Some Suggestions

[Psychobob 155]

He's not explicitly saying that, and even if he was, so what? It's not like we're forced to accept his ideas as they are -- they can be changed and adapted for the better.

 

Hell, if I had to choose between no third-person for anyone, and giving people a superficial choice, I'd go for the former, too. It's the same as with any other "choice" like this, where you have two options of which the other is clearly practically superior but not necessarily the preferable one.

See: "Don't like thermal-scoped AS50 being in the game? You don't have to use it if you don't want to!"; "Don't like cranking up the gamma to gain faux-nightvision? You don't have to do it if you don't want to!"; "Don't like everyone spawning with Makarovs? You can drop it if you want to!".

 

Anyway, that's beyond the point. The point is, there are a lot of players out there who would rather play the game without anyone being able to cheat using third person, and without anyone being able to fly choppers, and those people deserve to be able to enjoy the game that way as much as anyone else deserves to be able to enjoy the game with those features in. A hardcore difficulty setting would, in my humble opinion, be the best solution for this problem, with customisable "private hives" being the second-best (although vastly less optimal, as they'd split up communities more than an universal ruleset) one.

I am saying that everyone should be locked to first person because doing so is beneficial for the game as a whole; it fits with what the game was originally designed to be, the Standalone isn't as clunky and has much better perspective options such as a FoV slider, It makes the would make the game more balanced for everyone and removes the unequal god-like advantage that third person gives everyone.

Usually I'm all for choice but not in this case because it splits the community. Eventually the hardcore servers will die off because the amount of players will slowly drop over time until the servers are empty and/or end up being shut down, especially if they are player owned. This is exactly what happened in the mod, except in the mod players were allowed to create server with 24/7 day and 10,000 vehicles.There are no true hardcore servers left. It went out of control and everyone seems to have lost sight of what made the game so popular to begin with.

The players ruined the mod and I know exactly how they did it, it should be obvious to anyone that plays and especially to those who've played from the start, like I have. I'm here to stop it from happening again.

[Psychobob 155]

3rd person, hell nah, i play it in 3rd for movement and z killing and close quaters skirmishes but i vastly prefer 1st person above 80m firefights, its just how i do it, i hate movement in this game and third person helps a lot for me. i agree its advantagous if YOU'RE AMBUSHING, or looking round a corner in firefights in cqb(or meele it adds depth of field with meele as you have an accurate gauge of length like in real life) 

 

but i'm the opposite of you. i play casually with a friend and we just go and loot places and repaired vechs and had fun because we like the game like that and i think for me its much more fun.

 

its like argueing a TDM is better then a DMP(i think thats what you call it in most games), there is no right or wrong one is just more hardcore and tense and the other is casual fun

 

i think the 1st person servers and  hardcore only will suffice, if you hate not having enough people(say 3 in every 10 players) then it would make more sence for rokitt to remove FP then TP as really you should make the player-base happy. but i'm up for coexistance.

 

one final note, TP is not as useful as getting the first glimpse of somone and bieng able to sneak up on them, its only really useful for finding loot in wierd places and in an established fight.

hate peeking round corners, hey i've got real 5.1 headphones, in a week i'll be able to tell footsteps round a corner and their distance easily. do you want surround sound removed?

First person is beneficial for the game because it removes all of the unfair advantage that third person gives you. It fits with what the game was originally designed to be. The reason there shouldn't be a choice is because it splits the community and eventually kills the hardcore servers. It's possible that the hardcore servers will last forever in Standalone but based on the mod, I don't see that happening.

There is nothing wrong with being able to hear people who are around a corner or sneaking up behind you because it's not an unfair advantage. It's not impossible to hear people around a corner or sneaking up on your even if you've only got a basic stereo headset. In that situation your odds of wining aren't really more that 50/50 all else being equal.

[Psychobob 155]

On the topic of 3rd person "representing peripheral vision", you have no idea what you are talking about. Third person in this game does absolutely nothing of the sort. It doesn't increase your field of view at all. It is literally just a third-person view, it moves your camera back a metre and up like 20 centimetres.

 

It is a 100% an illusion and just something you've grown accustomed to. Say you're running in a forest, in third person your camera is essentially where your first person camera was a second ago, and it does not give you any more vision as it doesn't change your field of view. The only advantage 3rd person has over 1st person is being able to peek over grass, and behind and through walls. That has absolutely nothing to do with "peripheral vision".

