[email protected]

Honestly I think a dynamic spray paint system would be too resource sapping for what it's worth. I think It could be achieved with a compromise though; by having pre-rendered spray paint fonts, then just typing out what you want it to read as. I believe witting notes and tagging items are both planned for Alpha; in fact I think the latter is already implemented. Morse Code is all but confirmed; I see no technical reason not to include it sounds like it's right up Rocket's street and is probably just a question of priority and development time. As for a public area for players to leave notes; I can see it being added as a passive mechanic but I doubt if they'll include any kind of pre-made quest system in relation to it. I did actually suggest this a while ago in one of my own posts; as a part of a larger mechanic for humanity: were by you could share information about players automatically by visiting the area. Upon second thought It's much better not to have the computer determine a players humanity but the idea of having marked location where players can place/collect notes is useful. It would really help give DayZ that apocalypse feel; like you might see in related films there are often central walls/posts filled with missing person pictures and notes.

If they build a desert map then; yes include native creatures but not for Chernarus.

I see what you're saying but just get a mic; the direct text chat isn't supposed to be a substitute for mic's. Plus DayZ is supposed to be a more authentic game, than traditional MMO's; they'll most likely have the direct text chat working via the radio system anyway, with text appearing on whatever communication device you have.

Camera's as a functional item..I'm good with that OK GO.

Hey so I'll likely come back to this post and make some more critiques of what I've seen from the Dev-blog but for now I thought I'd hit on the first thing that jumped out at me. The first thing that caught my attention in the Dev-blog was comments Ivan made about map updates. So to summaries: Ivan mentioned that map progress is likely going to be slow and a complex process to implement. Basically this means updates are likely going to be more infrequent than most other major components and when they do come about it'd probably follow another major game update. Also the main key point: game progress would likely be reset to a different position (I'd ask for clarification but I'm pretty sure what was mean't by this; was that your in-game position would be reset to beach and not necessarily your gear.) As mentioned by Ivan him-self: they'd only do an map update if the cause was worthy enough; as it would cause a lot of immersion breaking position changes. Critique: I think resetting players locations is a bit drastic (though I understand it's perhaps unavoidable) Also some basses will likely be deleted or trapped under objects or the ground. Suggestion(s): Simply spawn players in mid air and have them parachute to the ground with control to avoid them landing on tops of tall objects. (This would only work providing they reworked the parachute system) Maybe map updates could be broken into two steps, step one: soft update (introduce new visual map elements or plot out area that are to receive updates) this gives players time to move camps from locations inside objects or under terrain. Then step two: hard update, add collision mesh's/fully render textures and provide plenty of warning before the update. You then combine this second update and para drop players into game; upon spawn. I think this way map updates could be more frequent and feed-back could be given when new additions are added; before being fully implemented. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4j0cPwIbwsM

I agree: data base wipes and character resets will be a consideration to be expected after alpha release but at that point it isn't an internal alpha; it's a paid for public alpha. As a result I know the DayZ team will do all that they can to limit these major set backs; to make the early adopters experience as seamless as possible. What I've suggested is a way to allow them to push out updates for testing as often as possible; without causing too much disturbance. (the more updates they can push out the faster feedback can be given) I see what you mean by people taking advantage and soft-spotting to kill people but it's a compromise which should allow players the time to relocate any tents they might have before the update resets their camps. There's probably a better way that you could achieve the same out come; like maybe simply plotting out the new assets before a hard release. They do already have parts of the northern reaches aerial views plotted to aid in the design process. However I don't see anything wrong with parachuting into game above where you logged out after an update; as long as they adjust the parachute mechanics to make them controllable and prevent people from becoming strained on the tops of builds. This system isn't perfect but it could limit the amount of full resets and "soft updates" would only be for a limited time.

Come on now: if you're gonna criticise my suggestions at-least finish reading the sentence you have an issue with. Plus they're building a new game this isn't just a mod anymore; they can re-build the parachute system and make it possible.

Honestly I think the mods got a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth; it's splintered into so many directions that it's hard to find a version with lots of dedicated modders and a focus on more than just content and features. I think the last version of the mod I really enjoyed was the version were the blood, food and drink indicators drained based on colour; instead of the tiered step by step indicators it uses now. Since this point various version of the mod have become too unstable and even more glitchy because of the countless unchecked, features and systems they keep adding. An before anyone says stop moaning and play the version you like; there's virtually no servers left that run this version anymore, especially since the Vilayer hives crashed and burnt. Also since BattleEye can't deal with the latest wave of hacks infesting most of the servers for the last few weeks; it's almost impossible to find some middle ground.

