Ultra realism Vs Balanced game design

[Diggydug (DayZ) 331]

  Quote

To really break (as in, bone snapped) both legs, it takes a little more effort than just falling down a small stair and a huge amount of really bad luck. Usually you'll sprain something or may have a small bone fracture. In game, you could limp for some time depending on treatment maybe? :)

Otherwise, Morphine affects pain and unless really specific, a broken leg can still support some weight usually. You could potentially shoot up morphine to ignore such pain and therefore walk somewhat, but pain is quite often there to indicate that there is a problem and ignoring that can lead to much serious problems.

 

In the early mod, I actually did crawl one night for bit more than two hours because of a broken leg before I could find morphine. Let me tell you, playing at night, crawling through tons of zombies with flashlight/chemlights is...frikkin scary :)

If we want to argue realism, it's not all that hard to break an ankle if your foot gets caught on those barn steps as you fall. Or when vehicles are added and you accidentally hit a tree. Compound fracture, bleeding out, can't walk, barely crawl, in shock and no doubt going to have an infection if you don't seek medical treatment.

If you do get all the proper treatment, it'll be over a month before you can walk. Two minimum before it's safe to run.

That's without the extra weight of gear to survive these conditions.

 

Suddenly realism is a chore, just like in the real world. You can't properly simulate the pain of that kind of injury even. In the game people will just keep crawling with that compound fracture, in the real world once the pain hits you're probably going to yell for help instead of trying to crawl to some hospital.

Which hits yet another issue. People do not behave realistically and you will never change that. Someone can yell for help, and even if yelling worked realistically someone would walk up, laugh at them, handcuff them, steal their shit, and force feed them disinfectant while teasing them.

 

No matter what you do, it's a game and there's a point where realism=/=immersion. It's a chore.

Edited January 8, 2014 by Diggydug

[kermo50 31]

  On 1/8/2014 at 11:45 AM, Greaves said:

Optional would be fine in my opinion. That way more people can have fun, without ruining it for others.

Maybe they could use "hardcore" servers for those who want this extra realism and challenge...

[Imbalanxd 59]

  On 1/8/2014 at 11:33 AM, DaGolem said:

A Good example is the First vs. Third Person view.

The UltraHardcoreRealism fanatic don´t want the Third person gameplay and they don´t want that player have a choice to play it.

 

This is behavior is exemplary for many things in the entire suggestion Threads!

If they don´t want something then they try to destroy it, not a optional, only destroy.

No matter what, it can be optional but NO! They don´t want they try to kill idea´s.

 

That would be like making the AS50 in the mod an optional weapon, rather than removing it.

 

Sure, it means people can use it if they want to, and others can choose not to use it, but that isn't really an option, since you MUST use it if you wish to compete.

Playing with the option of third person is plain superior to playing without it. If others have third person, you MUST use it at times, otherwise you will be beaten time and time again.

[ratiasu@hotmail.co.jp 122]

  On 1/8/2014 at 12:07 PM, kermo50 said:

Maybe they could use "hardcore" servers for those who want this extra realism and challenge...

No, DayZ is supposed to be hard. Maybe they should make "softcore" servers instead. So at least the softies know they are the weird ones, not us for liking it the normal "hard" way.

 

 

 

 

 

  On 1/8/2014 at 12:14 PM, Imbalanxd said:

That would be like making the AS50 in the mod an optional weapon, rather than removing it.

 

Sure, it means people can use it if they want to, and others can choose not to use it, but that isn't really an option, since you MUST use it if you wish to compete.

Playing with the option of third person is plain superior to playing without it. If others have third person, you MUST use it at times, otherwise you will be beaten time and time again.

 

Not true at all. The DMR was better than the AS50, yet it never got removed.

Edited January 8, 2014 by Ratiasu

[kermo50 31]

  On 1/8/2014 at 12:14 PM, Imbalanxd said:

That would be like making the AS50 in the mod an optional weapon, rather than removing it.

Sure, it means people can use it if they want to, and others can choose not to use it, but that isn't really an option, since you MUST use it if you wish to compete.

Playing with the option of third person is plain superior to playing without it. If others have third person, you MUST use it at times, otherwise you will be beaten time and time again.

There are currently servers that only allow first person. I think this May have been what he was referring to?

[Diggydug (DayZ) 331]

  On 1/8/2014 at 12:14 PM, Imbalanxd said:

That would be like making the AS50 in the mod an optional weapon, rather than removing it.