 

If you want something representing peripheral vision, either bring back the peripheral dots (an awful solution if you ask me), or just learn to utilise the Alt key to look around.

 

This^

 

I do think having third person does make it easier to spot people at a distance but I believe that's because the camera angle is higher and everything has the illusion of moving slightly slower. It's not something I can easily explain. Not to mention it's pretty easy to search for someone when you're safely behind a wall and able to see over, around and/or through it without exposing your position.

[burneddi 13]

I am saying that everyone should be locked to first person because doing so is beneficial for the game as a whole; it fits with what the game was originally designed to be, the Standalone isn't as clunky and has much better perspective options such as a FoV slider, It makes the would make the game more balanced for everyone and removes the unequal god-like advantage that third person gives everyone.

Usually I'm all for choice but not in this case because it splits the community. Eventually the hardcore servers will die off because the amount of players will slowly drop over time until the servers are empty and/or end up being shut down, especially if they are player owned. This is exactly what happened in the mod, except in the mod players were allowed to create server with 24/7 day and 10,000 vehicles.There are no true hardcore servers left. It went out of control and everyone seems to have lost sight of what made the game so popular to begin with.

The players ruined the mod and I know exactly how they did it, it should be obvious to anyone that plays and especially to those who've played from the start, like I have. I'm here to stop it from happening again.

I'm inclined to agree with you. DayZ (and any other milsim game, really) should not be a third-person game in my opinion. Hell, I'd not even call it an opinion -- third person is in direct conflict with the realism aspect of the game. I think it is one of those myth type things, started by ill-informed people, and perpetuated by people who have grown accustomed to it. Aside from allowing you to peek over grass, and behind and through walls, third person offers no definitive advantages, and there should be no arguments for constantly using it like a lot of people seem to (aside from getting used to it, which is the case for most people, it seems).

 

However, at this point its usage is so popular it is more of a question of whether or not it is viable to just cold turkey it out of the game, and obviously what Rocket and the rest of the devteam think of the matter. I wouldn't say removing it is definitely not going to happen, as it would certainly go in vein with all the new difficult (compared to the mod) mechanics introduced by standalone, but realistically, I have my doubts about it.

 

Have you seen all the casual tears caused by the new hunger/thirst/sickness mechanics? Just imagine the anal anguish if third person was removed. Of course, that might be a positive for you if you're into that kind of thing, but I would expect the devs don't really want to upset a major portion of the playerbase.

 

Anyway, I still think an enforced Hardcore ruleset would be a good solution. There never really was one for the mod. Naming it "Hardcore" or "Extreme" or something similarly superlative is important, I think, as it sort of gives it that "this is the true experience" kind of ring to it. and lets me berate everyone playing on any other difficulty for being casual

 

PS: Admittedly, the first person of DayZ/ArmA2/ArmA3/whatever also is a matter of getting used to. In fact, you could even argue that the third person mode is easier to get into, and as such takes *less* getting used to than first person. You probably wouldn't be wrong. However, these are all simulation games, and as such, realism is a key aspect. Third person simply is not realistic. Sure, it takes some practice to be able to comfortably maneuver in first person like you used to in third person, twice as much for land vehicles and four times as much for helicopters, but once you get the hang of it, it is extremely rewarding, immersive and fun.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Dejecaal

[Psychobob 155]

I'm inclined to agree with you. DayZ (and any other milsim game, really) should not be a third-person game in my opinion. Hell, I'd not even call it an opinion -- third person is in direct conflict with the realism aspect of the game. I think it is one of those myth type things, started by ill-informed people, and perpetuated by people who have grown accustomed to it. Aside from allowing you to peek over grass, and behind and through walls, third person offers no definitive advantages, and there should be no arguments for constantly using it like a lot of people seem to (aside from getting used to it, which is the case for most people, it seems).

 

However, at this point its usage is so popular it is more of a question of whether or not it is viable to just cold turkey it out of the game, and obviously what Rocket and the rest of the devteam think of the matter. I wouldn't say removing it is definitely not going to happen, as it would certainly go in vein with all the new difficult (compared to the mod) mechanics introduced by standalone, but realistically, I have my doubts about it.

 

Have you seen all the casual tears caused by the new hunger/thirst/sickness mechanics? Just imagine the anal anguish if third person was removed. Of course, that might be a positive for you if you're into that kind of thing, but I would expect the devs don't really want to upset a major portion of the playerbase.

