Can people stop saying...

[UltimateGentleman 355]

That the devs don't want realism and that they want authenticity?

 

 

They are the exact same freaking thing, I've seen huge arguments over this and had so many people say it to me and it's just so stupid...

 

Maybe the devs said authenticity once but that's just the word they used it means pretty much the same thing as realism.

 

Realism: the quality or fact of representing a person or thing in a way that is accurate and true to life.

 

Authentic: of undisputed origin and not a copy; genuine.

 

 

The game tries to be genuine like real life, oh what's that? "true to life" in the realism definition.

Golly, I guess they do mean the same thing.

 

Now stop saying that stupid non argument and learn some words.

 

Thank you.

 

[archamedes 238]

playstation is better

 

no xbox is better

 

no pc is better it programs all games on all platforms and has evolving technology

 

but xbox is better

Edited July 21, 2014 by archamedes

[NuckFuts 265]

I expected; from the topic title alone, upon clicking the link to be reading..

 

Can people stop saying... Alpha :)

[archamedes 238]

or "not sure if anyone has asked, but when are cars and base building coming into the game."

[DeatHTaX 1217]

playstation is better

 

no xbox is better

 

no pc is better it programs all games on all platforms and has evolving technology

 

but xbox is better

 

 Thank you for engaging in the discussion lol :P

 

 

 

To be honest, I don't even really know what someone means when they say the devs want DayZ to be "Authentic"....I mean by definition of the word the game is already "Authentic" because it's not a cheap knock-off of itself. :/

Edited July 21, 2014 by DeatHTaX

[SmashT 10907]

Well Rocket did explain what he considered to be the difference between realism and authenticity, and his preference for the latter at GDC last year. You can listen to his talk here.
 
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/24zwgvv02xf4i2p/GDC13-DesigningDayZ.mp3
 
 

The idea with DayZ was to put the players in a situation. And this is something I delved a lot into when I was working with the army. So if we take the example of, if you broke your leg in DayZ, and you have to use morphine before you can walk--now that’s absurd, that’s not realistic at all. Unless you’re like, I don’t know, Chuck Norris or something. And then the morphine needle would break on his leg. So it’s not realistic in that sense. But because the act of getting your leg broken causes a change in the situation that’s quite dramatic, it has a sense of authenticity to the people involved.

 

What I found was, when soldiers would do a scenario, they’d get shot and die, but they’d carry on with the mission, which is ridiculous. In the army, if someone gets injured, everything stops. And your mission becomes then recovering that person--even if they die, recovering their body. So when I introduced this health system I noticed that the soldiers completely changed in the way they played the game. And some of the most compelling experiences I get out of that was when it went bad, and the team rallied, and actually started putting down covering fire and getting supplies in and evacuating people. And that translated through to DayZ. I think it’s using those authentic experiences to generate the experience, rather than the realism. To be honest, there’s a lot about DayZ that isn’t realistic at all. But I think that it’s that authenticity that provides an emotional context

Also this interview with Bikeman:
http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/138121-bikeman-june-2013-interviewlivestream-with-rocket/
 

Are you considering a stamina system, I hate to mention WarZ because the whole game is garbage but that is the worst having to wait for your stamina to build up, I think they were trying to make the maps feel larger?

 

We have our burst sprinting which doesn't last very long but you can still run around and there is no attention of having stamina. I think a lot of games worry too much about realism and it takes away from the authenticity and I think stamina is one of those things. I think the way we will do it is looking at complex health effect, so if you run around and use a lot of energy you are going to get cold and malnutrition having medium term health problems rather then your stamina running out, so as long as your diet doesn't consist of energy bars and pepsi you are alright.

 

What kind of weapons are you planning?

