Third party VoIP - yes or no?

[Tek (DayZ) 95]

Actually there is a reason. DayZ is as much a simulator as a game. The extent to which it simulates an experience is up to the community and ultimately the devs.

I think this is a different debate all together. I view dayZ as a game, because it does not simulate real life. I view a simulator as being something that would replicate real things. Flight simulators, for example, let you fly with all the characteristics that flying would entail. Arma2 would be a simulator due to it replicating battlefield tactics.

DayZ on the other had is about a zombie take over, which is not realistic. There for the mod has become a game due to the nature of the environment the game takes place in. Plus simulators, while can be fun, are meant to teach, and let people learn. This mod has people that are playing for fun... and to a certain extent not learning (my opinion) what it takes to survive in this environment due to all the crying about KoS and PvP and DM references. To me this game is not about a zombie apoc, but a survival game set within a zombie apoc. Survival from anything and everyone. But at the base of this survival aspect is the means to find fun and enjoyment. And people are going to do that by playing with friends, on TS or any other VOIP program.

Realism has differing degrees, and anyone will agree that not all things that are realistic increase immersion. In that vein, chatting over a map IMO ruins immersion far more than being able to repair a car in 15 seconds (after scouring for the necessary parts for 4 hours). So that's why I asked - before knowing that it was, for all intents and purposes, impossible to remove - whether people liked 3P VoIP. Assuming it was possible and no censorship qualms arose, if people decide it's a strict simulation, then it shouldn't be allowed. If people decide otherwise as they have, then it should be allowed. Simple as that.

Realism does have differing degrees. However, since i've explained my stance on why I think this mod is a game and not a sim, I am a firm believer that you cannot have realism just for the sake of realism. There has to be an ability to play the game. People being told they cannot use TS is a realistic feature that is just not attainable for a variety of reasons. Right now I only have a set period of maybe 1-2 hours to play the game per day. So when I get in game, I want to meet up with my buddies and run around doing god knows what. Does not mean I am going to be able to due to distance, equipping, or another of other things. But I don't want to get on and wonder, "Where are my buddies?" and then hope I stumble across them. I am going to get on TS, ask what server they are on, then where they are on the map. Then i'm going to determine if I can join up with them. If yes, then we're going to go PvP, loot, fix vehicles, or whatever it is we feel like doing. And if we PvP, we are definitely using TS (whether we die or not) to help us communicate and execute our tactics to the best of our ability.

If this were a simulation then it would take a lot longer to fix vehicles, heal, even run across the map, much less put a long rifle inside a backpack with containers of ammo, and then run like you had nothing.

This is a game.

[Tek (DayZ) 95]

Agreed with the threadstarter above - there's no harm in discussion about the various possibilities, opinions and feelings about something like this - it creates interesting debate and a chance to consider other points of view. As pretty much everyone has agreed, there's no way of enforcing such a thing, so any debates are entirely theoretical and there's no need to get angry about the fact that the discussion is taking place - if you're fed up with discussing it or feel the discussion has no point, give the thread a miss, it's easy enough. :)

I feel the need to post my opinion because I have watched in other games where people proposed ridiculous idea's that would change the way the game is played that the devs then changed because they "thought" that is what the majority wanted, without looking at the consequences it would have on the game. Subsequently those games went on a death spiral after that because it changed the concept and design on what was supposed to happen within the game.

[WBK 176]

Fair enough. Nice, sensible thought out reply.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree though ;)

[Target Practice (DayZ) 1335]

I feel the need to post my opinion because I have watched in other games where people proposed ridiculous idea's that would change the way the game is played that the devs then changed because they "thought" that is what the majority wanted, without looking at the consequences it would have on the game. Subsequently those games went on a death spiral after that because it changed the concept and design on what was supposed to happen within the game.

And I don't disagree with you in the slightest. Go back a page in this thread and read the post I made towards the bottom of the page - judging by your post to threadstarter above, it seems that we share almost exactly the same opinion on the matter at hand.

My point was that there's no point getting angry and SHOUTING ABOUT IT, because it doesn't achieve anything other than putting a negative spin on the thread and deflecting away from debate and discussion and towards arguing and fighting - if that starts happening, the thread gets shut down, and the devs won't have anything to go on at all. I would assume that they'd most likely much rather have a balanced and well-thought out thread with point and counter-point, pro and con than they would a locked thread where everyone was shouting at each other.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Target Practice