 

Anyway, I still think an enforced Hardcore ruleset would be a good solution. There never really was one for the mod. Naming it "Hardcore" or "Extreme" or something similarly superlative is important, I think, as it sort of gives it that "this is the true experience" kind of ring to it. and lets me berate everyone playing on any other difficulty for being casual

 

PS: Admittedly, the first person of DayZ/ArmA2/ArmA3/whatever also is a matter of getting used to. In fact, you could even argue that the third person mode is easier to get into, and as such takes *less* getting used to than first person. You probably wouldn't be wrong. However, these are all simulation games, and as such, realism is a key aspect. Third person simply is not realistic. Sure, it takes some practice to be able to comfortably maneuver in first person like you used to in third person, twice as much for land vehicles and four times as much for helicopters, but once you get the hang of it, it is extremely rewarding, immersive and fun.

Agree.

I'm sure the amount of tears would easily refill the oceans even if they were completely empty. I honestly believe that if they just removed it completely and kept it that way the amount of complaints would drop to near nonexistent levels. New players wouldn't care and current/older players would become accustomed to first person. They'd realize how much they've been missing out on. It's much more than just a different visual perspective, the whole experience is different.

The game might suffer for a short time when the first made the change but in the long term it would become much stronger.

[grim981 5]

I'm inclined to set stuff aside and say this. I love first person, I use it most of the time (even in ArmA), but taking out third person is by no means, a solution. I only mean to defend the people who use it. Sure it isn't too "realistic" but it is an attempt at making up for senses you can't use (read that somewhere).

 

As for this "proof"

• "It's cheating"/"giving an unfair advantage" While it is true, you have to think. Even if they weren't hiding behind something, odds are you still wouldn't see them. Hiding behind something is taking away the possibility that they see you. They eventually have to get out of that cover to shoot you. Think about it, you're hiding next to a log or in tall grass with someone walking by. In real life, you'd be able to peak over it instead of exposing your whole body correct? In the game there is no way to do that, third person can help that. Now seeing over and around walls is a whole nother story... If you really think about it, it just makes you kind of a dick if you use it like that... but from what I've seen, they might be trying to eliminate that, like zooming in like you had our back to something... not to sure about that
• "It's unrealistic" Well sure, but think about it, if someone walks up to you from the side, you wouldn't know unless you looked that way. that's just how games are. Third person lets you see them when they get close.(also the log thing I said in the previous bullet) Like I said before, it just makes up for senses you can't use in game. Seems alright to me...
• Making it first person only is "How the game should be"/"How it's designed" This is most definitely not true and is the most bias thing you've said. When you can give me written proof as to where a developer has said that the game was designed to be the most hardcore realistic game out there, and solid proof that it is designed around being first person, then I will agree.
   

You have to remember that this is a game, not only does it have to be fun, but it has to keep peoples attention. While first person is fun, others find third person fun. Everyone has their own play style, and you want to eliminate the people who play in third person. Getting rid of third person would get rid of about 3/4 of the community and the devs would get SO much shit for it. It's impractical to get rid of something that is being used so much.

 

I have no beef with you, I do not want to be your enemy, but the constant "you're obviously not reading my posts" is borderline irritating... I am reading your posts, but when I respond, it seems like you would rather push what I'm saying out of the way and continue on. I am giving you reasons why it shouldn't be removed, and you continuously repeat yourself.

I hope you have a good day and I hope you are enjoying your time in Chernogorsk, survivor.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Grim 981

[grim981 5]

.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Grim 981

[Psychobob 155]

I'm inclined to set stuff aside and say this. I love first person, I use it most of the time (even in ArmA), but taking out third person is by no means, a solution. I only mean to defend the people who use it. Sure it isn't too "realistic" but it is an attempt at making up for senses you can't use (read that somewhere).

