Realism and Weapons [Balanced or Realistic?]

[Dagwood 680]

Why can't we have it?

I'm an occasional hunter and shoot probably once or twice a year. Shooting is fucking hard. I zero my ruger hawkeye .308 with a 2x7 scope to 1 inch high at 100m, fire off a box of rounds, and then put it away.

Even a headshot as close as 100m would be beyond my ability if I had to fire standing without a brace. Maybe I am just not that naturally talented, but I like to think that it's because shooting anything without bracing the weapon is very difficult.

Survivors in an apocalypse should not be as proficient as the Spec Ops we control in arma that have drills with their weapons endlessly.

Dayz already hinders our ability to snap our body around quickly to simulate the same limitations in reality.

Why not make the controls for aiming less perfect. When you adjust your aim and sight picture, the rifle should not perfectly mirror you inputs. There should be a small amount of coordination lost in translation; especially if the survivor is young. The longer you survive and the more that you fire your weapon, the more "skilled" you become. This means that your inputs would become less altered.

Please don't flame the shit out of me for hinting at some form of skill progression...

[Diggydug (DayZ) 331]

SKILL PROGRESSION!?!#!@?#! WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS IS?! SKYRIM????????????????

 

My only problem with the "The more you do something the better you get" idea is that each life becomes a serious grind. As with many things, I'd be willing to try it out, but I don't expect it to work well in practice at all.

 

Find a quite spot and shoot off in the distance on my own to get up. Others would go on an empty server at night and do it.

Faster bandaging? Get your pal, have him slap you bloody. Bandage. Repeat with minimal bloodloss. Bloodbag/saline yourself. Do the same for your pal.

Run faster the more you run? Okay that one just wouldn't work but yeah you get the idea.

 

Many people who play DayZ are cheap when it comes to gameplay and go for any exploit they can find. This would end up hurting the "honest" players more than it would the exploiters and cheap players.

_________

 

Learning how the weapons work should be a big part of it, like it was in the mod/ArmA 2.

Another part would be learning how the condition of each part affects that weapon.

Wind and bullet drop would be nice, especially considering the swaying of trees I've seen.

 

Other than that I don't want the game deciding where my bullet goes, I should be able to compensate and figure it out. 

[Etherimp 1323]

Firstly, whoever says "GUNS ARE HARD, MKAY" clearly has no fucking clue. 

 

Sniping a Taliban insurgent off of a mountain 2000m away with a .50 cal rifle, IS HARD.. That's why sniper teams work as TEAMS and have spotters. It's necessary for their shots to be very accurate and there are so many factors to take into account, and they will probably only get 1 shot..

 

Shooting an assault rifle and hitting someone at 200-400 meters SHOULD NOT BE THAT HARD.. It's NOT that hard IRL.

 

Shooting a hunting rifle is even easier. 

 

Shooting at pistol and hitting someone within 100m is moderately difficult if they're moving, but overall NOT very hard.. Ask the city of Compton.

 

 

As to the poll: I like realism in gunplay. I think DayZ has "survival aspects", and probably a lot of them.. more than most games.. but I don't want it to become a hardcore "survival simulator". I also think there needs to be a balance between realism and gameplay... Why simulate every nuance of reality in a video game? That's so fucking boring.. I would rather just live my life if that were the case. Games like Counter-Strike (for its time!) offered a good mixture of fantasy/reality. You could use real life weapons and there was bullet spread and recoil, but you didn't need to understand calculus to snipe someone from across the map.

 

Not saying DayZ should be quite as arcade-style as CS.. only that Dean and company should take a lesson from games like CS which were very successful: Balance realism...

Edited December 26, 2013 by Etherimp

[gibonez 3633]

Firstly, whoever says "GUNS ARE HARD, MKAY" clearly has no fucking clue. 

 

Sniping a Taliban insurgent off of a mountain 2000m away with a .50 cal rifle, IS HARD.. That's why sniper teams work as TEAMS and have spotters. It's necessary for their shots to be very accurate and there are so many factors to take into account, and they will probably only get 1 shot..

 

Shooting an assault rifle and hitting someone at 200-400 meters SHOULD NOT BE THAT HARD.. It's NOT that hard IRL.

 

Shooting a hunting rifle is even easier. 