All items and weapons are being redone, everything. One of our external artists did a lot of work on Grand Theft Auto and was quite a score for us. I'll just open the spreadsheet, we have got bolt action rifles, semi-auto hunting rifles, military style rifles, ruger, remmington shotguns, mauser, mosin-nagant. There is quite a lot of bolt action rifles, there is quite a bit of a mix, there is a lot of stuff you would expect in a Eastearn European country but we have also added in some military weapons like the m4a1. We aren't aiming for realism, we are aiming for authenticity so we make a few concessions, you might find a few scopes that fit quite a few weapons instead of one specific weapon.

[over9000nukez 199]

will people stop saying...

"I killed a *bandit*"

 

 

[Etherimp 1323]

I think it's pretty clear what the difference between authentic and "realistic" is.. Realistic pertains to reality - The natural world. There are no zombies in the natural world, but if there were, you could represent them in an "authentic" way.. A way which abides by the laws of physics.

 

Ever seen the movie "Event Horizon"? A faster-than-light drive which opens a black hole, and that black hole happens to be a portal to hell? Totally unrealistic.. But done in an authentic way which made it scary as fuck.

[Evil Minion 943]

That the devs don't want realism and that they want authenticity?

Thats actually a stock argument for everyone who doesn't want the game to be realistic. Face it: realism adds challenge and depth while excluding some luxury features. Not everyone wants this, even though it would make the game better (imo).

 

However, its still a game and there will be breaks from reality for technical (a 100% accurate ecosystem), censorship (gore and sexual content), setting (we do have zombies, right?) and gameplay (having to sleep ingame) reasons. Thats the intended "authenticity". Still I would like an "as much realism as possible" approach especially when it benefits the game in general (like realistic gun ballistics, damage and recoil).

[terminal_boy 860]

I expected; from the topic title alone, upon clicking the link to be reading..

 

Can people stop saying... Alpha :)

 

They'll be saying Beta instead to excuse the same bugs/lack of features come 2015...

[DeatHTaX 1217]

Thats actually a stock argument for everyone who doesn't want the game to be realistic. Face it: realism adds challenge and depth while excluding some luxury features. Not everyone wants this, even though it would make the game better (imo).

 

However, its still a game and there will be breaks from reality for technical (a 100% accurate ecosystem), censorship (gore and sexual content), setting (we do have zombies, right?) and gameplay (having to sleep ingame) reasons. Thats the intended "authenticity". Still I would like an "as much realism as possible" approach especially when it benefits the game in general (like realistic gun ballistics, damage and recoil).

 

Well to a certain extent even =- I -= don't want the game to be completely realistic, because let's be honest, there are some things that if we made this game 100% realistic, would really KILL gameplay. For example, stamina would make getting anywhere one hell of a task. And i'm sorry, but my idea of fun is not spending an hour to travel 2km. Don't try to tell me you can sprint non-stop cross country with a full backack, gun, gear, good, etc without getting tired lol. 

 

Just an example, but the Devs have to create a fine line between what is good for gameplay and what is good for realism.

[NuckFuts 265]

They'll be saying Beta instead to excuse the same bugs/lack of features come 2015...

 

Indeed they will...  

[DeatHTaX 1217]

They'll be saying Beta instead to excuse the same bugs/lack of features come 2015...

 

looooool

 

win

[archamedes 238]

I'm actually expecting this time next year when we finally do get cars (im assuming) you will get people then moaning that they keep getting run over by players and just want to find servers without cars.

 

Enter picard facepalm pic here

[pilgrim* 3514]

I think it's pretty clear what the difference between authentic and "realistic" is.

..//..an "authentic" way.. A way which abides by the laws of physics.

Ever seen the movie "Event Horizon"? A faster-than-light drive which opens a black hole..//.. done in an "authentic" way..[ A way which abides by the laws of physics]

 

well - (anyway) we all agree it does not have to be realistic to be authentic

whatever definitions are used, we can understand what Rocket's getting at.

Edited July 21, 2014 by pilgrim

[Evil Minion 943]

For example, stamina would make getting anywhere one hell of a task. And i'm sorry, but my idea of fun is not spending an hour to travel 2km.