 

As for this "proof"

• "It's cheating"/"giving an unfair advantage" While it is true, you have to think. Even if they weren't hiding behind something, odds are you still wouldn't see them. Hiding behind something is taking away the possibility that they see you. They eventually have to get out of that cover to shoot you. Think about it, you're hiding next to a log or in tall grass with someone walking by. In real life, you'd be able to peak over it instead of exposing your whole body correct? In the game there is no way to do that, third person can help that. Now seeing over and around walls is a whole nother story... If you really think about it, it just makes you kind of a dick if you use it like that... but from what I've seen, they might be trying to eliminate that, like zooming in like you had our back to something... not to sure about that
• "It's unrealistic" Well sure, but think about it, if someone walks up to you from the side, you wouldn't know unless you looked that way. that's just how games are. Third person lets you see them when they get close.(also the log thing I said in the previous bullet) Like I said before, it just makes up for senses you can't use in game. Seems alright to me...
• Making it first person only is "How the game should be"/"How it's designed" This is most definitely not true and is the most bias thing you've said. When you can give me written proof as to where a developer has said that the game was designed to be the most hardcore realistic game out there, and solid proof that it is designed around being first person, then I will agree.

   

You have to remember that this is a game, not only does it have to be fun, but it has to keep peoples attention. While first person is fun, others find third person fun. Everyone has their own play style, and you want to eliminate the people who play in third person. Getting rid of third person would get rid of about 3/4 of the community and the devs would get SO much shit for it. It's impractical to get rid of something that is being used so much.

 

I have no beef with you, I do not want to be your enemy, but the constant "you're obviously not reading my posts" is borderline irritating... I am reading your posts, but when I respond, it seems like you would rather push what I'm saying out of the way and continue on. I am giving you reasons why it shouldn't be removed, and you continuously repeat yourself.

I hope you have a good day and I hope you are enjoying your time in Chernogorsk, survivor.

I know I've heard Rocket talk about third person and what could be done to stop it from being so "cheaty" but since I'm definitely not going to go digging around for that tweet, post or video, i'll just consider it a loss.

It's cheating / gives an unfair advantage - That's a pretty f'kin massive concern when you're playing against other people in a game where every decision matters. You CAN peek around corners either by using the classic "Cone/Wedge" technique or by simply leaning out while near a corner. They don't have a way to peek vertically but I'm sure they could easily add the stance animations from ArmA 3 which would vastly improve the game.

As for it being unrealistic. Sure it's a game but it's a survival game, that alone means it should be as difficult as can be. It's not really survival when there is no difficulty. In a game where they have real world blood type statistics with realistic blood collection/administration mechanics that can result in an instant death, having a third person... I don't even know what to call it. It just makes me want to do this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUvADbpqGlQ

I'd say it's abundantly clear that they want the game to be as realistic as possible but for some reason they've thrown in possibly the most unrealistic mechanic they could think of.

This really makes it seem like they're more concerned about the money and catering to the majority than making an amazing game, which I don't believe would have any trouble being successful if even if they removed third person and issued refunds to the people who would demand one because of it. Just look at how much hate DayZ had everytime the release of Alpha was delayed. Everywhere I went people were saying "I don't even care about Standalone anymore" then they still sold what, 170,000+ copies in a 24h period? I'd be surprised if even half of their current total sales demanded refunds. I'd also bet than many who got a refund would rebuy eventually anyway when it hits beta and final release. Not only that but Rocket is telling people not to buy it yet unless they're sure they want it.

Now is the ideal time to make some radical decisions, such as removing third person. This would also allow people to thoroughly test first person and let them know what needs to be improved. So the first person we have now could be drastically different from what could be in the final release. Third person is really hindering that aspect of it as well I'd say.

[burneddi 13]

They don't have a way to peek vertically but I'm sure they could easily add the stance animations from ArmA 3 which would vastly improve the game.

I think the ArmA3 stance animations are awesome, but as far as I can remember, this issue was touched once and they didn't have plans to add them. I really hope they would, though.

As for it being unrealistic. Sure it's a game but it's a survival game, that alone means it should be as difficult as can be. It's not really survival when there is no difficulty. In a game where they have real world blood type statistics with realistic blood collection/administration mechanics that can result in an instant death, having a third person... I don't even know what to call it. It just makes me want to do this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUvADbpqGlQ

This is completely true. Such a discrepancy in design is almost hilarious. The game has (planned) features like a rather realistic first aid and health system, complex item maintenance and crafting (with eg. realistic gun maintenance), a realistic day/night cycle with truly realistic pitch-black autumn nights (granted, light sources in said nights could work a bit better)... And then you have a ridicilously completely out-of-place thing like third person, something you would normally expect to find in a much more casual game (not even Battlefield has third person, though), in place almost purely because half the community is comprised of people who can't deal with difficulty and realism in a game designed from the ground up to be unforgivingly difficult and realistic.