 

Shooting at pistol and hitting someone within 100m is moderately difficult if they're moving, but overall NOT very hard.. Ask the city of Compton.

 

 

 

 

 

You never fired a gun have you ? Shooting at paper targets from 15 feet and shooting a person from 400m are two different things.

[ProGamerGov 74]

Firstly, whoever says "GUNS ARE HARD, MKAY" clearly has no fucking clue. 

 

Sniping a Taliban insurgent off of a mountain 2000m away with a .50 cal rifle, IS HARD.. That's why sniper teams work as TEAMS and have spotters. It's necessary for their shots to be very accurate and there are so many factors to take into account, and they will probably only get 1 shot..

 

Shooting an assault rifle and hitting someone at 200-400 meters SHOULD NOT BE THAT HARD.. It's NOT that hard IRL.

 

Shooting a hunting rifle is even easier. 

 

Shooting at pistol and hitting someone within 100m is moderately difficult if they're moving, but overall NOT very hard.. Ask the city of Compton.

 

 

As to the poll: I like realism in gunplay. I think DayZ has "survival aspects", and probably a lot of them.. more than most games.. but I don't want it to become a hardcore "survival simulator". I also think there needs to be a balance between realism and gameplay... Why simulate every nuance of reality in a video game? That's so fucking boring.. I would rather just live my life if that were the case. Games like Counter-Strike (for its time!) offered a good mixture of fantasy/reality. You could use real life weapons and there was bullet spread and recoil, but you didn't need to understand calculus to snipe someone from across the map.

 

Not saying DayZ should be quite as arcade-style as CS.. only that Dean and company should take a lesson from games like CS which were very successful: Balance realism...

We are talking an.out simulating each gun's real life recoil, "damage", penetration, magazine size, fire rate, bullet speed, bullet type, ect...

CSGO is an e-sport shooter, the exact opposite gun characteristics of what people want in dayz.

[Lemonater47 11]

This is the realism survival game. There are plenty of other games you can play if you don't want this.

And I ain't a brony and I will want realism and stuff. Mr mazzar.

You just need the patience. Also I don't play bandit as its boring. Bandit hunter is much more fun. Stalk someone see what they do if they are a bandit or not. After you are kitted up and all. But don't missed people. Rob people. Well ask first then rob people. But I often follow groups of players to study what they do. Some are friendly groups those most are bandit kill squad groups. The. You just pick them off one by one constantly changing your position. You can make them think they are up against more than one enemy. Especially if you change your weapon. Way more fun and interesting game with far more things that can happen.

If it were balanced it would be far more of a gun battle with no communication with anyone.

[Dagwood 680]

Hitting a person with a pistol at 100m? Ya fucking right, man. Maybe if it's braced. Don't come in here thrashing me for admitting that I am not as proficient with firearms in real life.

Those snipers killing people at 2000m have fired their weapons millions of times. You and I have not.

[Lemonater47 11]

100 metres with a pistol is stretching it a tad but possible. Though you wouldn't hit a stationary person over and over consistently.

[Sooden 301]

...

Not saying DayZ should be quite as arcade-style as CS.. only that Dean and company should take a lesson from games like CS which were very successful: Balance realism...

 

yup good idea  <_< , blend in with the competition, don't look for a unique selling point,follow the working model and make 'some' cash. No risk, no fame. So depend what Dean's motive are for this game.

 

ADDED:

 

Fame example and power it can give

 

ELITE (1981 space game) was the fist space game to change from 'play for a day' to Space role-play and simulation and that gave birth to also sorts of space game. Because of their fame and even with the last ELITE game being in 1995 (i think), they started a kickstarter project and broke all records and are still getting support funds  (think its at 2mill pound+ and that early alpha), That's what fame can do for a game creator.

 

i know people will say 'but dayz got more in it alpha', be we are talking about a game which its last version over 15 years ago and funds where given just on the concept, not sales of a workable alpha client

Edited December 26, 2013 by Sooden

[Etherimp 1323]

We are talking an.out simulating each gun's real life recoil, "damage", penetration, magazine size, fire rate, bullet speed, bullet type, ect...

CSGO is an e-sport shooter, the exact opposite gun characteristics of what people want in dayz.

 

 

I understand that. And I was not suggesting taking the gun characteristics from CS:GO.. I was just giving CS1.6 as an example of a mod which found success, and balanced realism.