I get what you are saying but those features can be included to a reasonable amount. Example leg-breaking: instead of waiting for ingame days or weeks until your leg grows together its instantly fixed with a morphine injection or a split -> better for gameplay. People sprinting around all the time because there is virtually no reason to move in a different pace is not. I would like a tradeoff between speed, the amount you can carry and combat ability - just like in real life. As long as it isn't overdone and you can still travel around in reasonable speed (or the need to travel is low enough that its not a great loss) its actually better to have it.

[DeatHTaX 1217]

I get what you are saying but those features can be included to a reasonable amount. Example leg-breaking: instead of waiting for ingame days or weeks until your leg grows together its instantly fixed with a morphine injection or a split -> better for gameplay. People sprinting around all the time because there is virtually no reason to move in a different pace is not. I would like a tradeoff between speed, the amount you can carry and combat ability - just like in real life. As long as it isn't overdone and you can still travel around in reasonable speed (or the need to travel is low enough that its not a great loss) its actually better to have it.

 

exactly. To a reasonable amount. The "unreasonable" amount you're referring to is what's called realism :P I think you don't realize that we agree to a great extent lol

[pillock 850]

Well to a certain extent even =- I -= don't want the game to be completely realistic, because let's be honest, there are some things that if we made this game 100% realistic, would really KILL gameplay. For example, stamina would make getting anywhere one hell of a task. And i'm sorry, but my idea of fun is not spending an hour to travel 2km. Don't try to tell me you can sprint non-stop cross country with a full backack, gun, gear, good, etc without getting tired lol. 

 

Just an example, but the Devs have to create a fine line between what is good for gameplay and what is good for realism.

 

 

I think the game needs to feel realistic, intuitively, even if some elements of it are toned down for the sake of "fun". Being able to jog and sprint for unlimited distances without any penalty just feels wrong to me. So does being shot several times and still being able to run around as if nothing happened.

 

There's no good reason why the game should allow players to traverse the entire map in a single, short play-session, just because "it would be annoying to meet up with friends otherwise". Forcing us to spend more time in a single portion of the map, and making long journeys into a real mission/adventure is something that adds to the fun, not detracts from it.

 

Similarly, stamina affecting your ability to carry heavy equipment would add to the enjoyment. It would give you more decisions to make, give much more variety to the lives of your character and between the lives of different players. Complicated (not necessarily ultra-realistic) medical, health, injury mechanics add to this variety to scope for different play methods. Having weather and terrain affect your character more adds to the experience, adds to the fun.

 

The assumption, when deciding whether or not some new feature would be too realistic in order to maintain fun gameplay, should be that, actually, it would not be. Start with the game being as realistic (and therefore potentially very difficult) as possible, and then tone it down if it's proving to be annoying, rather than starting with the assumption that realism will be bad, and then under-cook the authenticity.

Edited July 21, 2014 by Pillock

[archamedes 238]

to be an authentic and realistic zombbie apocalypse survival situation, you wouldn't have people killing all the last remaining survivors of humanity and camping out on a hill snipering people either. Sure you would get mugged, beaten and raped when the fall of law and order kicks in but thats just down to the players really

[DeatHTaX 1217]

I think the game needs to feel realistic, intuitively, even if some elements of it are toned down for the sake of "fun". Being able to jog and sprint for unlimited distances without any penalty just feels wrong to me. So does being shot several times and still being able to run around as if nothing happened.

 

There's no good reason why the game should allow players to traverse the entire map in a single, short play-session, just because "it would be annoying to meet up with friends otherwise". Forcing us to spend more time in a single portion of the map, and making long journeys into a real mission/adventure is something that adds to the fun, not detracts from it.

 

Similarly, stamina affecting your ability to carry heavy equipment would add to the enjoyment. It would give you more decisions to make, give much more variety to the lives of your character and between the lives of different players. Complicated (not necessarily ultra-realistic) medical, health, injury mechanics add to this variety to scope for different play methods. Having weather and terrain affect your character more adds to the experience, adds to the fun.

