZ originally came as a simulator? Was it ever? Was it intended to be? Does it need to be to be congruent with its official description? Was the mod itself complex enough to be a survival simulator? Was the legacy versions like the 0.62 complex enough to be a simulator later on? One thing for sure: DayZ came from a system that is officially described and marketed as the most realistic military combat simulation ever developed That is one of the reasons why I encourage Bohemia Interactive to put a strong foot and focus on the realistic implementations for DayZ regarding of the liking of any audience with its tuppenny. Because it is on par with its identity, its official descriptions and its roots. Dean Hall said in an interview that the idea of DayZ is to be realistic but he choose to avoid the word realistic because people will come and say that the infected are not realistic. That's how he preferred to use the word "authentic". The infected and the unknown virus are just a vehicle of what drove the world to collapse but everything else is realistic. The realism of everything else is crucial because that's the intrigue of the post-apocalypse. That's the sub-genre and the market spoke for it even when it was unstable with a lot of issues, bugs, etc. There's a market for it and not just for DayZ but for the sub-genre itself. Following this, the infestation of arcadness (for lack of better term) should not stay in DayZ and we should get rid of it as much as we can because it does not stick to its official description. I can confidently argue that there's many aspects in DayZ that are too forgiving and inauthentic. (This includes movement and gunplay that have been mentioned here) those are just a couple of examples and there's still tremendously more in this matter to be addressed. This leads us to another question: Can authentic content stick to its identity without being a simulation? I too conclude that the modern ideal of authenticity does not lend itself to a coherent and rationally compelling account, and will more profitably be seen as a mixture of logically unrelated concepts. The nature and value of authentic behaviour has been explained by associating it with personal identity (being/remaining oneself) and fidelity to self (being true to oneself). An example of one of the most paradigm cases of inauthenticity from Bohemia Interactive in regards to DayZ is in the art concept of the trailer 1.20 premiered on Valentine's Day on Youtube. It was alarming, cynical, puerile and devoid of any seriousness and commitment to its identity. I don't know... maybe I'm the one who doesn't know what DayZ is and DayZ itself doesn't know either. DayZ: being true to myself means being true to my own originality, and that is something only I can articulate and discover. In articulating it, I am also defining myself. I am realising a potentiality that is properly my own. If authenticity involves being true to one’s “originality”, it will presumably also be a matter of avoiding blind conformism and undue deference. The value of being true to oneself: the borrowed truths are the ones to which one clings most tenaciously, and all the more so since they remain foreign to our intimate self. It takes much more precaution to deliver one’s own message, much more boldness and prudence, than to sign up with and add one’s voice to an already existing party. I believed that it is above all to oneself that it is important to remain faithful. We behave inauthentically because it is easier than “delivering one’s own message” The result may be what D.W. Winnicott calls a “false self”. This is among reasons why I despise the wide audience, anybody and anything trying to cater to it at all costs and I really do think and firmly believe that I'm better than this audience (I know that it may sound narcissistic but it is what it is). I see them as below me, I firmly believe that they are, all packaged and blindfolded. Yes, I'm better than them! The unfortunate matter is that it's a number's game and money talks. I'm the minority and they are the majority. I am and they are the piggy pinky party animal. I'm the untamed and educated and they are the tamed by the virus. I'm the immune survivor and they are the majority of the infected population. No, we cannot live together! Last but not least, There's officially no zombies in DayZ. In the horror-sub genre, there's a difference between zombies that you find in different medias (Resident Evil, Night of the living dead, The Walking Dead, etc) and infected (28 Weeks Later, DayZ, The Last of Us, etc) I believe the letter "Z" in DayZ stands for Zero - Day Zero.

