For the standalone; please make the zombies a challenge

[TeNnAnT 93 7]

DayZ.. Z=zombie

Im sure Rocket said its an infection, and in that 50min interview on announcing the standalone he was talking about the state of the infection and how him and his brother were coming up with ideas on how it could have started, never said anything about them being zombies pal,

Its like 28days an infection.

But agree that the "Z" does most likely stand for zombie... :huh: just confusing really.

[KetchupOnTheDog 41]

zombies/infected shouldnt be able to catch the player if the player is running... i imagine the player is more fit than the former, so why would the infected (also human) run faster? maybe have them not tire instead, and have the player tire so that you can still out run them but not for long. (they wouldnt even need to be very fast in this scenario) as tedious and pace-slowing as it would be, there definitely needs to be stamina... you simply can NOT call this game authentic in any way if a player can run forever...

Edit: player fitness improvement over time, even a subtle one, is also a good incentive to not suicide/respawn.

I agree, but dean said he doesn't want stamina in and that it is the only acception to the authenticity of the game. There should be some form of movement penalty for sprinting too long.. even if it's just a movement speed reduction until you catch your breath.

[Illuzion 0]

I feel like this is one of the single most important things that need to be fixed. In the MOD, the infected seemed like nothing more than a back drop. Just there for the correct setting of a zombie apocalypse.

[rscaper1070 3]

stop acting as if dayZ has anything else but zombies. how do you explain each one of them trying to eat you? which "authentic infection" would justify that?

Maybe it's a Bath Salts epidemic.

Edited December 1, 2012 by rscaper1070

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

There is one easy way to make the game muuuch worse, tweak the player speed so we can never outrun a horde. You atract their attention, you either kill them, or you die.

[Hatchet_Man 30]

What if a group of players were skilled enough to capture an infected and chain it up somewhere?

But instead of getting medieval on its ass, they inject it with whatever disease-reversing agent they've managed to concoct in the lab. (I'm referring to the SA, in which Rocket says we'll be able to develop cures for player sickness using makeshift labs).

What happens to an infected once it's cured? I'm guessing we won't have this option though, but it would be an interesting game dynamic.

[mr_chabowski@live.co.uk 2416]

What happens to an infected once it's cured? I'm guessing we won't have this option though, but it would be an interesting game dynamic.

They'd probably suffer a few aches and pains. That's for damn sure.

Chances are they'd keel over from all the nasty little bacterial infections they gather during life as a Zed.

Yummy.

[badbenson (DayZ) 38]

Maybe it's a Bath Salts epidemic.

nice "it's always sunny.." reference. :D

in my opinion experimental drugs or parasites would make more sense to me than the whole infection thing.sure the whole zombie virus idea kinda based on rabies but the effect of rabies on humans is different from animals. all it does is destroy the central nervous system which can lead to manic behaviour, uncontrolled excitement and stuff like that. if you apply that to a carnivore it explains the bites. it makes much less sense with humans though which rabies shows. in the end rabies just destroys the infected as opposed to making him/her/it a wandering flesh lusting maniac.

parasites on the other hand actually have an intrest in keeping the host alive (atleast for a longer period) but you'd have to go all fictional with that too since it would have to be a very advanced life form that's able to alter the hosts bahaviour to it's liking.

and drugs have a rather unpredictable effect on different individuals so it would have to be something especially designed for the bahaviour it causes. maybe the good old "military experiment gone wrong" plot. which would also be more science fiction than anything.

so in any case fiction is the only way to go with zombies/"infected". which leads to endless possibilities to make them make the most sense from a gameplay perspective instead of claiming authenticity to justify design decisions.

looking at the current zombie situation slow zombies would make things even worse so them being fast just makes sense in a big enviroment like dayZ's where you have always space to evade.

so stamina is a logical conclusion. the game (arma) already has some kind of stamina system in place which current only influences sprinting (which is just slightly faster than running) and aiming. making players normal people instead of marathon runners and adding more cars into the mix would make things much more intresting,

I agree, but dean said he doesn't want stamina in and that it is the only acception to the authenticity of the game.

i think this is yet another "quote" out of context. i think the statement you are refering to was about HUD and a stamina bar was used as an example. if that's not true you might want to state your source. otherwise i'm not convinced that rocket said that.

