DayZ Developer Blog 3rd August 2013

[pxxl 259]

It's a bit different since DayZ has allot more pre built hype and so will have more players smashing the servers from day one. MC grew quite slowly.

 

I was more interested in the statement "Currently, you can't even play DayZ without crashing."

 

So that's why i asked if he played it.

[sabre05 351]

Did you play pre-alpha?

 

 

It's a bit different since DayZ has allot more pre built hype and so will have more players smashing the servers from day one. MC grew quite slowly.

 

Also Minecraft was a Java game of no more than... what? 1GB of HDD Space? DayZ will be about 12 times the size.

[pxxl 259]

Also Minecraft was a Java game of no more than... what? 1GB of HDD Space? DayZ will be about 12 times the size.

 

I know this. I also built my first pyramid in the browser applet. Forget MC that's not what i was after.

[Rek Seven 37]

To me it sounds like people what two different games... On one side you have people who want a team death-match with looting and zombies and of the other side you have people that want an authentic zombie apocalypse game/sim.

 

I just hope the SA can cater to both crowds. 

Edited August 7, 2013 by Rek Seven

[terrvik 2409]

To me it sounds like people what two different games... On one side you have people who want a team death-match with looting and zombies and of the other side you have people that want an authentic zombie apocalypse game/sim.

 

I just hope the SA can carer to both crowds. 

 

I very much disagree. :) I hope the SA sticks to one crowd and make no compromises. Whatever the target crowd might be in the end!

 

EDIT: But I very much agree on the point that it seems people want two different games though.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Terrorviktor

[Rek Seven 37]

I very much disagree. :) I hope the SA sticks to one crowd and make no compromises. Whatever the target crowd might be in the end!

 

EDIT: But I very much agree on the point that it seems people want two different games though.

 

So which do you want?

 

Personally i play day z for the zombie Apocalypse experience and not the battle royal with zombies experience you get in the vanilla mod. 

 

edit: If i honest, i hope SA is made for people who are of the same mind as me because there are plenty of games that let you shoot people for no reason already. 

Edited August 7, 2013 by Rek Seven

[oompah 58]

re: Frankie's comments on KoS

 

I agree with him, the first month or so of discovering Dayz was awesome - this of course was when players would have a tendency to be friendly and team up to survive, at least more so than now.  The reason is pretty easy to understand, once a player learns the game very well the entire process of surviving becomes streamlined/optimized so dying isn't a big deal, so you play the game more like a PvP deathmatch than a survival sim.

 

I can't see anyway around this in the SA.  If you make surviving too daunting a task then new players will be put off and quit playing and even seasoned players will get frustrated with the process.  There is so much to do in the game: fix vehicles, find gear, explore, make friends, make enemies, survive (food, water, etc...) etc...  If you make the game so that any one part becomes to daunting then you take away from all the other aspects.  For instance if you want to hop on and try to get a car working, well that by itself can be a 2 or 3 hour ordeal, couple that with getting infected constantly or blinking for food every 5 minutes you are not going to end up with a fun experience.  The main threat should always been other humans, zombies and survival secondary - however that is just my opinion.

 

So how do you make the SA not ultimately turn into a KoS game and also not water down the fun parts with too big of an emphasis on just surviving?

 

The solution is to punish players for being bandits or reward players for being heroes/survivors

 

 

It's hard to do that organically, the only way to do it that I can think of is to use some immersion breaking mechanic.  Such as having safe zones in the game where heroes/survivors can freely share resources, players could also game plan how to go get a bandit, share information on what they've encountered etc... (or something like that) and these areas would have to be off limits to bandits.  Need a bloodbag?  Try to make it to pusta, a town for survivors only, see if anyone ise there to help you.  need a bloodbag and you are a bandit you are SOL, good luck.

 

I dunno, but it does seem important to somehow draw a better line between bandits and survivors so the game just doesn't become a deathmatch session.

[Rek Seven 37]

^ I think an expanded morality system could help curb the tendency to KoS. 

[terrvik 2409]

So which do you want?

 

Personally i play day z for the zombie Apocalypse experience and not the battle royal with zombies experience you get in the vanilla mod. 

 

edit: If i honest, i hope SA is made for people who are of the same mind as me because there are plenty of games that let you shoot people for no reason already. 

 

 

I'm with the survival sim crowd, so I hope rocket keeps his promise of making the game very harsh and getting rid of most of the conveniences the average gamer wants and is used to.

 

I'm also very much with the "games are art" crowd and I really think SA could prove how much emotions a simple concept can generate.

 

Totally agree that there are many other games out there that does the deathmatch thing (and does it better) already so SA really should move away from that.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Terrorviktor

[SoulHunter (DayZ) 233]

re: Frankie's comments on KoS

 

I agree with him, the first month or so of discovering Dayz was awesome - this of course was when players would have a tendency to be friendly and team up to survive, at least more so than now.  The reason is pretty easy to understand, once a player learns the game very well the entire process of surviving becomes streamlined/optimized so dying isn't a big deal, so you play the game more like a PvP deathmatch than a survival sim.

