The theory of everything

[Vattenlarv 81]

Woah, I was not expecting this much action. Just a tad bit derailed here and there, but I have been guilty of doing the same to other threads, so fair play I guess. 

 

On 2017-06-21 at 10:13 AM, Lexman61 said:

With all due respect, but some people clearly take an over intellectualized approach to DayZ. We are after all playing a video game, not a survival simulator for National Guard officers or CIA special OPS teams to realistically train in a post apocalypse civilian scenario. Nor should this game become a Ph.D dissertation in sociology or psychology for a few players who wish to recreate in their mind what is not, and never will be, a real life situation on a screen monitor.

There is an underlying patronizing attitude in the idea that there is a right and wrong way to play DayZ. That players should be "forced" by the game itself to play in a certain way, or obliged to follow the unwritten dogmas that some players promote to be the only "true" manner in which to enjoy DayZ, is completely unacceptable!

The kid coming from COD, the KOS only player or the asocial lone wolf sniper have the same right to play and enjoy the game in any way that they see fit on par with crop breeders, socially minded super interactive persons, ethical bandits and the "I-forgot-this-is-only-a-videogame types". The concept of trying to "weed out" some player types according to your own play style and behavioral preferences is just the opposite of what a videogame should be. I play DayZ for my personal enjoyment, not to please or conform to somebody else's play style, ethical, or philosophical "standards". If this is a problem for somebody too bad. 

DayZ is not and should not be like a game of chess with fixed and unchangeable rules to obey. 

 

I understand how I can come off as an elitist cunt at times, as I am very strong in my convictions. But please trust me when I say that I do not wish to force players out of the game, so only me and people like me can play the game in peace. That is not at all what I am trying to say. 

 

On 2017-06-20 at 1:36 PM, Vattenlarv said:

If DayZ players were forced, by the game itself, to do everything more cautiously and tactically due to increased "realism" and "difficulty" (increased in the way this thread is suggesting), the short attention span teenagers and other players that do not fit into the supposedly gritty world of Dayz would stop playing the game. They would neither have the patience or cognitive skill to survive as they could no longer sprint all over the map looking for tactical bacon, or make favorable tactical decisions in a game that does not allow them to use the same combat tactics as they do in GTA 5 online. 

 

My rhetoric can at times be very fingerpointing, I know. I shouldn't have used those exact words, and I am glad someone corrected me for doing so. 

I have made attempts to convince the masses of my beliefs in the past. Not only in the DayZ forums, but also in other early access games forums where I have felt a slower paced game, with an "everything is OP"-model in place, and more realistic player movement, would've enhanced the experience for everybody. When I do so, I am often met and "downvoted into oblivion" with similar arguments as yours, Lexman61. No one wants to be told how to play a game, and the game shouldn't restrict you from playing the game your way. Especially not DayZ. 

Slowing down player movement, plus a fair amount of inertia, weight penalty and a somewhat realistic stamina system would not restrict anyone from playing the game the way they want to. IMO it would only add more suspense and tension, appreciation for the world of Chernarus (as you would not be able to just sprint past everything), and more justifiable kills and deaths whether you are the psycho screwdriver bambi or not. In a slowed down DayZ a psycho screwdriver killer would actually be a terrifying idea, as it would be much more unlikely. It would be so humiliating to be mauled by a screwdriver, when you're carrying a repeater and a side arm, that the idea of such a thing would haunt you as you're making your way through Elektro. At the current state of the game, the probability of death by screwdriver is unrealistically high, and therefore nothing but frustrating (what I think Kirov was trying to point out with his tea bagging metaphor).

I know it's a game, and I don't want it to be anything else. I just want it to be the best game it can be, and I think player movement is the missing ingredient that would turn the cheese and ham sandwich in to a 5 course dinner. That is all I am trying to say really, but it feels like sometimes one has to go in to subatomic detail to get the point across. That is frustrating, and when I am frustrated I sometimes say stupid shit. I apologize. 

Edited June 22, 2017 by Vattenlarv

[Vattenlarv 81]

20 hours ago, larky2k said:

If this did happen in the real world. No one would KoS the first person they met. Cause realistically most people know Diddly squat on how to survive without their Iphones or Facebook. So the first thing someone would do is find someone with some Outdoors knowledge and try to make friends with them and help. This is one Humans do band together when things get tough and work it out to the end.

When I Play Dayz i rollplay the last pocket of a Military force depending on what Berets i find I play, Red = Paratrooper, Green = Royal Marine Commando, NZ Beret = New Zealand Defence force or the Chernarus Beret = Last local Military personnel.

I will go around try to help people by giving them food and Medical help (never lasts long) and go around cleaning out Villages of zeds to make them safe areas (I RP that it's safe). 

 

In my utopian vision of what I believe the suggested changes would do to DayZ, RP servers would not be necessary, server hopping would be more hazardous than rewarding, friendly samaritans would be considered legends, and true adventures would take place in Chernarus. Well administrated servers like, my one and only go to server when I still played, Oldschool DayZ Hardcore would have a world order, where Kunthammer and his raving lunatics would control the southern cities, and the peacekeepers would have to intervene when bambies report sinister laughter throughout the area, etc. 