i still think the problem is not the zombies' speed but their "AI" and the dammage they do. by trying to make them more realistic (line of sight) rocket accidently made them way to forgiving. why would someone who wants to eat you so bad that he sprints after you suddenly stop running in your direction just because he lost sight of you for a second? also the decision to make zombies do tiny amounts of dammage and adding the possibility of a knock out just doesn't make them feel dangerous but rather annoying. so making it possible to lose the zombies and making them less dangerous (thx to all the whiners) basicly broke them in their functionality.

even with the broken AI (which is partly a problem of modding arma for MMO purposes) the zombies would do their job if they could kill you easily. people would be thankful that they aren't really smart in any way.

the classic arma 2 zombie mission series "chernarus apocalypse" shows how easy it can be done. in those missions zombies are fast too and they kill you with 3 hits if you don't heal in between hits. while the set number three might appear kind of acardy the result is the opposite. people respect the zombies in those missions as a real threat and that results in "realistic" zombie apocalypse gameplay. i can't say it often enough. it's a simple matter of balancing. in the end advanced pathfinding and other AI fancyness are just cosmetics which make the zombies more convincing. to make the players afraid of them all you need is make them able to easily kill you.

Edited December 2, 2012 by badbenson

[brent2 11]

Could not agree more with the OP. Zombies ("infected", or whatever you'd like to call them) need to be the primary threat, not other players. As long as zombies are simple obstacles which can be easily avoided or otherwise dealt with, and food is so insanely common, and guns and ammo are almost as common as food, the game will remain a slow-motion Call of Duty deathmatch.

[KetchupOnTheDog 41]

Could not agree more with the OP. Zombies ("infected", or whatever you'd like to call them) need to be the primary threat, not other players. As long as zombies are simple obstacles which can be easily avoided or otherwise dealt with, and food is so insanely common, and guns and ammo are almost as common as food, the game will remain a slow-motion Call of Duty deathmatch.

I agree, food and water should also be a bit more scarce, along with weapons and ammo. Although i believe basic civilian melee weapons should be a bit more common along with shotguns and handguns.

Edited December 3, 2012 by KetchupOnTheDog

[KetchupOnTheDog 41]

nice "it's always sunny.." reference. :D

in my opinion experimental drugs or parasites would make more sense to me than the whole infection thing.sure the whole zombie virus idea kinda based on rabies but the effect of rabies on humans is different from animals. all it does is destroy the central nervous system which can lead to manic behaviour, uncontrolled excitement and stuff like that. if you apply that to a carnivore it explains the bites. it makes much less sense with humans though which rabies shows. in the end rabies just destroys the infected as opposed to making him/her/it a wandering flesh lusting maniac.

parasites on the other hand actually have an intrest in keeping the host alive (atleast for a longer period) but you'd have to go all fictional with that too since it would have to be a very advanced life form that's able to alter the hosts bahaviour to it's liking.

and drugs have a rather unpredictable effect on different individuals so it would have to be something especially designed for the bahaviour it causes. maybe the good old "military experiment gone wrong" plot. which would also be more science fiction than anything.

so in any case fiction is the only way to go with zombies/"infected". which leads to endless possibilities to make them make the most sense from a gameplay perspective instead of claiming authenticity to justify design decisions.

looking at the current zombie situation slow zombies would make things even worse so them being fast just makes sense in a big enviroment like dayZ's where you have always space to evade.

so stamina is a logical conclusion. the game (arma) already has some kind of stamina system in place which current only influences sprinting (which is just slightly faster than running) and aiming. making players normal people instead of marathon runners and adding more cars into the mix would make things much more intresting,

i think this is yet another "quote" out of context. i think the statement you are refering to was about HUD and a stamina bar was used as an example. if that's not true you might want to state your source. otherwise i'm not convinced that rocket said that.

i still think the problem is not the zombies' speed but their "AI" and the dammage they do. by trying to make them more realistic (line of sight) rocket accidently made them way to forgiving. why would someone who wants to eat you so bad that he sprints after you suddenly stop running in your direction just because he lost sight of you for a second? also the decision to make zombies do tiny amounts of dammage and adding the possibility of a knock out just doesn't make them feel dangerous but rather annoying. so making it possible to lose the zombies and making them less dangerous (thx to all the whiners) basicly broke them in their functionality.

even with the broken AI (which is partly a problem of modding arma for MMO purposes) the zombies would do their job if they could kill you easily. people would be thankful that they aren't really smart in any way.

the classic arma 2 zombie mission series "chernarus apocalypse" shows how easy it can be done. in those missions zombies are fast too and they kill you with 3 hits if you don't heal in between hits. while the set number three might appear kind of acardy the result is the opposite. people respect the zombies in those missions as a real threat and that results in "realistic" zombie apocalypse gameplay. i can't say it often enough. it's a simple matter of balancing. in the end advanced pathfinding and other AI fancyness are just cosmetics which make the zombies more convincing. to make the players afraid of them all you need is make them able to easily kill you.