 

I can't see anyway around this in the SA.  If you make surviving too daunting a task then new players will be put off and quit playing and even seasoned players will get frustrated with the process.  There is so much to do in the game: fix vehicles, find gear, explore, make friends, make enemies, survive (food, water, etc...) etc...  If you make the game so that any one part becomes to daunting then you take away from all the other aspects.  For instance if you want to hop on and try to get a car working, well that by itself can be a 2 or 3 hour ordeal, couple that with getting infected constantly or blinking for food every 5 minutes you are not going to end up with a fun experience.  The main threat should always been other humans, zombies and survival secondary - however that is just my opinion.

 

So how do you make the SA not ultimately turn into a KoS game and also not water down the fun parts with too big of an emphasis on just surviving?

 

The solution is to punish players for being bandits or reward players for being heroes/survivors

 

 

It's hard to do that organically, the only way to do it that I can think of is to use some immersion breaking mechanic.  Such as having safe zones in the game where heroes/survivors can freely share resources, players could also game plan how to go get a bandit, share information on what they've encountered etc... (or something like that) and these areas would have to be off limits to bandits.  Need a bloodbag?  Try to make it to pusta, a town for survivors only, see if anyone ise there to help you.  need a bloodbag and you are a bandit you are SOL, good luck.

 

I dunno, but it does seem important to somehow draw a better line between bandits and survivors so the game just doesn't become a deathmatch session.

I very much agree with you. I also think that Frankie is right about KoS existing in S.A that much because of the game's mechanics forcing players to do so.

 

If the game would force players to need/cooperate each other, so then when the players get to learn the game well, they would well know that KoSing around would only bring more trouble than trying to communicate with them.

 

If that would be the case, the current rate of KoS per player (about 95% imo) would be decreased a lot (about 10% imo), which would add a more funny apocalypse experience imo.

[Skat3rat 1633]

I very much agree with you. I also think that Frankie is right about KoS existing in S.A that much because of the game's mechanics forcing players to do so.

 

If the game would force players to need/cooperate each other, so then when the players get to learn the game well, they would well know that KoSing around would only bring more trouble than trying to communicate with them.

 

If that would be the case, the current rate of KoS per player (about 95% imo) would be decreased a lot (about 10% imo), which would add a more funny apocalypse experience imo.

 

That's what Rocket is working towards in SA.  He knows, along with most of us, that the only way to lower the KoS mentality is to give a reason for players to work together.  From what he's talked about, it's all the medicine, diseases, and injuries that he hopes will atleast help a little with KoS.  

 

Ultimately you can't stop KoS altogether.  Although you may be able to stop a lot of it, there will always be the ones who don't stop to think even for a second before they shoot you.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Skat3rat

[SoulHunter (DayZ) 233]

That's what Rocket is working towards in SA.  He knows, along with most of us, that the only way to lower the KoS mentality is to give a reason for players to work together.  From what he's talked about, it's all the medicine, diseases, and injuries that he hopes will atleast help a little with KoS.  

 

Ultimately you can't stop KoS altogether.  Although you may be able to stop a lot of it, there will always be the ones who don't stop to think even for a second before they shoot you.

And hopefully along with the RP servers, the amount of players who do not think before shooting will be reduced ultimately.. I've yet to see myself even a single KoS issue in DayZRP even though it is a DayZ mod.. I cannot imagine what kind of experience I'd have in StandAlone private servers of that community =))

Edited August 7, 2013 by SoulHunter

[Hosty 647]

Hello there

 

Crikey are we back on topic? Great!

 

The bayonet does look nice doesn't it? I like the sneak peek we have had into the new weapon system.

 

I wonder if it will be implemented for HMG's/LMG's/Mortars etc?

 

Rgds

 

LoK

 

 

Bayonet on a mortar?

You wot m8

[Skat3rat 1633]

Bayonet on a mortar?

You wot m8

 

Why rush at someone with a sword when you could rush at him with a 50 lb mortar with a bayonet attached to it?

[sabre05 351]

Why rush at someone with a sword when you could rush at him with a 50 lb mortar with a bayonet attached to it?

 

Next you'll be suggesting cars with bayonets attached to them...

[Skat3rat 1633]

Next you'll be suggesting cars with bayonets attached to them...

 

Why attach a bayonet to a car when you can attach a mortar with a bayonet on it,to the car?

[sabre05 351]

Why attach a bayonet to a car when you can attach a mortar with a bayonet on it,to the car?

 

Genius. 

[sktrooper@hotmail.com 70]

I still fail to see how an expanded medicine-, disease- or injury system will make people think twice before shooting other players? Unless Dean goes the bloodbag-route and enforce it so a broken foot or wound can only be treated by another player.

 

But that would be a horrible system because this game is meant to be "be whatever you want to be" kind of game. If I want to be a lone wolf and not trust anyone at all, I should be allowed to be just that. There is no need to force me to go and find a rare friendly player to patch me up.

 

So no, I don't think an expanded whatever-system will stop or reduce mindless killings on sight. Why or how would it?

 

The only thing that will make people think twice about firing that gun of theirs on everything that moves, is an equally (or even more) dangerous risk of attracting a horde of zeds that can't be easily disposed of by hiding in a bush or pinetree or running through a building.