 

The assumption, when deciding whether or not some new feature would be too realistic in order to maintain fun gameplay, should be that, actually, it would not be. Start with the game being as realistic (and therefore potentially very difficult) as possible, and then tone it down if it's proving to be annoying, rather than starting with the assumption that realism will be bad, and then under-cook the authenticity.

 

I completely agree, however, the issue is balancing what is still fun for gameplay, and what is still challenging at the same time. I am not for an "easy mode". I think it's ridiculous as well that I can run for extended distances, but I don't want my player to be "realistic" in the sense that he has to stop, put his hand up to the camera (or whatever) and tell me intermittently between pants that he needs a minute, sits down, drinks some water, takes his shoes off and rubs his feet, then takes a nap.

 

See what I'm saying? lol :D

[Evil Minion 943]

Higher amounts of realism are probably something that could be considered for hardcore mode. However, I would like to decouple "first person only" because there might be more fans of this particular part of realism.

 

Heck - if it was for me I would make the whole game - or at least the majority of it - first person only:

 

Easy: 3rd person allowed + downscaled realism

Regular: 1st person only + downscaled realism

Hardcore: 1st person only + less* downscaled realism

 

*Think of the broken legs.

[pillock 850]

I completely agree, however, the issue is balancing what is still fun for gameplay, and what is still challenging at the same time. I am not for an "easy mode". I think it's ridiculous as well that I can run for extended distances, but I don't want my player to be "realistic" in the sense that he has to stop, put his hand up to the camera (or whatever) and tell me intermittently between pants that he needs a minute, sits down, drinks some water, takes his shoes off and rubs his feet, then takes a nap.

 

See what I'm saying? lol :D

 

 

No. The game shouldn't force you to do nothing in order to recover from something like exhaustion, injury or sickness. But it should force you to play differently.

 

I believe a more detailed set of animations are on the way that show to a better extent what a character's status is (limping and such) - I'd really like to see them go to town with this. So, you might see someone who's shattered from running, malnourished and bleeding, stumbling about desperately in the rain, trying to find food, shelter, medicine or help. This would give other players a visual indication of the potential threat of someone they come across, and lead to far more likely and interesting player-to-player interactions.

 

New spawn bambis should be weaker than hardened, long-lasted survivors, and their body language (ie. animated movement) should show it, ideally. Surviving should be difficult and punishing - not because "it's realistic", but because it adds depth to the gameplay and makes DayZ better than the competition.

[Parazight 1599]

There are too many words in the English language!!!!   We need to eliminate 30% of them!!!  STAT!!!

[Etherimp 1323]

Higher amounts of realism are probably something that could be considered for hardcore mode. However, I would like to decouple "first person only" because there might be more fans of this particular part of realism.

 

Heck - if it was for me I would make the whole game - or at least the majority of it - first person only:

 

Easy: 3rd person allowed + downscaled realism

Regular: 1st person only + downscaled realism

Hardcore: 1st person only + less* downscaled realism

 

*Think of the broken legs.

 

 

I'm not one of the "1st person only" people... most of my game time is spent on 3rd person servers, but I think they should just make the game completely 1st person while on foot. I would however appreciate a 3rd person camera while inside vehicles. Driving vehicles and flying choppers in 1st person is fucking painful. I think BF3 demonstrated this well.. there was no 3rd person for infantry, but was for heli's/tanks/etc.

[scriptfactory 620]

Higher amounts of realism are probably something that could be considered for hardcore mode. However, I would like to decouple "first person only" because there might be more fans of this particular part of realism.

 

Heck - if it was for me I would make the whole game - or at least the majority of it - first person only:

 

Easy: 3rd person allowed + downscaled realism

Regular: 1st person only + downscaled realism

Hardcore: 1st person only + less* downscaled realism

 

*Think of the broken legs.

 

Game mode should specify a set the actual difficulty of the game mechanics (e.g. easier to get sick, less health, less loot and harder zombies on Hardcore mode). Server admins should also be able to change these settings (including 3PP/1PP on/off) in a Custom mode.