"i think this is yet another "quote" out of context. i think the statement you are refering to was about HUD and a stamina bar was used as an example. if that's not true you might want to state your source. otherwise i'm not convinced that rocket said that."

52. Q: The ability to sprint for unlimited distances seems to completely counter the design of a giant map. Do you ever plan to put limitations on player sprint? [Zipper -82ndAB-]

A: There should be consequences to this but mobility is one aspect we probably need to compromise authenticity/realism in order to make the game actually playable at all. We could tie this in with the revised medical system (health + energy etc...) so that there is impact on those who run everywhere. Current ingame mechanics limit sprinting anyway.

http://dayzmod.com/f...-rocket-thread/

[mr_chabowski@live.co.uk 2416]

Unnecessarily long double-post quotes FTW

[KetchupOnTheDog 41]

Unnecessarily long double-post quotes FTW

IKR i just fixed it though..

[mr_chabowski@live.co.uk 2416]

I don't know what assumptions are safe to make regarding players stamina. All we know for certain is that medical considerations are going to be more impacting in certain scenarios.

Maybe encouraging players to take their time is exactly the change of pace the game needs?

I'm not keen on unfounded speculation, but rocket seems to know precisely what he hopes to achieve. If I was a gambling man, I'd guess that means we should just wait and see how it turns out.

EDIT: Whatever happens, it's definitely going to be a slap in the face compared to the "see Zeds, don't care" situation in the mod.

Edited December 3, 2012 by Chabowski

[oldfossil 59]

...

Edit: player fitness improvement over time, even a subtle one, is also a good incentive to not suicide/respawn.

Not so real in my opinion, if you consider that at least a couple of things of the in game conditions are critical:

diet is poor and mainly based on canned goods.

rest is supposed to be not so easy as you can't find a safe place to do that in a restful way.

is likely indeed a progressive worsening of the survivor overall shape.

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

I wonder what's the obsession of absolutely having a cure to the infection, people cannot accept the idea that their current character is hopelessly fucked?

To borrow the slogan of project zomboid "This is the story of how you died." I sort of like this idea.

Edited December 3, 2012 by Lady Kyrah

[mr_chabowski@live.co.uk 2416]

I wonder what's the obsession of absolutely having a cure to the infection

:huh:

mentioned ≠ obsessed

[badbenson (DayZ) 38]

A: There should be consequences to this but mobility is one aspect we probably need to compromise authenticity/realism in order to make the game actually playable at all. We could tie this in with the revised medical system (health + energy etc...) so that there is impact on those who run everywhere. Current ingame mechanics limit sprinting anyway.

i stand corrected/convinced sir!

but i'm glad that he actually wants to limit constant running but doesn't go with what people have suggested in this thread (stamina to make zombies more dangerous). then we would end up with what warZ currently has which is just a bad lazy concept.

[maxhewitt 3]

What i mean by faster than you is they don't slow down when they reach you. Even if your running away they can catch you and kill you (think left for dead speed). You will have no choice but to kill them or try to line of sight them. If you read my post you would find i never mentioned anything about huge spotting distances, super running speeds, NOR one hit kills.. and also they do warn other players as is in the mod, but that's the point. You're more scared of the players than the actual zombies. Its a ZOMBIE apocalypse. Zombies should be #1 threat. They probably won't be, but I'd at least like them to be authentically dangerous.

Well for one thing, almost every piece of zombie fiction ever created supports the view that humans are just as dangerous as zombies - you know where you stand with a zombie but you're immediately faced with moral dilemmas when dealing with humans.

Also I don't think you should use the phrase 'authentically dangerous' - authentic to what?

At the end of the day there are no hard and fast rules for zombies. We can't declare that they should be able to run faster, or bite, or punch, or smell blood...it's all speculation because zombies aren't real! The fact that there's a grey area between 'infected' and 'zombie' doesn't help. The developers haven't established whether or not they are re-animated corpses or living humans infected with a disease. Until the developers make their minds up and stick to their guns, all these debates on 'zombie' behaviour are fruitless. Interesting, but fruitless.