Katana67

Yikes! And I thought my old Telecaster was chipped... EDIT - Just rewatched the stream. Rocket mentions "permanent items" and then goes on about how players could be able to have stashes inside of the apartment buildings.

"Durability" as it were, should absolutely be a factor. It should be gradual, as you say. But one should have to maintain their equipment, period. It's a huge flaw of the mod that once you've got that DMR and five mags, you don't have to maintain them (thus allowing consequence-less KOSing). You can have them indefinitely. I haven't seen anything degrade in anything SA related that wasn't shot with a rifle round, so I'm not sure where you're getting the "2-3 uses" from. They'll have to find a balance. I mean, I clean my weapons after every trip to the range and I'm not fighting for my life in a zombie apocalypse. One would think that you'd have to be cleaning your weapon as if one was in a combat environment, same applies to mags. Plus durability and degradation allows for a lot of new loot trips.

http://www.twitch.tv/rocket2guns/b/485686449 It's three and a half hours... buckle up.

With regard to the whole "damage" or "condition" of items insofar as the discussion of "experience" is concerned (i.e. if you use a bandage for the first time, you maybe won't do a good job. Do it enough and you'll get good at it), I think there might be a cool feature to be explored here. It might place too much of a burden on the items themselves, but perhaps a "weathering" attribute should be attached to the items. This could apply to several uses. - It would distinguish between certain items without impinging on their overall "condition". So, for instance, you could keep your Mosin maintained for six months, get attached to it and become proficient with it, but it would gradually acquire a "weathered" texture. What I'd like not to see is "magic repairs", whereby if you repair a broken rifle from 20% to 100%, it doesn't automatically change appearance to a brand new weapon. - Said weathering could give the player a visual cue as to how far he/she has progressed with regard to "experience" with a particular item. Meaning that if your M4A1 acquires a "weathered" texture, it would indicate that you've spent X amount of time with said individual weapon to gain proficiency. Rather than just being "Oh dayum, I can reload fast all of a sudden!" - A similar concept could be applied to stances, whereby one starts out looking fairly "civilian" but gradually through use one acquires more appropriate shooting stances. Perhaps weathering isn't the correct term, but I think this might be a good way of exploring plausible visual cues to indicate gradual proficiency. I get that "brand new" items should be included. But as I use these items, I'd like them to look used without directly impinging on their usefulness (i.e. damage/condition).

The network bubble problem wasn't fixed by the June deadline he set (which wasn't really a deadline for release if one looks back at it). Pretty sure it was the network bubble then still. People had a shit fit, so he decided that he was no longer going to comment on potential timeframes for release. It's not a question of whether he knows the release timeframe or not, it's a question of it meeting criteria for release. My point is that, when he gives rough estimates or deadlines or even vague timeframes and then doesn't meet them, it's far more damaging than just always thinking release is over the horizon. I will say no more. Gone on far too long. Let's get back to fawning over the stream, shall we?

So now you're faulting him for not saying that it won't be released promptly? I don't get your grievance. You say you want him to comment on or pin down a release date (i.e. 2013 or 2014). Yet you fault him for potentially being misleading in having some sense of imminence with regard to the release? Which one is it? Do you want him to not comment on it, or do you want him to comment on it (even if his comment may be proven wrong by circumstance, as has happened in the past)?

I love how Rocket is all gung-ho about including things to discourage KOS in standalone, yet every person they come across in the stream... they just grease outright no questions asked. Priceless. :P

He's said countless times that he's not willing to comment on a release timeframe though. It's bitten him in the ass at least twice (December 2012 and June 2013). So why would he change now? I'm willing to bet that he isn't sure of whether it'll be out in 2013 or 2014 simply given the brevity of time left until 2014. So why would he risk making an inaccurate call again? Something could arise before then, an unanticipated occurance, that would prevent an otherwise expedient launch from occurring in 2013. So why would he speculate when circumstance could prove his assessment wrong again? Saying that he's been teasing us all year isn't accurate. He explicitly stopped estimating release dates in June. Release has always been contingent upon milestones and system development. Looking at it from a "when is it going to be out?" perspective isn't helpful. Looking at it from a "what needs to happen for it to be out?" perspective is more helpful. Rocket's statements of "final laps" are still contingent upon success and the achieving of certain objectives (i.e. a playable alpha, along with certain system-specific aspects). It's not as if he can just push a button to release it, and is holding his finger over the button teasing us. There are testing priorities which need to be fulfilled before a release can occur.

So you want him to estimate a date for release? I'm confused. Isn't that what you're faulting him for? Estimating dates and then having to go back on that because his assessments weren't accurate (and thus "leading" the community)?

Sort of ironic, as he's done that multiple times in the past (and subsequently explained his reasoning for changing it)... and that's what prompts you to ask for an "honest answer" from Rocket.