This is what I am hoping for in DayZ. Not GTA 5 style combat or Pewdiepie type players everywhere.

But that's me, my wishes. I am not expecting anyone else to share them, even tho I wish I could convert a couple of non-beliebers out there. 

[Sqeezorz 839]

DayZ generally has far too few con sequences of your action. The world in DayZ is not an apocalypse. This is what makes everything possible, without the need to worry about other players. A stranger player is better when he is death, since everyone can do it all by himself with some tactics. Only when the world in Chernarus is hostile to you, only then will you be glad to meet another player just to have a chance to achieve something. It sounds like hardcore, but that's what it takes Tisy to reach. DayZ has to go as far as you need to think, whether you should take the SVD before you, or if you leave it, for fear to become a potential goal, just because you have an SVD. It needs sensitivity to decide what is good for you, or what harms you. The decisions of your action, with the consequences are simply missing at the moment.

I once said: The way you go, decides how long you live / survive.

[emuthreat 2837]

On 6/19/2017 at 6:27 AM, Vattenlarv said:

Players can live through powerful events and emotions arising from the ever-evolving emergent gameplay."

Had an interesting experience entering Stary after a beeline spawn run from the southeast last night:

I had just looted the firs row of cars in the parking lot approaching the town, and noticed a guy just a few meters to the north of the wall.  He was standing there aiming a rifle at me, so I ran over to hide behind the van and pulled out my ax as he approached with an AKS74u in hands.
I hailed him and said I noticed he was aiming at me earlier, and asked if he wanted to talk, etc. but he just ran up and said "hey buddy, don't worry I'm not gonna kill ya, what's your... bam..bam."

That was the most highly evolved emergent behavior I have seen in this game yet.  I mean, instead of meeting a friendly guy with two pots and a stove and no gun, this genius talks just long enough to easily kill a cooperative guy with nothing better than an ax.  The strategy was groundbreakingly emergent.
Not only does he get water storage and a free gas stove, but the widely envied joy of doing all that truly bitchin' gas findin', fishin'/huntin', pot cookin', and water carryin' all by himself.  Lucky bastard might be making himself a leather suit right now, for all I know; maybe he saw some poor schmuck carrying a barrel and lime.

Unfortunately for OP, there is not game element that can remove this basic aspect of online play: Other people, and their motivations for playing at that particular time.  Even if it's not a KOS, players will sometimes determine that they will kill everyone they see, even if they do say hi first.  It's RP KOS rules...
Certain measures might have an affect on the type and number of players who are attracted to the game.  In terms of increasing difficulty and time commitment for meaningful success in the game, this will filter the player behavior to some degree, but will greatly reduce population and interest if it's too much.
It's also worth noting that in that respect, the tuning of the game just becomes a balancing act of scarcity, risk, and reward; which adds little to the overall experience of the game.  Instead of balancing new realism systems too harshly to drive player behavior, I propose/rehash the idea of additional benefits to certain actions.

I would like to see a Morale system, not to be confused with morality, that would adjust player statistics based on comfort level, security, and confidence of the player at that time.
Things like eating hot meals, or even better, diverse meals of meats and vegetables and rice; eaten warm, while seated in player placed shelter; with friends who helped build the shelter, or fed and/or healed one another; and having all your guns fully loaded with your clothes in good repair and dryness; sitting in reclined position.
These little creature comforts would reward the player with faster digestion and more energy and hydration density in foods, a 66% blood regeneration buff, and a 50% health regeneration buff; healing bone damage after 5 minutes. Having all those conditions met will result in +100% shock damage and +50% shock regen.

Additional systems like having increased stamina from high morale can also be possible, to provide incentive for players who do loot runs to hunt and farm and rest up before venturing, so they can carry more for longer distances before becoming fatigued.  Sprinting too long could diminish the stamina buff, so players who are careful and budget their energy expenditures carefully can possibly keep this buff for days on end; so long as they never allow themselves to become hungry or thirsty, get injured in any way, or sprint for more than 3 minutes straight (or more than 4 minutes of any 5 minute period, possibly).

I really believe that the solution lies in an incentive system for desired player behaviors.  The way I see it, is that many of the players don't even know such basic things as cooking with pots in household fireplaces, or crafting leather clothing for extra storage, killing a chicken to make bone hook, turning guts into a rope, keeping multiple stones to make new knives after using it a few times, to keep meat cuts at above 90% quality.  There is already so much depth to this game that goes completely over the heads of much of the playerbase, because they have no real incentive to try these things.

Let's see how an incentive system works with driving player behavior.

[Kirov (DayZ) 585]

On 23.06.2017 at 8:09 AM, emuthreat said:

I had just looted the firs row of cars in the parking lot approaching the town, and noticed a guy just a few meters to the north of the wall.  He was standing there aiming a rifle at me, so I ran over to hide behind the van and pulled out my ax as he approached with an AKS74u in hands.
I hailed him and said I noticed he was aiming at me earlier, and asked if he wanted to talk, etc. but he just ran up and said "hey buddy, don't worry I'm not gonna kill ya, what's your... bam..bam."

