calin_banc

As it stands now, the mod doesn't have such a big complex gameplay mechanics, quite the contrary. The inventory/user interface is bad, as it takes numerous steps for you to put an item from the world in the backpack. God help you when you try to switch items from that to the pouches or vice versa. Sometimes they just disappear into nothingness. Dead Island in a way, does this more effectively and proves that up to some point, a UI designed with consoles in mind, can overcome some of the issues raised by the lack of a keyboard. The best inventory/carrying capacity system was in Hidden and Dangerous 2 in my book. But this is true only for the actual state of the game. What ideas Rocket has that will actually make it into the game, that remains a unknown variable. Consoles may handle it or they may not. It also depends if the gameplay will be centered to cater for a broader audience. That is the source of "don't do it on consoles" stance.

I'm not, just point out some facts. That list could contain Operation Flashpoint series and Call of Juarezz as well, among newer IPs. The "problem with consoles" I've already went through it above: a) limited hardware; B) it caters to a lot of people, hence the need to make everything as easy to use as possible. Because of that, a lot of games are shorter, condensed, sometimes with stupid UI adapted to the console's gamepad, with big "wow" moments at every step. The modern human doesn't have a lot of time to invest in a game. He wants easy thrills, easy to understand and use gameplay mechanics, a relatively good story and that's about it. Some may even skip the cut-scenes or dialogs in order the "get to the point". The youth who never experienced "the gold age" of gaming, may never understand why we like complex RPGs and stories, why you shouldn't be quickly rewarded for your every action and laugh in your face and let out a big "meh" when you put him in front of a game like Stalker, Amnesia, Penumbra, ArmA, Morrowind, first three Gothic games and so on. It's all about accessibility to the market. That's why consoles are at fault, they made it possible for every one to game, as harsh and crazy as it may sound. You want your game to sell, you need to hit some "markers" along the line, some tested and retested mechanics which leads to minimal innovation if any. They invest tens or hundreds of millions of dollars just in marketing (non of that goes into the improvement of the game) in order "to be heard" by the masses. In that case, you'll need to sell millions just to break even. Now, compare that to Amnesia: The Dark Descent. They've sold around 300k, some on Steam sales, and only by that, their financial situation was ok, they could think ahead to their next project. Crysis 1 and Crysis Warhead sold 4,5 million combined and it still went on consoles. Cervat Yerli, the CEO of Crytek, had dreams about competing with CoD and that is by it's own statement. In a way, the Crysis 2's presentation is now all to clear. Oh, not to mention the rumors about EA and how about it's for sale because of bad revenue. What I'm trying to point out, is the "dictatorship" of the majority. In a way, it is the same for movies, literature, music etc. Investors want results, they want more money, not a better product. A user/casual gamer, without high expectation would buy almost everything that is half good. Look at how much money CoD made every year just by adding DLC's to their main products, products that, in essence, are all the same from the forth installment until now. Gaming press it's almost not there, most of the time giving high points and fail/don't want to underline flaws. Yes, consoles are easy to use and don't imply an upgrade (although you may end up paying more for a console and it's games than by upgrading your PC and buy games for it), but at the same point, is the reason for making "a worse day to game". Of course there are fails on the PC as well; even ArmA 2 at it's release date was a bit of a fail, but team stood behind the game and fix it. Some major players out there would have just left it as it was: example - Flashpoint 2. It all depends on Hall's view of the game and how much they'll have to cut/optimize the engine in order to run on that older hardware.

I think the game will hit the shelves in Alpha and if it sells well, it will go on consoles, probably somewhere in that state or in Beta. Discussions are always good, two heads think better than one. :)

In a way they did bought Day Z if you see it like a content with acces only through another one which is not free. Without this mod, a lot of customers would have probably never spend any money on ArmA 2. Sure, you can argue that ArmA has it's own SP campaign and MP life and an editor, but it doesn't count really. They weren't enough to justify a buy in the first place. Only the mod turn the odds into a buy. If the stand alone version is going to be on the new ArmA 3 engine, I'll throw some cash at BIS, if not... maybe later, on a Steam sale. :)

