Katana67

First thing that struck me about the E3 footage... the distant zombie "hits" look worse than ever. I understand it's an early build, but zombie damage needs to be improved a lot. I like the animations, but hate that zombies still just magically "afflict" damage to you without any sense of contact. That, and EVERYTHING still clips, zombies still jump through buildings and fall through the ground. That type of stuff really breaks immersion for me. I could live with it in the mod, but not necessarily in the SA. Again, I recognize that this is an early build, hence why it is prudent to outline these issues now rather than later. Here's a link to what I'm referencing The animations look good, but I'm not sure I like the way they're going. The "hold the weapon by the forearm" one is interesting, but your character shoots like a five year old with a Red Ryder. I assume this is in an effort to make our characters less "military" and more "civilian". Which I'm not sure I am in agreement with personally, as it doesn't reflect the player's skill so much as it just makes everyone look like they don't know how to fire their weapon. I can only hope that they have some sort of "progression" as has been suggested, whereby a player gradually learns how to hold his/her weapon and this is reflected in the animations. I would think a very basic backstory would need to be created as to why a person has survived the initial zombie outbreak on Chernarus to even wind up alive on the shore in the first place. Whether it's through guile, previous experience, trial and error, military training, etc. Perhaps allow the player to choose things like this? Which would reflect in the animations/behaviors of your character. I am hesitant to suggest something like this, as it is a pretty conventional RPG trope and may not be in the spirit of DayZ. But, I think they need to clearly specify "why" they're doing something, because if it's to make everything look "more civilian", I think they might be going a tad overboard. EDIT - Just read Rocket's reddit explanation of zombies doing damage, very hopeful and glad to have a bit of clarity.

I don't think weapon calibers can be strongly deemed "American" or not. Sure, there's a relatively hard divide between former Warsaw Pact weapons/calibers and NATO weapons/calibers. But there is also overlap, especially in a fictional nation (Chernarus) with fictional circumstances being placed upon it by the developers. It seems clear, from ARMA 2's origin, to the mod's UH-1Y's crashing, that NATO is involved with the "lore" of DayZ. This has been debated to death, and I think the consensus is that Russian/Warsaw Pact weapons should be the commonly found fodder of weapons. NATO weapons should be found around towns seldomly, with the high-end stuff being relegated to barracks and helicopter crashes (at least in the current mod paradigm, no idea how loot will work in SA). My view on the issue is that a barebones AK or an AR-15 shouldn't be god's gift to man. These are weapons that are available in many households in the United States and elsewhere, much less on military bases. Likewise, the bulk of "civilian" weapons in this regard, from both a realistic perspective and a "balance" perspective, should be Euro/Warsaw Pact bolt-actions and shotguns. I'm all for ammunition/weapon variety, as it allows for an enhanced sense of urgency and allows for the developers to play with different rarity levels. I'm totally fine having .30-06 and the like, weapons and ammunition, being able to be found in residential houses. However, it should be sufficiently rare to both justify the real-world unlikeliness of this occurring... and to give the player a choice between "Oh, do I want this M1 Garand with a clip of rare .30-06? or do I want this Mosin-Nagant with a box of 7.62x54R that I'll probably be able to find in the next town with ease?".

On the subject of suppressed sniper rifles, one must consider several things. Ammunition rarity, suppressor duration, and then the overall performance of the weapon. With the current paradigm, one cannot run "non-SD" (i.e. supersonic ammunition) rounds through suppressed weapons. I'm not sure whether this will be carried to SA or whether it'll be dealt away with in the mod. If suppressed weapons are allowed to use supersonic rounds, that opens a whole new discussion. However, it should negate most sound dampening and maintain the same downrange performance as a non-suppressed sniper rifle. Likewise, when using "SD rounds" or subsonic rounds, the downrange performance (effective range, damage, etc.) is degraded at the benefit of being fully suppressed. This is in itself balanced if the SD weapons were altogether rarer than non-suppressed sniper rifles to justify the extra capability of being able to use both types of rounds (as already exists with unsuppressed weapons using "SD rounds"). If suppressors are crafted/scavenged, it is likely that they will have some sort of limited duration related to rarity. Meaning, one could make a suppressor out of a potato... but it'd only last one shot and would use up the commonly found potato. As a mid-range, one could craft a makeshift suppressor (out of an oil filter for instance) which would last ~30 rounds (insert variable here). At the high-end, a properly looted rare suppressor would last on the order of several thousand rounds if not tens of thousands (on centerfire rifles, rimfire suppressors degrade much quicker). As an aside, we've got to get away from the traditional dialogue of "balance" and break away from the paradigm we've got now of attachments being integrated with weapons. The latter paradigm will change in SA and it looks like in the mod with the inclusion of attachments. So, we've got to now both look at weapons and their attachments. In my mind, if sufficiently hard to find and maintain, any weapon should be able to be included.