 

Sure, it means people can use it if they want to, and others can choose not to use it, but that isn't really an option, since you MUST use it if you wish to compete.

Playing with the option of third person is plain superior to playing without it. If others have third person, you MUST use it at times, otherwise you will be beaten time and time again.

 

I think he means how the same people tend to go around shooting ideas down in the name of "realism" and basically saying it should never exist in any form and refuse to look at anything but realism. I don't agree with everything being optional myself, but with certain things, like first person, you can have them restricted on servers, and I think that's what he means there.

So first person players can play on servers knowing that everyone else on that server is also in first person.

 

Everyone has their own idea of what the perfect DayZ is and many want everyone to play their perfect DayZ and ignore what other's believe to be the best DayZ.

[wild_man 4442]

have resolve to make dayz UNIQUE UNFORGIVE BRUTAL SURVIVE EXPERIENCE ;)

 

have strength of purpose to make dayz unique game NO COMPROMISE FOR COWARDS AND LAZY GUYS >:(

 

have courage for make dayz worlds #1 gaming challenge for hardcore bad ass mofo's 

 

make dayz game we proud to say 'I play dayz'  B)

[floj 393]

  On 1/8/2014 at 9:52 AM, kermo50 said:

Here is my attempt to give one example sacrificing realism for balance.

 

Ok at the moment there are 3 bags available in the standalone, a small brightly colored civilian backpack (smallest), a large colored hikers pack (largest), and a hunters backpack which is earthy colored (medium). The lets leave the first bag out as it arguably the least desirable bright, stands out and has the least room.

But the smaller profile of the normal civvy one makes it easier to see behind you if you're thinking in realism terms...or I guess you can just play in 3PP EZmode and ignore that aspect.

 

  On 1/8/2014 at 8:49 AM, HCHellCaptain said:

"balance" is the ugliest word in the English language when applied to video games. 

 

It has no place at all being applied to something like DayZ, which specifically aspires to be something different. 

For me I think balance should be attained at a PVE level. Zombies vs you. It should be difficult but not impossible to raid the large towns, it should probably require a group or incredible stealth skills to do safely. You should be able to make it from one town to another without having to drink 10x canteens of water or eat a whole backpack of beans but crossing the whole map, you'll need to restock somewhat. You shouldn't be able to fill your backpack with goodies from a 5minute jaunt through town, but also you shouldn't have to spend hours finding a can of beans and nothing to open it with. Balanced.

[KeyaKev 12]

Everyone's idea of the perfect "zombie realism" game is one where you can not be killed by other players. DayZ is THAT game right now. You kids just need to suck it up when you die, it happens. If DayZ was a PvE only game they wouldn't have even bothered with finishing Alpha from the lack of sales.

 

Anyone who thinks KoS isn't apart of realism and is whinging for an answer to get it toned down - you can't say that if this was real life and you felt threatened by another person you wouldn't shoot. Kill or be killed.

Edited January 8, 2014 by KeyaKev

[floj 393]

I have no issue with pvp on top of that :D Was just trying to clarify waht balance means in game design

[Mutonizer 78]

  On 1/8/2014 at 12:06 PM, Diggydug said:

 

 

 

If we want to argue realism, it's not all that hard to break an ankle if your foot gets caught on those barn steps as you fall. Or when vehicles are added and you accidentally hit a tree. Compound fracture, bleeding out, can't walk, barely crawl, in shock and no doubt going to have an infection if you don't seek medical treatment.

If you do get all the proper treatment, it'll be over a month before you can walk. Two minimum before it's safe to run.

That's without the extra weight of gear to survive these conditions.

 

Suddenly realism is a chore, just like in the real world. You can't properly simulate the pain of that kind of injury even. In the game people will just keep crawling with that compound fracture, in the real world once the pain hits you're probably going to yell for help instead of trying to crawl to some hospital.

Which hits yet another issue. People do not behave realistically and you will never change that. Someone can yell for help, and even if yelling worked realistically someone would walk up, laugh at them, handcuff them, steal their shit, and force feed them disinfectant while teasing them.

 

No matter what you do, it's a game and there's a point where realism=/=immersion. It's a chore.

 

 

The goal here is not to reach "perfect realism", nobody's stupid enough to think that'll ever happen.

The goal is to aim toward it as much as possible, so that when the "game" part comes in (because as you said, in the end, it's a game), the compromise will be more toward the initial goal and less toward making it "gamey".

