louist

Axe as side, it's not entirely out of the realm of possibility. I know how useful anecdotal evidence is, but there are plenty of week and two week hiking trails in my province, where all your food is packed in and your waste is packed out. You could easily be filling a 70 liter pack with 15-20 kilos, not counting the weight of water. It's a bitch, and by the end of the day you're exhausted. But possible.

Thank you kindly. And Mos1ey as well.

Are there any scopes that fit on the M4? I've found two, but neither fit. The only mod I found that did apply was the bipod, and I'm not sure it had an impact, as the character was wiped before I got a change to fire it.

That said, I still hope there are heli crashes or something similar. Not specifically for hi-end gear, but for the added incentive for exploration. Even if they only gave access to canned food and currently available gear, I'd still be stoked to find one.

You have a valid point, I also enjoy the variety Chernarus offers. Though if some modders put out an eastern urban map, I'd be just as happy. Again, though, these are things for the far future.

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. One of the great things about the mod, I think, were the sub-mods that grew out of it, and offered different experiences based on changes to the map. At some point in the distant future, it would be nice if SA allowed for the same variety.

Why not have separate holsters for chest, waist, and legs? I don't know if it might be a bit much to allow multiple holsters, but I'd certainly appreciate the choice between them.

Oh, both sides contribute to the problem, there's no doubt about that. In the end, it is Rocket and his team that will decide what this game becomes. These discussions are here for us to offer our opinions, which the devs can sample, should they decide to do so. Trying to drown each other out, to derail each other based on differences of opinion, makes it a lot less likely that anyone will stop by for a look. Again, I'm not saying you're a part of it.

@Mercules: But how many people are attacking opinions for being contrary to the vision without also calling them a noob, idiot, or telling them to "go back to CoD/WoW/whathaveyou?" That's what I would like to see less of, as it contributes to the toxic environment these forums are taking on. In addition, ideas that may seem to go against the vision may in fact improve the game. Derailing discussions (and I am not referring to you) because they run contrary to the core won't help us improve the game. @ZedsDead: I'd just like to point out that EVE and UO both have optional "hard-coded" factional warfare, as well as "soft" factions such as guilds, corps, and alliances.

@Mercules: Actually... You have a point, in a limited sense. Validity is separate from truth, however, as valid arguments dont have to be true to be valid. So let me restructure that. Everyone has a right to An opinion. No matter what that opinion is, or how much other people think it goes against the core or "vision" of the game. We should not invalidate people's opinions and suggestions based on who those people are or what games they play, and so on. My main point is that we should be arguing opinions and not attacking people. Once that happens, we all look bad.

@Regular: the vicinity feature is very touchy in my experience. Some items won't come up unless I have them directly under the crosshairs, and even then, I sometimes have to shuffle around a bit before it works. But sometimes it works great. Given time these issues will be ironed out, though.

I really like this idea. Both for its usefulness, and for it's potential for misuse. It does nothing but add to the game.

Clumzy is absolutely right. Everyone's opinion, even relative newcomer's is valid. As much as some people (a vocal group, no doubt) feel the need to act as gatekeepers or "true fans," they're in the same boat. Argue against or for ideas. Don't attack people for the ideas they have.

Whatever the usefulness may be, it is nice to know :)

Sickerthansars: you and Rocket seem to disagree on whether SA is an MMO.

Shadow: I wouldn't attack him on that issue. Most MMOs, of any kind, have factions in some form, whether they are hard coded or player created. Yes, even the ones with no discernible RPG elements.

I agree, Pie. I don't see a need for factions. And if they did exist, not allowing you the freedom to kill faction members would be, in my opinion, a huge mistake. DayZ for me, is about freedom, and that's what I hope it encourages. But if people want factions, I have no issue with them saying such.

Well, in many ways DayZ is a lot like a lot of games, but I see what you're getting at. I was just trying to validate the OPs comparison between SA and other games.

Sorry to burst your bubble like that, Weedz. SA is indeed intended to be an MMO. Bu my point, Weedz, was that people draw specific connotations to the term MMO, which they are perfectly valid in doing. It means, amongst both gamers and the industry, more than simply a lot of players playing together online. Rocket, as a gamer and developer, is undoubtably well aware of that, and so, too, must he be aware what applying that label to SA means. No, an MMO is not the same as an MMORPG, but look at the list of MMOs. Look at the features they share amongst themselves, as well as with MMORPGs. There is a massive amount of overlap, and even non-RPG MMOs have a lot of "RPG-like" features and mechanics."

Weeds: check the alpha release trailer. It specifically calls SA an MMO. Sure, we could be pedantic, and claim those words don't reflect Rockets, but he's still the driving force behind the game, and I assume the trailer reflects his views.

The MMO label comes with specific connotations that have to be taken into account. I would not, for instance, call a 64 player round of CS an MMO, even though, technically, it seems to fit the criteria: that's a lot of people playing at once. So what's the difference? Party progression and partly persistence. But many people also associate the label with more. They see sides, they see missions/quests, they see crafting, they see skills. Etc and so on. You can't bitch that they would carry those connotations, the conventions gaming itself has built up, into a conversation about a game that purports to be an MMO. You can disagree. Please do. But don't be twats about it, and don't try to shut down conversations. Show that you're better than the stereotyped CoD generation.

Hardly a productive. But thank you for trying. And invoking realism is a slippery slope. I would rather aim for immersion.

Don't bash him for comparing SA to MMOs. Rocket invited that comparison by calling SA an MMO.

I'm not sure the increase in "deathmatching" would be noticeable over what we see in the mod or what we are seeing in SA. Rocket has tried in the past to limit it, without success.

OP has a point, though. Opening some doors only to have it slide you three feet back and to the right isn't terribly realistic itself, and breaks immersion. Every time it happens, I'm reminded I'm playing a BI game.