In an effort to make serious contributions to the game, I wrote a white paper detailing salient design issues.

[Jsteiner 6]

Link for viewing or download below - pdf also attached to this post.

http://issuu.com/t80jsteiner/docs/dayz_design_white_paper?mode=window

Dayz_Design_White_Paper.pdf

[gesundheitk 420]

Seems interesting. Going to read it all soon.

[BwobBwub 660]

It is safe to download everyone (If you were unsure).

I agreed with the zombie part. Zombies need to be more of a threat but I think it has been stated many times, that zombies will be more of a threat to players.

Edited April 13, 2013 by BwobBwub

[roykingtree 125]

I agree with your point that zombies are relatively pointless although I would like to point out that zombies do have loot. I don't agree with instanced combat scenarios, it makes me think of people using a LFG menu for a Starry Sobor instance. As far as losing everything upon death, I think that is crucial to the core of DayZ. What could be different though is your characters personal achievements could stay with you upon death (ie....stats, morality, etc...).

[Chris529 380]

Interesting read

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello there

I like this but don't understand why you didn't just post it here, aside from the formatting aspect.

Rgds

LoK

[Sula 1205]

I haven't read it. No Introduction, Purpose, or Recommendations, I note!

[leviski 2152]

Very interesting indeed, but why not just post it here?

[Jsteiner 6]

I didn't post it here for two reasons: first, people take you more seriously with good formatting - second, I distributed this to Reddit and Twitter in addition to this forum, so it was easier to host a viewable file than to maintain the text here.

I was hoping to spark some serious conversation about the topics I highlight in the paper.

@roykingtree - I'm sorry, but I'm sticking to the point I laid out in the paper. Losing all your gear? Sure! Absolutely, in fact. Destroying EVERYTHING a player has managed to create during their time in the game? That's betrayal at a very basic level. I make a point about how it actually 'cheapens' the life of a player rather than making it more precious because the totality of loss renders progress meaningless.

You're right about the 'Stary Sobor instance' notion - but I was thinking more of something akin to the helicopter crashes. Randomly you find entrances to instances, complete them (others can enter and kill you while you're doing it) and then it's destroyed. Not persistent instances. This way, the developers can create new instances, drop them in, take them out, modify them, and tweak them to the community's liking. Trust me, you'd like it.

Edited April 13, 2013 by Jsteiner

[Jsteiner 6]

@Sula - Would you like me to introduce myself? : ) I point out that I did make recommendations in the paper, and the purpose was rather clear.

[roykingtree 125]

I didn't post it here for two reasons: first, people take you more seriously with good formatting - second, I distributed this to Reddit and Twitter in addition to this forum, so it was easier to host a viewable file than to maintain the text here.

I was hoping to spark some serious conversation about the topics I highlight in the paper.

@roykingtree - I'm sorry, but I'm sticking to the point I laid out in the paper. Losing all your gear? Sure! Absolutely, in fact. Destroying EVERYTHING a player has managed to create during their time in the game? That's betrayal at a very basic level. I make a point about how it actually 'cheapens' the life of a player rather than making it more precious because the totality of loss renders progress meaningless.

You're right about the 'Stary Sobor instance' notion - but I was thinking more of something akin to the helicopter crashes. Randomly you find entrances to instances, complete them (others can enter and kill you while you're doing it) and then it's destroyed. Not persistent instances. This way, the developers can create new instances, drop them in, take them out, modify them, and tweak them to the community's liking. Trust me, you'd like it.

I now see what you mean with player creation and I do agree with you on that. One of the reasons the Wasteland MOD is so successful is it's ability to build and lock bases/items.

[TIC 1050]

I dig this layout of this topic. Pretty professional and clean. Also it's a very interesting read. It's like reading a magazine article.

I do agree that there should be benefits to players who do deeds such as killing a certain number of zombies or surviving for a certain period of time (Like a month would give you some type of title) and it could be carried onto your character possibly after death as well.

[gesundheitk 420]

I think death doesn't really 'give' you a reason to live again is because of how it's essentially simulating life. Once you die, everything you did before is essentially not known to anyone else but people you know. In DayZ, you start over as a new person that basically has no connection to the original. I don't think much reason could be given for that.

[DemonGroover 8836]

Well put together.

In so far as two points you made, i like the idea that you will die at some point and have to start over. This is what makes the game so compelling, especially if you aren't really interested in tents or bases like myself. One shot to the head and it's back to the beach. I would not like to see some sort of character progression that carries over to your new character when you die. In fact i am against any sort of "getting your gear back" approach, but its a personal preference and i actually like starting over than being fully geared up.

Your other point is that it isn't worthwhile killing zombies, but to me this isn't the point of DayZ. You need to survive, being Chuck Norris doesn't work. Going in gung ho shouldn't be a worthwhile option, especially once the zombies become more of a threat in SA. TBH firing an Enfield in Cherno should bring a whole lot of hurt down on you. Silent take downs with the hatchet and hopefully new and improved crossbow will be more important in SA especially considering the vast increase in zombie numbers.

Like most zombie films and books the zombies are the background to the real story - the interaction between the survivors and the ongoing tension. Zombies should pose a threat but if DayZ just became a zombie shoot em up i wouldn't be that interested.

[GOD™ 2795]

Too much reading...my eyes burn.

[Lady Kyrah 1109]

For the amount of "effort" you've put presenting your argumentation i was surprised to only find two pages. Kind of a case of all "form" and no "substance".

For what you wrote, the forum would have been plenty and would have spared everyone some time.

But i digress.

Anyway, i'm against the idea of being able to secure some form of permanent progress. Death should essentially symbolise "go back to square one". What needs to be done is to raise the bar quite a bit, being able to experience all the game has to offer in a couple of hours, even with the treat of permanent loss of progress isn't enough to keep everyone busy. Ideally, it should be practically impossible to experience everything the game has to offer in a single playthrough.

[Mos1ey 6301]

I appreciate that you took the time to write it up but I strongly disagree with pretty much everything you said other than that zombies should be buffed.

It's a survival sim. Death should absolutely be the end of your character and their progress. IMO all saved tents and vehicles belonging to your character should also despawn when you die, the vehicles should then respawn on next server restart.

Like I've said before - humans are drawn to the path with least resistance. Opening up the game to modding or even mission file editing would just end with us having to choose between playing on starter gear, 9,001 vehicles and 24/7 daylight servers or more or less empty real servers. I truly hope the standalone stays locked up securely.