It is not about making everyone happy. It is about sticking with the identity of the game. To stick with the identity of the game, you have to follow some rules and those rules don't care about anyone being happy or not. Valuing what the audience like instead of valuing sticking with the identity of the content is the first major step to betray the identity of our content and by extension, our audience. I ask people here who are defending the matter to make an effort into being accurate in the given information to avoid miscommunications, misinterpretations and interpretations of exaggerations. What was meant here is that there's no inconveniences (for example: affected weapon sway) when sprinting and stopping to aim and even a total absence of sway when you hold breath. This is among the very least of the inconveniences for a content that is officially described as authentic and unforgiving because this aspect here goes against the official description. Here again, for the least to say. You are asking this question to the wrong one because getting DayZ big at all costs is the main problem here. "I don't cater to anyone to please, I unapologetically stick with my identity and the official description. You either get on with it or I show you the door." Sometimes you have to lose. DayZ had that charm of not being for everyone and was already big while honest in that. Let it stay in its place, develop its potential in its own path and don't try to "please everyone" for more financial gains. Don't be afraid to be alone. Just stick with the identity and the official description of the game. Some might go and some might come. Yes it did. We're discussing it here and elsewhere. Yet, you still wrote it above. You put arguments about success being about adapting the game to the wide audience. The engagement of the player rather than the content. You are focusing on the big wide audience approach and you relate success to that aspect instead of sticking with the identity of the content. DayZ lacks a solid direction in sticking with its identity, its official description and its roots. Thank you for your kind words but I judge by actions. The "not that bad after all" depend on the type of audience you are attracting. If we push our content into arcadness (for lack of better term but I think you'll get it). It will sure have its audience too because this audience doesn't know any better. Do we ever ask questions about statistics and try to understand what they hide and mean with depth or we're just celebrating numbers regardless of anything else? Do we ask ourselves "who are we attracting?" "Who is this audience that DayZ is now attracting?" and "what did DayZ do or didn't do to attract and keep attracting this audience?" Again, you value success by the wide audience and numbers at all costs. My subjective threshold and enjoyment is irrelevant. Sticking with the identity and the official description of the content is. It's up to me as part of an audience to cater to that. Don't meet me half-way and don't try to cater to me otherwise you'll compromise yourself. Video game concept art is one of the most important aspects of game development. It's responsible for setting the tone and style of a game and can be used to communicate the game's vision to the rest of the team and by extension, the extended audience. Yes it does and more than we think. Bohemia Interactive is already gone against its players by simply not sticking to the official description (authentic and unforgiving) by removing and not working on things that are related to this aspect and by extension, the identity for financial benefits. Bohemia Interactive have done many great things for DayZ (fixing, adding content, etc) that I'm grateful for but many other things out of place that betray its identity and this need to be addressed. Thank you. The potential for DayZ can be greater than this. Please start by following the rule of going on par with its official description and don't forget its roots. I'm thinking of putting suggestions threads soon and explaining with as much detail as I can think of why and how it will affect the game and I was wondering if devs do actually read this forum. That's what brought me to this thread.

A game is what you make it to be (to the margin of the systems possibilities). Are you talking about your own subject threshold of the enjoyment of a game's mechanics? Because If I designed a game and described it in its official website as authentic and unforgiving to come visit its forum and be a witness of this kind of attitude that you have here then you'll be the one sent packing with your damned money.

Jared Martin and Sean_87__, I definitely agree and upvote this suggestion. Removing the possibility of switching servers while keeping the characters gear on is another step toward the good direction. Not only switching servers with the gear on allow survivors to loot up in low-pop servers to join a high-pop server and consequently, have gear advantage but it suppresses facing the time and space constraints. - Facing the night - Facing the weather - Changing player's unwanted spawn and position on the map with previous-server gear on - The possibility of combat log and server hop to avoid a hostile encounter when position is revealed with previous-server gear on - Finding more bases to raid because the uncommitted-server raider keeps switching servers with his gear on, raid in multiple servers and get the loot to import to his server and come back to his server to stack his character/base/stash without constraints and diminished inconveniences. - A step toward a more focus on the committed and authentic survival and less rushed death-match couloir - It might also prevent duplicating glitches like Jared said. The possibility of switching servers with the same character and its gear on is incentivised by absent/low-commitment behaviour, non seriousness and it has an avoidant behaviour aspect to the authentic and unforgiving experience of the game and we need to get rid of this feature. Sean_87__, Can you please link me to the suggestion thread that you mentioned above?