Not "crazy" about the idea but something did hit a chord with me. Stress would be a very real factor in these circumstances and it undoubtedly would have physical affects on the body but anything that impacts core game-play needs to be trodden very lightly(being moving, shooting and other forms of interaction) Also I don't think handicapping someone's ability to aim is a good representation of being crazy; if anything you'd become highly stung and trigger happy. I really think it's a bad idea to have your character take control out of the hands of the player when handling a weapon. Though you could very realistically represent the physical affects of stress. For instance stress initially heighten your alertness and reaction speeds; so perhaps you can adjust the audio to pick-out important sounds/ambient noise or increase the saturation, contrast and because this is a game; you could chose to do this only for certain entities, like zombies/players(rather than the entire picture) You could even raise mouse sensitivity marginally; to speed things up or slow things down, with out introducing a cock-blocking animation or sway into the equation. As stress level increases and the demands on your body increases; you could introduce resource constraints(how quickly you require food/water) Your breathing might become more loud and rapid. Sweat might (as well as having sanitary affects) cause you to become hyper sensitive to changes in temperature and combined with lots of activity could cause cramp related injuries and increase sensitivity to sound and light(by increase light bloom and sounds at the high end making things sounds tinny and ear piecing) Over prolonged periods, the extra sensitivity to things would become overwhelming and cause vision to literally narrow, sounds to become muffled. Which you could achieve by decreasing FOV, darkening the edges of the screen, overlapping the same image slightly off center or even by creating a fish-eye lens like effect when you look upwards. As for sounds you could could drop off the mid and increase the bass and high end massively; to give you that trapped in a box sort of sound. There's a huge range of artistic effects you can achieve visually or audibly without inhibiting a players control over their character.

Yes that's fair enough but the suggestion section wouldn't exist; if this game were being developed, entirely without the input of forum's members. Did you not read the part about: how feature can have an impact on controls and the overall feel of the game. One of the reasons this thread exists; is to discuss the implications of including/omitting different features in relation to controls. Such as in Arma 2 the numbers 0-9 were locked out of the custom control set; reserved for commands. Here's a list of potential design implications: Would full control customisation; leave the game open to exploitation Should items on the tool bar; be individually mapped Should stance's be individually mapped or toggled between What features should allow for locking/toggling (maybe toggle forward should be add for infinite running) Maybe there's a design choice that could decrease the number of keys being occupied unnecessarily and free up some other key bindings for the players to more freely use The point is; deciding what not to leave open to player choice is equally as important as devising innovative solutions to having lots of bound keys. Ultimately I think remapping keys should be left to the player but you have to make a decisions that keeps exploits from arising and features that help in managing of a multitude of control layouts. Example: Instead of taking up several keys to do multiple functions; you could use the same two keys by being able to toggle between different features that aren't in use simultaneously. For instance you don't have a sets of movement keys for each stance (that's ludicrous) you have a key to toggle between stances. The same idea can be applied to the "tool bar" as suggested on my suggestion for a control layout; by having two keys to cycle through options, then having it corresponded to whatever is currently selected in the tool bar (such as the zeroing on your weapon, to the frequency's used by your radio; both of which are not likely being used at the same time) Hopefully this gives you a better understanding of what I mean by control layout; the design of control mapping goes much deeper than just where keys are bound.

Great Thanks for the entry; I'll add it to the poll once I have more than just your's and my own suggestions to to take a poll with.

Do people not read others comments: the game is going to release with some sort of default control scheme and it won't be the one that you get with Arma 2 because it's a different type of game. There's a whole new set of mechanics that need to be accounted for and the default layout is likely to have a massive impact on the way the game feels and is played. The purpose of this post; is to evaluate the best default scheme for this type of game, taking into account the way it is played and the new features that have changed the experience.

Clearly the Dev team won't take away your ability to bind your own keys but the game is completely different now; thus it needs a new default layout to account for the redundancies and for new features not accounted for in the mod and Arma 2.

This my suggestion for a new layout; based on what I've seen of the latest build of DayZ. Features in the game have changed; some controls will be altered to accommodate these new features.

The controls configuration used in the mod are designed for Arma 2. Controls will be reconfigured anyway for Stand-Alone; any suggestions made now, may help determine the best default set up.

Probability or "chance" only applies to predicting the outcome of events in the "real world" not determining the event itself. The "real world" isn't random; the culmination of multiple variables determines the outcome of an event. Many variables gives the perceived illusion of events being unpredictable and random. So if you take account of enough variables; you can portray an event accurately and as long as players don't have the exact values, some things will still be perceived as being unpredictable. If you don't have rules and set values; the game world would figuratively explode, it just wouldn't work. There's a reason dice rolls work in table top games like D&D and 40K because they don't happen in real time, they're turn based and predictable within varying degrees; try rolling a real time dice game. This is similar to how people perceive there to be a limit on the amount of frames per second the human eye can distinguish between; when in fact we don't see images as frames at all, we only notice the inconstancy when they drop bellow a certain rate. Games can have thresholds; you have a range of damage in which a bullet can do. That threshold can change based on other variables, like: distance, damage, accuracy, health, condition, even: heat, wind, rain, or fog. The depth of the simulation is up to the game designer. If everything was completely random; you could be standing still and break a leg without any input.