If you develop a game that would run in the future on a PSP, for instance, it has to be created around that hardware. The better versions of it, has nicer graphics, but that's about it in general, the gameplay is hindered by that decision. Tod Howard said before Skyrim release that he's happy with the hardware that is available today and a better one, will only give the advantage of rendering richer graphics, 7 feet away, where the player doesn't see it that well anyway. The same Tod Howard that said when Oblivion came out, that "with every new game in -The Elder Scrolls- series, we set to reinvent what TES means, it is essential. This was not possible on current gen hardware". It's the same now and it will always be the same until we reach the Star Trek's Holodeck simulation level. When Oblivion came out, it has worse graphics that on those presentation videos simply because the console couldn't handle the engine. Of course, it would have been a burden for the PC's of those time, but over the course of next gen video cards and CPU, that would mean nothing - as it has been proved. Still, advanced shawdows were out for both platform. Deus Ex is one of those "must play" games, a stone mark in gaming. It came out in 2000 I think, being the Crysis of it's time in HW demands, with beautiful visual, a creative gameplay that gave the player the possibility to finish a mission in different ways, a good story, believable characters and a truly awesome feeling of it all. Deus Ex 2 came out, completely consolized and dumbed down. Far Cry 2 promised to be a good game judging by the dev's movies, with a state of the art graphics engine, smart AI, a "smart" story and more than one way to tackle a situation . What came out was a highly repetitive game, with dumb AI, stupid storyline/storytelling, empty world and shot-them-all gameplay mechanics. Crysis 2 it was going to be better than the first two "thanks to consoles" - devs words. It end it up a corridor shooter, with less of the suit's abilities and an idiotic customization for the weapons/suit. Mafia, another land mark, was continued with Mafia 2, a game that was released before it was properly finished, with dumb DLC content and a poor and short storyline. Mass Effect 3, same story. The list could go on for quite a while. On one hand, there is the console's old hardware which hinders new gameplay mechanics and graphics and on the other hand, there is the fact that gaming is an "industry". The emphasis on broader audience and the lack of a really mature and strong gaming press, lead to the today's gaming state. Imagine Day Z trying to reach on that trend, to cater for that sort of potential clients: balanced sniper rifles, balanced vehicles and items spawns, balance everything to the point the game may not be the same. To be honest, as far as I'm concerned, it could go both ways, I wouldn't care that much, because the gameplay it's still in it's development state. It could turn out to be something great or just something okish from time to time. Survival is easy, but we all know that it is need it a lot more than that to maintain a "sex-appeal".

And it will be a difference instead of shooting you dead from the beginning in what terms? :)

Well, I've killed a bandit by letting him climb a ladder and them pumping him full of led as someone else did to me (luckily I've managed to hide in time). This is a valid tactic even now, as it is also, to shoot any other guy or a group without hassle, if you take them by surprise. Firing from a distance, with a scoped rifle and putting the enemy in the situation of defending himself, and in the same time being atacked by zombies if he's close to them, is almost the same as knocking him out for the walkers. A tranq. gun could bring the fun into the gameplay. As someone put it, hitting a enemy's tactical vest should not register as a hit and if you combined that with a low ROF and range, should be ok even though that weapon is as easy to find as a winchester for instance. Anyways, other non-lethal methods could be fun too.

Found a bug a few versions back, still here. Basically, when I tray to move a gun from pouches to backpack, if there isn't enough space, the gun will disappear from inventory altogether and can't be recuperated. It's quite frustrating and annoying to have multiple guns, some of them rare and fine and to lose them so easily.

Neah, there is still US equipment in Day Z, so they never moved out, not really. :D Anyway, it's funny to meet zombies during the campaign. To bad though, that the game crushes so much.

Was doing the standard mission today, when I notice something strange with the corner of my eye. Although the time warped itself 4 times, some movements of the individual were bizarre. After a close investigation, I've quickly recognize the distinct characteristics of zombies (present all over the scientific literature of highly valued Hollywood scientists) and eliminate the suspects. Staroye may have been the zero (patient) point of the epidemic. My long beloved squad mates thought I've lost it, but I know better. I will disguise as a regular security firm kind of guy - white, tactical vest, a small Coyote backpack, a Makarov and some provision. With any luck, I can sneak to the base, take a chopper and go back home. This ... is ... madness!

All the good stuff was moved to the airfields? But way does it reappear afterwards then to the same place? Neah... That doesn't make sense as it doesn't for you, to end up there, with that "basic" survival equipment, but without a method to light a fire, a knife, a binocular, a compass, watch or a decent weapon - the Marakov isn't one. Your equipment suggests something totally different than a stranded individual. The background story, of course, will need to be written in the future, still, increasing the spawn rate and the number of supplies in communities and lone buildings, should be done. I'm not talking about guns necessarily (or for that matter rare ones), but the "usual" stuff: food, liquids, some sort of melee weapons, especially wood, bikes perhaps and so on.

Stole everything from every house, barn, shed, etc., from every community? It's nice though that shit respawns like magic after a while in certain places while in others, the looters, probably forgot to pick up shiny NV, SD weaponry, ordinary but good weapons and loot and so on. ;) PS: Also due to "that server only" thing, with cars and choppers and tents, if you don't have one, repairing them it's a little bit pointless since they can be lost so easily. That's for lone wolf players or very small groups.

Or provisions should be found at the doorstep of every single house, even those in which you can not enter. Being a game that wants to be close to reality, well, in every house there is at least a lighter, some matches, food, warm clothes, blankets, wood for fire (especially in villages or cottages) and so on.