I might be misunderstanding you on this one. Why do you want "compensation" in an equal increase in slots on vests and backpacks? The carrying capacity of vests and backpacks is unauthentic and should be reconsidered too. I don't like the fact that DayZ is officially described as authentic and unforgiving and that you can still carry a Mosin in the backpack, a cooking pot in the vest, a shovel, a jerry can, a car radiator in the vest, a big wooden log or any other ridiculously massive item in any inventory or storage system that wouldn't align with honesty and accuracy. I think that the inventory system need to put a full confident step and embrace realism with detail and meticulous care. Same here: if I have no pocket in a t-shirt then I shouldn't be able to carry something in that worn t-shirt and the vest or the backpack shouldn't compensate for it by increasing the carrying capacity unrealistically just for the sake of compensating, easing on survivors and giving them relief. Giving them what they want instead of what they need because I fear that they might not buy or play my game anymore. No, sir! Betraying the identity of the game is not the right direction. Yes! Now we're getting close to it. But... Putting a block of certain objects in certain clothes is a good idea. Unfortunately, it doesn't resolve everything. The inventory and storage system need to be reworked in the carrying capacity and reconsidered with what, how and if a certain content or contents all together can be carried in a container with a meticulous touch of realism in mind. What do you mean by this? A game is what you make it to be (to the margin of the systems possibilities). As a developer, I think you can manage to fit the inventory and storage system to fit realism if you want to. This is true. That's why half work doesn't work. BI need to rework the inventory and storage system with depth and I suspect that the "only slots design system" might be limiting in the capacity to approach realism. I wouldn't choose the word "reduce" for everything. (Of course now we instantly think of reducing and it just indirectly shows how the current state of the inventory and storage system is ridiculously big, unauthentic and forgiving) I'd phrase it like this because accuracy here does matter: You can't rework the storage system to be authentic without also reworking the size of the contents to be contained on par with authenticity because It creates unbalance. Authenticity: Realistic works strive to depict reality as accurately as possible, avoiding idealizations or exaggerations. Two words in the official description of DayZ: authentic and unforgiving Sean_87__, I really hope so and in the right direction.

Hi Andrey, High TTK is not realistic and would betray the identity of the game. There's already too much of "arcadness" (for lack of better term but I think you'll get it) in the game. So please don't ask for more of this latter, ask for less. It's always good for information to keep in mind those two words in the official descriptions of DayZ: authentic and unforgiving. You'll need to learn to adapt to those aspects. I understand your frustration about being shot by surprise but we are all in the same boat. A bullet is dangerous and can be deadly. Just as it should. Be glad and thankful that you can still respawn after being shot dead and continue to play the game. See, that's your balance! That's the balance you're asking about a game and realism.

The filtering bottle might just be too overpowered if all we need to do to drink safe water is to fill it with snow and drink straight after that safe and sound. Once the filtering bottle is found, dehydration problems have been resolved. If that's the case, i'll be good that this filtering bottle is extremely rare and that we still need to wait quite a while for the snow to melt (and the time to melt depends on the temperature and the storage condition as it might never melt and stay frozen) or if we want to accelerate the melting process, we should drop the bottle close to a fire or pour that water in a container that boils it as a faster and safer option. In addition to that, warm water will warm our body a little bit and give us a heat bonus for a little while. It's good to think in details and in slow-paced manners. Collecting snow in the filtering bottle should take time and effort to give us a descent quantity and it should be revolved around anticipation and not as a direct to instant resolve to counter dehydration issue and quick safe liquid ready to drink.

Great! Looking forward to see how the temperature rework is implemented along with the additions that come with it. I hope everything is done with.a slow-paced taste.