Dynamic Objects (not Dynamic terrain)

[attorney1977 311]

I really like the idea, it's very cool - but I think there's some technical problems with getting it synced up in MP.

If the server was choosing the locations at launch, then as players connect, it would have to download all of the data to the client computers. This becomes an issue with lots of people joining, then leaving and so on. There would be a lot of desync as bandwidth would be eaten up with transmitting all of the randomised positions.

This isn't an issue at the moment because all the locations for the objects in Dayz are contained in the clients pbo files (so avioding having to transmit anything).

[Crusader- 26]

But is the break in immersion worth it? That is the question.

exactly people forget that its a game sometimes its not real life, so for the sake of replayability and even just plain fun compromises have to be made and i believe this is a compromise that could be made.

[m.w. vindicator 880]

exactly people forget that its a game sometimes its not real life, so for the sake of replayability and even just plain fun compromises have to be made and i believe this is a compromise that could be made.

My thoughts exactly

[m.w. vindicator 880]

I really like the idea, it's very cool - but I think there's some technical problems with getting it synced up in MP.

If the server was choosing the locations at launch, then as players connect, it would have to download all of the data to the client computers. This becomes an issue with lots of people joining, then leaving and so on. There would be a lot of desync as bandwidth would be eaten up with transmitting all of the randomised positions.

This isn't an issue at the moment because all the locations for the objects in Dayz are contained in the clients pbo files (so avioding having to transmit anything).

That could be problematic. Who knows how much it would effect things

[m.w. vindicator 880]

Update OP!

[colekern 1364]

I'm not sure that would work.

I was thinking that the buildings would be randomized only once, when the server starts up for the first time ever.

[m.w. vindicator 880]

I was thinking that the buildings would be randomized only once, when the server starts up for the first time ever.

Possibly. Maybe the building itself could be switched but not the location.

Example.

We have house 1 and house 2. The houses are located at positions X and Y respectively.

The random element is that House 1 could be randomly switched on server creation with House 2. The building locations would remain the same but the buildings themselves would be unique to each server.

I like it.

[mr_chabowski@live.co.uk 2416]

Remember, the idea of it being server-dependent would rely on having characters locked to a server.

If you can move between servers, the same problems mentioned by Hetstaine would arise again.

Personally, I really like the idea.

There was another discussion about this before, but we never could agree a solution to the percieved "breaking immersion" or spawning inside objects.

(well actually it was a topic about chopper crashes, but the point got a little shifted to more variety in objects etc.)

If we'll still be allowed to change servers at will, IMO there's no reason that your character has to be in the exact location you logged out. You could be a few yards away without it being the end of the world.

The aforementioned chopper crashes don't ruin the whole experience, but to be fair this suggestion would make in-game variety WAY more obvious.

ON the subject.

There could be towns (like Stary) with entire military or medical posts that are not neccessarily always there.

I think it would add a LOT to gameplay, and hinder loot-map users by making them actually play the game as intended.

[m.w. vindicator 880]

Remember, the idea of it being server-dependent would rely on having characters locked to a server.

If you can move between servers, the same problems mentioned by Hetstaine would arise again.

Personally, I really like the idea.

There was another discussion about this before, but we never could agree a solution to the percieved "breaking immersion" or spawning inside objects.

(well actually it was a topic about chopper crashes, but the point got a little shifted to more variety in objects etc.)

If we'll still be allowed to change servers at will, IMO there's no reason that your character has to be in the exact location you logged out. You could be a few yards away without it being the end of the world.

The aforementioned chopper crashes don't ruin the whole experience, but to be fair this suggestion would make in-game variety WAY more obvious.

ON the subject.

There could be towns (like Stary) with entire military or medical posts that are not neccessarily always there.

I think it would add a LOT to gameplay, and hinder loot-map users by making them actually play the game as intended.

Nailed it. The main benefit is like what you said in the "On subject" part of the post. I agree that spawning in a few yards away from where you logged out wouldn't be problematic.

[rpatto92@hotmail.com 26]

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.

[m.w. vindicator 880]

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.

That is a good way to say. Not entirely random, but varied each time