Here's a better Idea no probably. If you stop to and need to use more than one hand whilst holding another object, to complete an activity like bandaging; it gets placed on the ground whilst you bandage. If you forget to pick it back up again it stays there; so it becomes more about managing your tool bar (as seen in standalone) than a chance of dropping something.

Sorry if this isn't as concise as it could be but it’s essential to the understanding of the ideology and reasoning behind this system; if you wish to get straight to the meat of the topic go straight to: What do I propose. Humanity What is it good for? This is a harshly debated topic and I've seen plenty of suggestions; most of which from disgruntled survivors with a few from bandits but generally most bandits players outright dismiss the possibility of change and as for survivor’s players suggestions, well most would ultimately turn off PvP. In fact there seems to be no common ground what so ever and neither seem prepared to suggest a really compromise. So want can I bring to the table: Well the first thing I suggest is to think about what's missing from DayZ, in fact games in general and the first thing I turn to is; real life and how it could be mimicked in game. For me what’s missing is the sense that my actions have consequences and that they may come back to bite me, quite literally in the ass. There is however always a bunch of people who just don't give a shit and to quote the Dark Knight "some people just want to watch the world burn" but in reality actions at-least most of the time have consequences. Now I’m not saying there should be some sort of in-game prison for player killers; though I’m sure given the correct tools players wouldn't take long in setting one up. What I'm actual saying is what are the real life consequences of being a "bandit" or killer. Though being a bandit you would expect them to associate with sorts that’d likely kill another player on sight without hesitation. Knowing this fact; you have to ask yourself: are these the same sorts of players I’d likely trust? I think playing on this idea is the key; while not stopping player killing it may lessen or at-least make these choices seem meaningful. Want do I propose: So to sum up before I get into detail of how I think this system could work; it’s like taking the recently popularised game by Seananners and Hutch created by Bad King Urgrain "TTT" or Trouble in Terrorist Town and turning it almost on its head. Mechanics of the system: Heroes and bandits should be completely oblivious to each other and also to survivors All bandits should be able to distinguish each other easily All heroes should be able to distinguish each other easily Server names should be invisible to bandits Players should be given tools which aid in them locating other players Killing bandits and heroes should have a more significant impact on your humanity compared with survivors Aiding a bandit and hero should have a more significant impact on your humanity compare with survivors Tools should be added to allow players to exchange information about: humanity, experiences, player movements and inventory Each tool should contain an element of trust which could be compromised by another player Players humanity may be passed on or uncovered though various tools/mechanics which potentially could expose them to everyone Also Stronghold mechanics: Players should be able to set up areas in city or towns that expose anyone entering them as a survivor, bandit or hero These areas should also be destructible These areas should allow bandits to identify the server they're on

I know and on second thoughts me neither. What if you removed the humanity part altogether from this system and left the rest; letting the players decide who is a bandit and who's a hero for themselves and then allowing players to share their experiences with others. This way the only players that need to hide themselves are those with some sort of infamy or fame; so you only get found out if you're careless or stupid and get caught be other players.

On a side note can we avoid "chance" based events altogether; I'd rather have to guess or know the correct dosage of Epinephrine to give. Probability used in this way in games; is a bad idea, however things outside of the players control for the sake of in-continuity is useful.

Here's a better idea instead of arguing about what's a fair probability and introduce more random bullshit. Have a value based system; if you log out in conditions that is determined to be illegitimate, you get a warning. On the third warning; deterrents start to take affect. None of which should cause any damage. Depending upon algorithmic based thresholds such as: taking damage, knockout, gun fire, proximity and time. The player could be time out, knocked out, placed in combat or loose condition, food/drink or sleep. (whatever makes it into the game)

I think people understand perfectly fine; so I've cut out all the other bits and highlighted the main point here. Either you don't understand why probability or "chance" is such a bad word when it comes to damage values or you don't understand it's meaning and have failed to elaborate with others. If anything related to player actions in a game, relies on chance. It immediately throws up warning signs because it enables possibility of random bullshit; which players like to avoid at all costs. An that is why most games use value based reactions not probability. Probability has it's place but it's outside of any features within or affecting a players control.

Well said sir: those damage should never be probability based. Damage should be based on: power, velocity, caliber and accuracy verse armor, health and position. Basically like a table top card game; you trade the values off against one and other. Except that this is in real time; giving you less time to consider the cards, the uncertainty of values and your ability to predict them within a certain degree of accuracy. Essentially all the cards are stacked you've just got to figure out which once to choose and fast.

This is a good example of how probability bases system should be used in games. Essentially what you've described are procedurally generated objects throughout the game world.

Nice idea: I really like the thought that there's a structure to the game that determines the outcome of certain actions based on a solid algorithmic cause and affect system but at the same time kept from view of the players; to be figured out via trial and error.