And how have you suffered because of Rocket's inability to give you a solid release date? How exactly have you, tangibly, been affected by this? Full transparency =/= a release date. Transparency, however, includes being up-front when your assessments are no longer accurate. Which Rocket has been.

Something sorrily missing from most other video games/shooters (Battlefield especially) in standalone, such a simple thing. Defensible effing rooftops. No idea why this is such an elusive thing.

That and the lack of consequence. Who gives a fuck about their assault rifle/life when they can just loot a brand new one and get five mags in five minutes? I'm looking forward to seeing how the systemic changes affect KOS, rather than just the very narrow "In hand" mechanics and such that are specifically designed to discourage it.

But you didn't say that, you just listed problems with a broken ACOG. I haven't seen a fully repaired ACOG in SA, so I have no idea whether or not they've done it right.

One, it was broken... So, not sure if it looks different/functional if it's at 100% and not entirely cracked. Two, I don't care anymore. EDIT - I love the guy going off on this long-winded speech about weapon modularity when you could just... you know... say "weapon modularity".

Agreed, the buildings look amazing. Dat Apartment building.... /drool Rocket, you're gonna' want that furniture... framerate be damned. I'd rather believable buildings than empty husks.

Controllers are for games /argument :D

Sweet god thank you lord in heaven that they now have elbow-down shooting. Feature, put it on the back of the box.

Answer my fucking controller support questions Rocket! /rage

I do think they need to do something with the spawns. It could be as simple as spreading them out more. I don't think people spawn above Solnichny. I'd like to see Berezino be a regular spawn point as well. Or it could be as simple as varying them along the coast, so that one doesn't spawn on the beach every time. I think having spawns inside the treeline would be helpful.

We've known about this since Gamescom where they showed off the new maps. There are a bunch of cities in what used to be "The Wilderness" on the same latitude as Pobeda Dam. Kind of a bummer, as the wilderness seems to be shrinking and shrinking. That and there's now a road running north-south west of Myshkino... Ugh...

Not to make a grand political statement, but this is why there's a lot of mistrust of politicians in America. Fools who think "making an incorrect call in a highly fluid situation, often with incomplete information" = "lying".

Try Twitter brah!

They obviously have to pick favorites to some degree either way, like with some of the forum posters here that are testers. But my issue is with the criteria and motives, which are now cheapened by having to play favorites amongst streamers rather than just folks who exhibit interesting takes on things or who are just passionate about the project. If Rocket has qualms with picking favorites amongst streamers, then I don't really see eye to eye on that issue at all with him. In my opinion, streamers (or even just popular "personalities") shouldn't factor in to development any more than the average joe. Just as we do not deserve to be testing by virtue of being on a forum, they do not deserve to be testing by virtue of being streamers. In fact, I'd submit that they are less deserving as they are openly motivated by popularity and in some cases, monetary gain. However, that's neither here nor there. Streamers will undoubtedly shape the perceptions of their viewers, but I'm just saying that they should be on equal footing with the average player upon release. If they have time to build up their preconceptions, they'll have formed certain mental constructs on the standalone which may contribute to an already divided community. Likewise, these assessments (therefore based on pre-release testing) may not be accurate. So it may lead, in some instances as I've said previously, to a bit of "confirmation bias". Whereby a stream viewer sees a stream and hears a streamer's take on the standalone, then buys the standalone only to have these pre-disposed flaws/positives already in the back of their minds. So, for instance one could smugly say "See, Frankie was right... the zombies suck! WTF devs?" It just removes a potential layer of bias to the feedback given post-release if streamers are excluded. Just to reiterate, I'm not against adding more folks to the testing team. Just not streamers, as they have a significant sway (right or wrong) over their audiences.

Rocket was worried about favoritism. That's what I got out of his statements and the pro/con information they put up with their reasoning. The goal, as I understand it, was to allow streamers in to help bolster their numbers and (ostensibly) speed up testing. However, they'd have to be selective and Rocket was worried that folks would feel left out as it would set precedent. I disagree with the idea of preferential treatment of streamers, not the idea that more people should be testing standalone prior to release. I can't speak for the community itself, but personally, I'm with Rocket on this one. I don't care for streamers, I think they're highly overrated in terms of usefulness and contributions. Likewise, I don't want the precedent of favoritism to be hovering over the entire development cycle. That and I want the relatively un-biased masses to deliver their own honest feedback once the NDA is dropped and standalone has released. People tend to default to the opinions of popular streamers to shape their critiques, which is detrimental. I don't think streamers should have any advanced footing to shape those potential critiques on release. So if the release comes a bit later because they didn't have swaths of streamers to help out, so be it. I'd rather that than have a community pre-disposed to certain "popular" interpretations on release.