 

 

 

 

yup good idea   <_< , blend in with the competition, don't look for a unique selling point,follow the working model and make 'some' cash. No risk, no fame. So depend what Dean's motive are for this game.

 

I never said anything about making the game like CS or blending in with the competition.. As I said above: BALANCED REALISM.. Too realistic is boring, too arcadey is stupid.. But the game should be accessible while also being "semi"-realistic. News flash: The DayZ mod was not ultra-realistic, but it was more realistic than the average Shooter, while still maintaining some decent shooter mechanics.

 

 

 

You never fired a gun have you ? Shooting at paper targets from 15 feet and shooting a person from 400m are two different things.

 

 

You ever shot a person from 400m? 

Edited December 26, 2013 by Etherimp

[Etherimp 1323]

Hitting a person with a pistol at 100m? Ya fucking right, man. Maybe if it's braced. Don't come in here thrashing me for admitting that I am not as proficient with firearms in real life.

Those snipers killing people at 2000m have fired their weapons millions of times. You and I have not.

 

I never trashed you. Furthermore, 100m is not that fucking far. And, your response "Those snipers killing people at 2000m..." .. What the hell does that have to do with DayZ? Nobody in DayZ is firing 2000m anyway. I said "Doing that is difficult, hitting someone at 200m with an assault rifle is not."

[Sooden 301]

...

I never said anything about making the game like CS or blending in with the competition.. As I said above: BALANCED REALISM.. Too realistic is boring, too arcadey is stupid.. But the game should be accessible while also being "semi"-realistic. News flash: The DayZ mod was not ultra-realistic, but it was more realistic than the average Shooter, while still maintaining some decent shooter mechanics.

...

 

i never said you said, make the game like CS, but you said 'Dean and company should take a lesson from games like CS ...' That's what I meant by blending in (a lesson from games, see the 's', so ideas from them games) and was making the point that he can do that or try something risky and new. Sure my comment was a little flippant but not an attack on your comment

[Etherimp 1323]

i never said you said, make the game like CS, but you said 'Dean and company should take a lesson from games like CS ...' That's what I meant by blending in (a lesson from games, see the 's', so ideas from them games) and was making the point that he can do that or try something risky and new. Sure my comment was a little flippant but not an attack on your comment

 

 

The original CS did anything BUT blend in with other shooters.. If you recall (or if you're old enough to recall), CS was the first shooter of its kind. Pre-CS there were VERY few "tactical shooters".. Most shooters were along the lines of Doom/Quake/Unreal. 

Edited December 26, 2013 by Etherimp

[Sooden 301]

The original CS did anything BUT blend in with other shooters.. If you recall (or if you're old enough to recall), CS was the first shooter of its kind. Pre-CS there were VERY few "tactical shooters".. Most shooters were along the lines of Doom/Quake/Unreal. 

 

forget CS , my mistake i guess, just when you said "company should take a lesson from games like CS",it sounded like you where talking about more than one game of the same style, so i though you meant 'take lessons from a group of games, that have the same style'

 

and i am plenty old :P

Edited December 26, 2013 by Sooden

[crypticsilence 7]

If arma or dayz were realistic we wouldnt have people killing each other from 300m+ so easily.

 

Shooting is extremely hard in real life and devs have yet to translate that in game thus far.

 

It's basically understood that the characters in game are all proficient with their weaponry. It would be a boring game otherwise.

[Avengerki 20]

I like realism in my guns and play. Each time a new zombie survival simulator game comes out I want to try it to see if it meets my expectations. Dayz is pretty good, where it kinda sucks is the constant pvp killing I would like to think IRL we would not be constantly killing each other on sight over a can opener.

 

In the Walking Dead the Govenor was two faced and I kinda liked that, he may kidnap people and either let them join him or if he thought they were a threat kill them but he didn't always kill on sight unless the group he came on had a resource he wanted. He built a community where people could live a normal life while those who liked killing could take care of the zombies and protect them. I would like to be able to make a community but know that probably won't happen in DayZ as how it is in my head.

 

State of Decay is a great concept also for zombie survival and follows DayZ some in terms of realism but it does have a community you can build and protect and limited ammo and weapons to find. Need to find resources to build stuff, people get sick, need to secure food that type of stuff. Some groups of people you run into just want to kill you, some want to be left alone, others want your help but remain seperate and then there are those who join you. Except for it being single player(although that may have changed since I last played it) it has many aspects I like and many I don't. DayZ is the same, it has different aspects I like but lacks some others.