@ Mr Mouse Of course, I totally agree. We haven't seen anything and I suspect we won't for a while while they are focused on releasing a stable alpha and/or releasing new gameplay mechanics. It just seems to be a fundamental thing to me, vice something that'll be less noticeable whether it's sunny, raining, foggy, etc. Not sure what to make of that. That, and I like the fact that it's not always dreary. More realistic that way, it's just hard to envision other weather patterns currently for me. @ Rista Yes, this, very much this. I absolutely hate the dimming/brightening of the lighting in ARMA 2. Sure, your eyes adjust if you're looking toward the sun... but it doesn't make you ineffective... especially for hours on end. @ Feanorfeuergeist Totally. But, I would caveat this by adding that things like weather directly affect gameplay. My concern is primarily whether it looks good, but it can also affect gameplay. But, you are correct, that my main concern here is aesthetic. Although, as a personal aside, I would submit that making things look good affects my overall enjoyment of the game. That's not to suggest that it should take priority over other things, but it shouldn't necessarily be at the bottom of the list.

Question... Is everyone still cool with the "look" of SA? Meaning, the washed out blue-tint look that works for ARMA 3 and TOH? I understand that they probably don't have weather working really, hence why every vid/screen we get is in the brightest day you ever did see. But I can't help but feeling the new "look" is profoundly un-atmospheric and doesn't really match Chernarus. Perhaps this will be tempered later by differing weather patterns, but things just don't look right to me. It's not so much an issue of not looking "apocalyptic" or "horrific", it's more an issue of just not looking good altogether. Don't get me wrong, I love the sunny days in DayZ, but everything seems so much more lush and realistically depicted in terms of color with the mod currently. I also don't think that I've ever seen SA with full settings on, so that can't really be helping. But I'm just wondering, is it possible for them to change the atmosphere of the game dynamically? What was the logic behind the shift in palette? Is it dependent on the engine?

I can say, hand on heart, that I know many people who are absolutely stoked for SA who haven't even played DayZ or already play the mod but don't post on the forums. See, I can use supposition/assumption/hyperbole too without putting forth objective facts. I have no doubt that there are people who've become disillusioned with SA. But there is no evidence to suggest that these people make up a minority/majority of anything.

Fair enough. I didn't really want to get too into detail about it, plus, we know pretty much everything that was leaked anyhow... so I suppose it's sort of useless discussing it. Just a few quirks.

Are we allowed to discuss information garnered from leaks here?

Will there be specific attachments for weapons? (i.e. .308 suppressor, 5.45x39 suppressor, .303 suppressor). Will some of these be crafted? (i.e. MagLite suppressor, oil filter suppressor, potato suppressor, bottle suppressor with decreased longevity).

Well I frequently disagree with things in DayZ and things in SA, yet I'm still here. There's no weight in these "negative" and "positive" connotations you cite. Nobody's opinion is being suppressed. To me, this just is a blaring example about how people think that disagreement is somehow more honorable than agreement. When in reality, placing preference on one or the other is useless. It's also an example of how few people know how to make a critical argument, vice just trolling and/or being negative in the literal sense of the word. I've been on these forums for a while, as an active poster and avid reader. I'd say, as a conservative estimate, that 70-80% of so-called "negative" opinions, are either expressed in a way that is purposefully combative (trolling) or are based on illogical premises. Like I said in reference to another poster, there's constructive feedback, taking a critical viewpoint, griping, complaining, bitching, then being a dick. Most people fall on the latter three rather than the former three.

He posted a libelist rant attacking Rocket's integrity and acted on false assumptions. I'm sorry, Rocket, Jimmy from down the street, God, the mailman... doesn't matter who the subject of such an attack is, defense in that regard shouldn't be interpreted as a "cult".

I am frequently critical of Rocket's choices/reasons. This isn't one of them. If he/they make a few I disagree with, I'm still going to enjoy their product immensely. What is the problem? There is a difference between constructive feedback, a critical viewpoint, griping, complaining, bitching, and being a dick. In that order.