 

If during game design you plan for "let's try to get it as realistic and authentic as possible", then all your final game-play decisions will factor that. If you start by saying "this is just a game, let's forget realism", you end up with Health Boost appearing after killing a zombie, perma-sprint, etc.

 

As for DayZ, I want that compromise to be so hardcore that yes, sometimes it's a chore. Playing at night in DayZ is a chore but it's also AWESOME. Having a broken leg is a chore, but the experience it offers is also awesome. 

 

There are tons of games out there already about "survival & zombies", none really catch my attention because they mean nothing, have no "soul" (whatever that means), no balls. Could play most of these games barely paying attention. DayZ IMMEDIATELY caught me, I'll always remember that first connection, during night time, completely unable to see anything apart from that flare light. I was like: "wow, this is crazy!" and spent the next two hours laughing nervously while trying to sneak between zombies and whatnot while staring at a near pitch black screen.

 

And that's pretty much it overall. I don't really want DayZ to become just some random FPS game with zombies, I want it to be an experience that bitch-slaps me so hard every-time I make a mistake that I'll want to punch through the wall, that grips me so tight that I keep a light on when playing just so that I don't get a heart attack.

Never gonna happen of course, but setting achievable goals is for crybabies and that's why I say: go nuts, I'll try to cope!

Edited January 8, 2014 by Mutonizer

[cataclyststa 8]

Ultra realism? We are talking about a zombies aren't we?

[Ozar 108]

i am for ultra realism.

 

making a game balanced means that you develope that game for PvP. Thats not what Dayz is meant to be.

 

Games where you play a 1vs1 or a 3vs3 , like SC2, that needs to be balanced.

 

in Dayz u try to stay alive and then comes a group with 5 players, there cant be anything balanced.

[Mutonizer 78]

  On 1/8/2014 at 2:33 PM, cataclyststa said:

Ultra realism? We are talking about a zombies aren't we?

 

Realism within a given context, which can itself be totally fantasy. Some call it authenticity.

[capt. beefsteak 95]

I like real, but the top speed of running is something like 30-40 mph, i mean the dude hauls ass ... real is real, the game does have some handicap already fellas.. He run's a 4 k in 4 mins and takes a few deep breaths lol..

 

EDIT: that translates to 37mph @ 4k in 4 mins, i would like to see shoes wear faster lmao..

Edited January 8, 2014 by Deepfryer

[soulfirez 901]

  On 1/8/2014 at 2:49 PM, Mutonizer said:

Realism within a given context, which can itself be totally fantasy. Some call it authenticity.

and thats what Rocket calls it authentic not realistic beans for you lol

[bfisher 561]

Why do people think that a game like DayZ doesn't require "balance"?  Balance doesn't necessarily mean that everything is "rock/paper/M4A1" where every "weapon" or "class" has a counter.

 

It means finding the right combination of difficulty and fun.

 

Did people like it in the Mod when every jerkoff hacker had an AS-50?  No.  One long range sniper creates an interesting challenge.  EVERYONE having an anti-material rifle (except for clueless new spawns) changes the game dynamic to a constant sniper duel.  It's not balanced because it only allows one style of play in what is supposed to be an open-world sandbox.

 

People may disagree, but I think the 24 day/night cycle is also bad game balance.  It's "realistic", but I'm not freakin playing this game for days at a stretch.  Why do I need the game to follow the same cycle as in real life?  GTA, Far Cry, Fallout, Minecraft and nearly every other open-world environment game out there manages to create an accelerated day night that "feels" realistic in the gameplay world. 

 

 

 

  On 1/8/2014 at 2:40 PM, Ozar said:

i am for ultra realism.

 

making a game balanced means that you develope that game for PvP. Thats not what Dayz is meant to be.

 

Games where you play a 1vs1 or a 3vs3 , like SC2, that needs to be balanced.

 

in Dayz u try to stay alive and then comes a group with 5 players, there cant be anything balanced.

 

"Balanced" doesn't mean creating a Call of Duty or Battlefield style "Rock / Paper / M4A1 / Airstrike".  "Balanced" means the game supports a wide variety of play styles.  If the game is flooded with AS-50 anti-material rifles (like the Mod was at one point), that's not balanced.  It turns the game into a massive sniper duel at a thousand yards.  Balance would be if you want to play with an AS-50, you can (if you find one), but you also have to suffer the drawbacks.  You have to lug a 35 lb weapon around, requiring you to eat and drink more.  You make a shit ton of noise when you fire it, attracting every zombie for a mile.  Stuff like that.