[Etherimp 1323]

In reference to the discussion we were having about hitting a target at 100m with a pistol:

 

A .45 (230gr HP @ 900fps) has a max point blank range (MPBR) on a 5" dia. vital zone target of 113 yards. At 100 yards it has 335 FPE. 

A 9mm (125gr HP @ 1200fps) has a max point blank range on a 5" dia. vital zone target of 139 yards. At 100 yards it has 269 FPE. 

A 9mm NATO load (115 FMJ @ 1300fps) bumps the MPBR zero out to 148 yards on a 5" dia. vital zone target. At 100 yards it has 283 FPE. 

They drop off very quickly after their MPBR zero. The .45 is -35.7" @200 yards, the 9mm is -29.6" @ 200 yards and the 9mm NATO is -23.6" @ 200 yards. 

Since the MPBR is so close and the energies are relatively similar I'd rate them as equivalent.

 

 

And here's a guy firing a 1911 at 230 yards and hitting a gong.

 

[Sooden 301]

It's basically understood that the characters in game are all proficient with their weaponry. It would be a boring game otherwise.

 

not sure it would be boring if we weren't proficient http://youtu.be/jaPWREuCk0I

[crypticsilence 7]

not sure it would be boring if we weren't proficient http://youtu.be/jaPWREuCk0I

 

Haha, that would be funny to see in, but frustrating to have it happen to you. 

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

I'm okay with realistic weapons but that doesn't mean an insensible weapon selection, you can pick weapon designs that are inherently balanced.

 

And by balanced i mean, weapons that have advantages and inconveniences that make the game interesting.

 

ex: double barreled shotgun?, revolver? yes please. belt fed m249 with 4x scope? Ughhh.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Lady Kyrah

[crypticsilence 7]

I'm okay with realistic weapons but that doesn't mean an insensible weapon selection, you can pick weapon designs that are inherently balanced.

 

And by balanced i mean, weapons that have advantages and inconveniences that make the game interesting.

 

ex: double barreled shotgun?, revolver? yes please. belt fed m249 with 4x scope? Ughhh.

 

 

Haha, but you balance the game by making those types of things really rare.

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Haha, but you balance the game by making those types of things really rare.

Or non existent really, i have a lot of trouble imagining m249 wielding maniacs in a non military setting. And i'm not counting gun shows because that's not exactly a good rendition of a zombie apocalypse/shit hit the fan setting.

 

Also.. rare is a very difficult thing to assess, even things that where rare in the mod became stupidly common because people maximize their "chances" to find rare loot through loot cycling, server hopping, and player killing. A good gun never really disappear once it has been looted from the RNG.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Lady Kyrah

[crypticsilence 7]

Or non existent really, i have a lot of trouble imagining m249 wielding maniacs in a non military setting. And i'm not counting gun shows because that's not exactly a good rendition of a zombie apocalypse/shit hit the fan setting.

 

Also.. rare is a very difficult thing to assess, even things that where rare in the mod became stupidly common because people maximize their "chances" to find rare loot through loot cycling, server hopping, and player killing. A good gun never really disappear once it has been looted from the RNG.

 

With all the military bases, there would probably be MORE heavy weapons than already in the game, so on a realistic level I would disagree with you slightly. However, the light machine guns from my experience were nothing compared to the sniper rifles, and how super effective they are. My only concern with taking out high tier weapons, is why? The whole point of the game is to find exciting and fun pieces of equipment, you can get helicopters and fly them around with no training, you can drive complicated vehicles such as tanks or APCs (I think this was only in some mods of DayZ Mod... modception), fly planes, etc. I personally would hate to see high tier weaponry go away.

[badpr1m3r 49]

Please tell me what the hell you all know about realism anyhow?  How many fire fights have you been in?  How many times have you been shot at with the intent to kill?  Ever tried to hit jack shit when your adrenaline is through the roof and your legs are wobbling like noodles?  Blowing smoke out your ass is all this thread is. You have an "idea" of what you think realism is.  Its a video game.  Take it for what it is.    

[ob1 5]

If they just went back to stock Arma 2 weapon ballistics, MOA accuracy and effectiveness I would be happy....