I think it could either be a folding stock or like some sort of reference paper/card taped on. It appears that they've made the AK look a lot more "apocalyptic" so, could be anything. Likewise with the barrel. It's a pretty low-res mini-profile of it, so I wouldn't jump to conclusions.

I believe this is a hide/show interface. Red = hidden, green = shown. All the green ones have their storage open.

I'd much prefer this. But, I think scripted door/window barricades would be easier to implement. This is ultimately what I'd like in lieu of player house construction, just using the existing houses as shelter.

I don't get how one can say ARMA 2's animations are good and/or preferable to ARMA 3's. In ARMA 2, you lean by snapping your spine/hips in half at a 45 degree angle. Humans don't move like that, unless they're hula dancers. ARMA 3's leans are not only more incremental, rather than INSTANTLY jerking to the side, they are also much more natural in pose. I would also love to hear the definition of "consoley". Because that interface looks FAR more complex than any console UI I've seen. If by "consoley", you mean simple, slick, and intuitive... then yeah, it might be "consoley". But in UI, that is the name of the game. Plus, look at the added functionality. Not only can you craft in this interface, there is a hotbar, apparent drag and drop interface, layered additions to your characters loadout, hide/show buttons. ARMA 2's inventory is way too clunky for its own good, so I don't get how an inventory that adds more functionality and is more intuitive to operate is somehow a bad thing and/or equatable to "console". I mean, what more do you want? Sure it could look prettier, but that will obviously come later. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rocket, if you're still browsing, can you tell us how the weapons are going? How are the attachments being implemented? What kind of interface will be used for this? Will there be specific attachments for weapons? (i.e. .308 suppressor, 5.45x39 suppressor, .303 suppressor). Will some of these be crafted? (i.e. MagLite suppressor, oil filter suppressor, potato suppressor, bottle suppressor with decreased longevity). Will optics be interchangable or will we have to find specific optics/mounts? (i.e. PSO scope, optics requiring picatinny rails, etc.) Will rail systems be rarely available to allow the attachment of picatinny/1913 attachments to AK's and the like, are they being rendered with that capability, or will there be reason to search for specific matching attachments?

Hmmm... Well, I'd have to see how night looks in SA. If it looks worse than vanilla DayZ, then I'd say take some time to improve it before release. If it looks the same, then don't worry about it until later. Night looks pretty bad in vanilla DayZ in my opinion, so hard to tell what Rocket means in this regard.

Yeah, I do ultimately agree with this. I mean, the LOS thing definitely makes the vicinity loot thing much more palatable to me. But, I'd rather have it as described above. I'm sure it'd require a bit more work though, perhaps further on down the line. That and a "grab loot" animation, not sure if that's in already or not. I don't recall. Will have to see how it plays out in game, whether or not the entire object has to be visible or just a pixel of it to count for the vicinity loot.

Oh gotcha', wouldn't've thought it was LOS. Solid.

Doesn't it undermine the "Scavenging" aspect of looking under tables and chairs if one can just kneel down and see everything in his/her viscinity?

Good call! My bad.

Hey, new twitter screen of inventory! @rocket2guns No DevBlog this week, too busy getting ready for E3: but here's the latest WIP (very WIP) of the new inventory system https://twitter.com/...0399872/photo/1 Again, won't the VICINITY loot system sort of negate any "scavenging" that they were touting? Why look under tables when I can just kneel down and see everything nearby?

I dunno, I mean the tweets are cool. But they preclude any significant announcement. So it's sort of discouraging. Let's be honest we all sort of knew that the server architecture would be done by the time Rocket got back, so is it really that cool that we know this now? I think what people would like, ideally, is regular small tidbit tweet updates with regular DevBlogs which are more expansive. This isn't outside of the realm of possibility. But, I don't fault them for not doing it either. What, is Rocket gonna' tweet "So, ya... Standalone Alpha now released on Steam! #DayZSA" and that's it? The biggest bit of information we got from the tweets so far, is that the server architecture is all set. But we still have no idea as to even a potential timetable and/or whether there's new precluding factors to an otherwise unimpeded release. There's nothing wrong with that mind you, but I'd much rather a DevBlog and a consistently released one at that.

They sure as hell can make better forests (see area around Black Lake).

Oh sure, I hadn't even thought of that. Good call. Yeah, zombies should totally have an effect on any possible barricading. I think you being low-key while in that house should be a thing, for instance zombies'd be attracted to any bright lights and rustling about. Then, they'd start whacking at your barricades. EDIT - And hey, maybe some houses could start with the doors locked anyway. So that the player would have to open it up, perhaps to more lucrative loot.