 

I want "realistic" in that thinks are intuitive.  Falling off a barn roof hurts.  Eating spoiled fruit makes you sick.  Getting shot fucks your shit up bad.  It takes time to heal.  Not eating, drinking or staying warm makes you weaker and eventually kills you.  Running long distances makes you tired. 

 

I don't want realistic in that everything is in real time.  Otherwise it would take a month of real game time to starve and nearly every injury would be fatal.

[korpisoturi (DayZ) 127]

If this would be ultra-realistic, it wouldn't be fun, it would be overly complicated and suck ass. In-between or gameplay.

Edited January 8, 2014 by korpisoturi

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

No surprise, everyone voting for "ultra realism" without a single thought for what that would actually mean in the game.

 

The answer is obviously "somewhere in between." That's what the game is and that's how it will remain so it's actually playable.

 

Not only would "ultra realism" create a completely unplayable mess of impossibly frustrating mechanics, it would take like 8 years to create. People need to stop and think about what they're asking for.

[Mao Zedong 48]

For everyone that voted Ultrarealism... I better hope you support .50 cals because those ARE real weapons... and they are very much apart of the world we live in. Food for thought.

[soulfirez 901]

Ok its one of those days its the second time i have agreed completely with zed (and already voted it) i must be going soft in my old age..

[stealth_katsu 26]

  On 1/8/2014 at 8:59 AM, HCHellCaptain said:

Oh but you should, and hopefully will. 

 

Then you could force feed other players...wait..nvm.

[blurhitz 244]

If they are really thinking in creating "ultra realism", well, good luck entering in beta stage after 15 years.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

  On 1/8/2014 at 5:18 PM, Mao Zedong said:

For everyone that voted Ultrarealism... I better hope you support .50 cals because those ARE real weapons... and they are very much apart of the world we live in. Food for thought.

 

No, it's ultra realism. There would be basically zero guns. None at all anywhere, ever. If there were guns, they certainly would not "re-spawn" so only the first players to get them would ever have them, and once those ones break they would be gone forever. We would basically be running around throwing rocks at each other and poking each other with sharpened sticks or pieces of old rusty metal (and KoS would still be a "major problem").

 

No zombie re-spawns, no loot re-spawns, no food or animal re-spawns, no medical supply re-spawns. Most standing water and wells would give you Legionnaire's Disease and then you would basically die from a week-long bout of screaming diarrhea. Broken limbs would take months to heal, in which time you would surely die of starvation while lying on the ground crying like a child or hold up in a bed where your friends left you because they're sure as hell not going to hang around your bedside patting you with damp cloths and singing you songs. You would no longer be magically immune to the pandemic, so most of your survivor stories would end about 12 hours post spawn where you just cough a few times and then turn into a zombie.

 

This isn't to talk about all the necessary missing mechanics like planting and watering crops, shitting and pissing, having sex and making babies (no more player respawns, you actually have to give birth to new players and wait for them to grow up).

 

etc., etc., etc.

 

Again, people asking for "ultra realism" are just trying to sound hardcore. It's a stupid suggestion and the game would be stupid.

Edited January 8, 2014 by ZedsDeadBaby

[Ozar 108]

@ZedsDeadBaby - zed is dead. (i love this movie)

i understood what you said - BUT :)

 

  Quote

 

No zombie re-spawns, no loot re-spawns, no food or animal re-spawns, no medical supply re-spawns. Most standing water and wells would give you Legionnaire's Disease and then you would basically die from a week-long bout of screaming diarrhea. Broken limbs would take months to heal, in which time you would surely die of starvation while lying on the ground crying like a child. You would no longer be magically immune to the pandemic, so most of your survivor stories would end about 12 hours post spawn where you just cough a few times and then turn into a zombie.

 

man, you have my beans. i am totally with you - BUT:

 

i wish some points would be in this game. I am absolutely against respawn of loot what so ever.

i was with you when you talked about the diseases and i hoped it would be in the game BUT:

i dont have so much time to play on my PC so my opinion is that is was right to make the "Cure-Duration" shorter. because you still wanna play a game right.

 

I even think if some points would be in the game the cooperation and interacting of players would increase - and i would love to see that.

Edited January 8, 2014 by Ozar