 

You won't make people think based on moral dilemmas, you'll make them think by giving him the choice between 2 risky options: kill the player and risk getting swarmed, or leave the player and risk getting shot at.

[Rek Seven 37]

I still fail to see how an expanded medicine-, disease- or injury system will make people think twice before shooting other players? Unless Dean goes the bloodbag-route and enforce it so a broken foot or wound can only be treated by another player.

 

 

Maybe disease could b really common and infectious and if you shoot someone who has the cure in their inventory, there is a 90% chance of that item becoming unusable/broken.

[Skat3rat 1633]

Maybe disease could b really common and infectious and if you shoot someone who has the cure in their inventory, there is a 90% chance of that item becoming unusable/broken.

 

Yeah, Rocket has talked about items capable of being broken if they get shot.  For instance if someone has NVGs and you shoot their NVGs, you can brake them.  That might make hostage situations more common if someone is trying to kill a player for their gear.

[sktrooper@hotmail.com 70]

Very utopian, but doubtful that will ever happen. 90% of the rest of his gear will still function, worth it in my book. Free loot without risking zeds (and thus avoiding infections and bleeding).

 

Anyway, the server I play on has done some sort of odd update that increased the amount of spawned zeds, made them super-sensitive to noise and they seem to be less eager to leave a player alone when that player is hiding in a bush. It's actually broken and not intentional (at least I think it isn't), but it does prove my point.

 

I was looting the firestation at the edge of Elektro when a bandit with a DMR shot at me from somewhere in the fields. He missed and what followed was just glorious: zeds came running in from as far as the hospital, there were easily 10-15 of them. They were hitting him despite of him sitting in a bush, after half a minute he just had to bolt it or else he would get absolutely stomped by the zeds.

 

That's how it should be. He decided to fire a shot at me (I only had a crowbar and some food, so not like I was a real threat anyway), he didn't kill me and had to retreat without any loot or else he'd be dead. He never had the chance to fire a second round.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Applejuice

[oompah 58]

You have to make the choice of deciding to shoot a player impactful.

 

If I shoot this player (who is not a bandit) the result is punative for me, maybe I lose X,Y, and Z - which makes surviving much harder for me

 

How to go about this?  I mentioned the safe zone thing, where bandits don't get access to certain helpful zones that have resources.  I don't know if I like that idea in practice, but the concept might work.

 

I shoot people on sight a lot just because I don't want them shooting me first - that really sucks.  I don't even mind bandits in the game, I think that's awesome.  I hate being forced into a bad situation though because ultimately I simply can't take any chances and there is no penalty killing a guy before he kills you.

 

No one should be an accidental bandit, it should be a choice and i think bandits would actualyl enjoy the extra challenge of being "penalized" - making their sort of badge of honor that more meaningful for them.

 

One area though you would have to resolve is killing a person in self defense.  If the game could know you were shot at first by a player you killed you shouldnt become a bandit for that, especially if being a bandit become a more challenging way to play.

[Rek Seven 37]

Very utopian, but doubtful that will ever happen. 90% of the rest of his gear will still function, worth it in my book. Free loot without risking zeds (and thus avoiding infections and bleeding).

 

So your character has a disease that he will die of in a couple of days but instead of trying to secure a cure from another player, you would just shoot the guy on the off chance that he might have some NVGs?

 

I guess people with that mind set will never change their play style but for most normal people, a system like this would encourage people to think before they shoot.

 

So many people in the games media comment on how the majority of games involve a gun as being your primary method of interacting with the world but Day z could be so much more. 

[Jgut90 71]

You have to make the choice of deciding to shoot a player impactful.

 

If I shoot this player (who is not a bandit) the result is punative for me, maybe I lose X,Y, and Z - which makes surviving much harder for me

 

How to go about this?  I mentioned the safe zone thing, where bandits don't get access to certain helpful zones that have resources.  I don't know if I like that idea in practice, but the concept might work.

 

I shoot people on sight a lot just because I don't want them shooting me first - that really sucks.  I don't even mind bandits in the game, I think that's awesome.  I hate being forced into a bad situation though because ultimately I simply can't take any chances and there is no penalty killing a guy before he kills you.

 

No one should be an accidental bandit, it should be a choice and i think bandits would actualyl enjoy the extra challenge of being "penalized" - making their sort of badge of honor that more meaningful for them.

 

One area though you would have to resolve is killing a person in self defense.  If the game could know you were shot at first by a player you killed you shouldnt become a bandit for that, especially if being a bandit become a more challenging way to play.

People here really don't like the concept of having a safe zone. 

 

For example, a sniper would just camp outside of the safe zone and when someone gets out of the said zone *boom* dead. 

[sktrooper@hotmail.com 70]

So your character has a disease that he will die of in a couple of days but instead of trying to secure a cure from another player, you would just shoot the guy on the off chance that he might have some NVGs?

 

 

I have a disease and I see a player. I can ask him for help, or I can shoot him and see if he has some antibiotics on him. What will be my motivation to pick the former option over the latter?