Now is the ideal time to make some radical decisions, such as removing third person. This would also allow people to thoroughly test first person and let them know what needs to be improved. So the first person we have now could be drastically different from what could be in the final release. Third person is really hindering that aspect of it as well I'd say.

This is true. Making radical design choices such as this would send a clear message of what the standalone is going to do -- take the original core principles and aspirations of the mod, back then out of reach because it was just a mod, make them reality, and toss out all the customs and conventions created by a community playing a broken, unfinished mod.

The question is, will they do it? I hope they would, but I sort of doubt they will. And if they indeed won't, a separate "hardcore" difficulty would be the best compromise. Ultimately I think it depends on what rocket's vision of the game really is, as I trust him to make the game exactly as he wants it to be. As to that, I don't think we're really going to get a detailed answer out of him.

[Wili 156]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMq8du-qOm4&feature=youtu.be

 

Implement this system please!!!!

 

The log out is cancelled if you move in any direction or you receive damage. You will  be able to look around while logging off.

 

You can still do ALT + F4 or close your client but the character will remain "40 seconds" in game and you will be able to be killed.

[warmonger917 26]

All of your points have merit, although i would keep the helicopters in and allow people to have rat hole bases. I seem to recall Rocket saying something about underground type bunker "instances" for players to store gear. As such i think they could be kept away from heli scouts.

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

All of your points have merit, although i would keep the helicopters in and allow people to have rat hole bases. I seem to recall Rocket saying something about underground type bunker "instances" for players to store gear. As such i think they could be kept away from heli scouts.

I really hope they don't do that, every player digging a hole in the ground like a gopher doesn't seem to fit into a zombie survival game. I'd much rather just have base fortification.

[AngelEyes_666 13]

Player trading should be emphasized more. This isnt single player, dont ever add merchants. Adding a player-to-player trade menu would be awesome. I think trading and team survival is what sets Dayz apart from the "pvp heavy" copycat zombie games out there.

[hazrauken 0]

The game only has stereo sound, though. Not only that, but "surround" headphones are completely useless anyway, as you only have two ears and regular headphones are already covering both of them.

i'm gonna have to go with they're not useless when its genuiely got 3 different drivers in each can, search roccat kave 5.1 but ugh to this bieng stereo rather then surround didn't know that

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

 

 

11. Remove third person!

 

This a million times this.

[ShokeR (DayZ) 29]

Helicopter should be in the game but also it should be very hard to fix them you will need alot of parts and you need like a car to grab the parts because they are too heavy so even if you find helicopter good luck fixing it

[Psychobob 155]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMq8du-qOm4&feature=youtu.be

 

Implement this system please!!!!

 

The log out is cancelled if you move in any direction or you receive damage. You will  be able to look around while logging off.

 

You can still do ALT + F4 or close your client but the character will remain "40 seconds" in game and you will be able to be killed.

I agree. I know they already plan on adding some sort of system like this because they did with the mod.

[Psychobob 155]

All of your points have merit, although i would keep the helicopters in and allow people to have rat hole bases. I seem to recall Rocket saying something about underground type bunker "instances" for players to store gear. As such i think they could be kept away from heli scouts.

I remember something about that too and I don't think it would be a good idea. People have to be able to lose their gear since that is what makes the game so fun, the element of risk and knowing that one mistake could cost you everything. I'd much rather see a base system such as that from epoch. However, in Epoch there is locked safes that are essentially unbeatable, I would like to see them able to be cracked if added to Standalone. Even if it meant a 15 minute safe cracking animation or something AFTER finding some sort of tools to allow it to happen.

[Psychobob 155]

Player trading should be emphasized more. This isnt single player, dont ever add merchants. Adding a player-to-player trade menu would be awesome. I think trading and team survival is what sets Dayz apart from the "pvp heavy" copycat zombie games out there.

I agree. I've always thought it's so weird that we have to throw items on the ground to trade them. Picture doing that in real life. haha.

[Psychobob 155]

Helicopter should be in the game but also it should be very hard to fix them you will need alot of parts and you need like a car to grab the parts because they are too heavy so even if you find helicopter good luck fixing it

Good idea. I'm all for this and having helicopters so long as they don't make building a base pointless.

[Reaper1 2]

I'm sure this has been brought up before, but something needs to be done about the loot system. It literally encourages people to server hop.