I don't see why I (or the OP) should have any problem with the above situation. KOS is certainly a valid approach to some situations, for some people. The main issue here is that KOS-ing is cancerous, as KOSed players more often that not become KOS players. Hence, instead of enhancing the pallet of possible interactions, KOS only limits it. Some people (on this board) put the KOS figures at some 80% of DayZ interactions. Now, if it was say 20%, this would certainly lend to a sense of mortal danger in our Chernarus adventures. But at 80%, with much of it of the 'screwdriver-in-Bere' variety, it's obnoxious, boring, and yes - predictable.

 

On 23.06.2017 at 8:09 AM, emuthreat said:

Unfortunately for OP, there is not game element that can remove this basic aspect of online play: Other people, and their motivations for playing at that particular time.  Even if it's not a KOS, players will sometimes determine that they will kill everyone they see, even if they do say hi first.  It's RP KOS rules...

Certain measures might have an affect on the type and number of players who are attracted to the game.  In terms of increasing difficulty and time commitment for meaningful success in the game, this will filter the player behavior to some degree, but will greatly reduce population and interest if it's too much.
It's also worth noting that in that respect, the tuning of the game just becomes a balancing act of scarcity, risk, and reward; which adds little to the overall experience of the game.  Instead of balancing new realism systems too harshly to drive player behavior, I propose/rehash the idea of additional benefits to certain actions.

We have always to remember that Dayz, and actually any MMORG, does not and can never deliver a truly unbiased sandbox, an environment neutral to all possible gameplays chosen by players. You mention behaviour filters like they already weren't there. Just like any cuts of canned food would drive many players away, so conversely, right now many people simply refuse to play this current, actually slightly boring 'loot&die' simulator. I didn't buy Dayz out of the sentiment to the mod, I truly wanted a 'post-apoc gritty survival simulator', and fuck me if DayZ is anything of these. The availability of ammo, the way gorka jackets make you impervious to the environment (thus still allowing etc. to comfortably snipe in bad weather), the food spawn, the still somewhat lackluster crafting options - these are all heavy filters already applied on our gameplay. For a while I had some fun with ignoring spawned food and restricting myself to hunting/farming, until I realized that it can be kinda boring and utterly pointless. The current filters in place make DayZ strongly pro-KOS and somewhat discouraging PVE, or at least leaving it to maniacs. I refuse to believe that the current player base is optimum either in figures or in diversity. Actually, I think it's probably the contrary - each COD kid drives away more than one sensible player who'd really fit into the DayZ landscape and contribute more than giggling when saying 'titties'.

 

On 23.06.2017 at 8:09 AM, emuthreat said:

I really believe that the solution lies in an incentive system for desired player behaviors.  The way I see it, is that many of the players don't even know such basic things as cooking with pots in household fireplaces, or crafting leather clothing for extra storage, killing a chicken to make bone hook, turning guts into a rope, keeping multiple stones to make new knives after using it a few times, to keep meat cuts at above 90% quality.  There is already so much depth to this game that goes completely over the heads of much of the playerbase, because they have no real incentive to try these things.

Let's see how an incentive system works with driving player behavior.

I read about your morale idea before and I say you have my beans. I think the only way to entice players to explore the mechanics is to make it worthwhile. Adding more slots to crafther leather clothes was a step in a good direction, I'm sure it's not the last one.

 

There is also another layer of the PVP problem, and that is the strategy, as also pointed out by the OP. Fast A-D dancing beats situation awareness and taking advantageous positions. Usually I don't watch streams, but from what I've seen, people either camp sniper spots or do interpretive dancing. They are so super proud of their skills of chambering-a-pistol-and-doing-circles-around-the-guy that they don't even realize how ridiculous this looks like. And first of all, how this has nothing to do with... well, anything really. We can only try to guess the number of potential players who saw it, facepalmed and want nothing to do with DayZ.

 

 

[Vattenlarv 81]

On 6/23/2017 at 8:09 AM, emuthreat said:

Unfortunately for OP, there is not game element that can remove this basic aspect of online play: Other people, and their motivations for playing at that particular time.  Even if it's not a KOS, players will sometimes determine that they will kill everyone they see, even if they do say hi first.  It's RP KOS rules...
Certain measures might have an affect on the type and number of players who are attracted to the game.  In terms of increasing difficulty and time commitment for meaningful success in the game, this will filter the player behavior to some degree, but will greatly reduce population and interest if it's too much.
It's also worth noting that in that respect, the tuning of the game just becomes a balancing act of scarcity, risk, and reward; which adds little to the overall experience of the game.  Instead of balancing new realism systems too harshly to drive player behavior, I propose/rehash the idea of additional benefits to certain actions.

I think many of us, especially in the forums, have a distorted idea of what DayZ is, and what it can become. We have been playing the game, followed the development, fantasized and argued over the future of DayZ for so long, we can no longer truly empathize with what a new player, who is brand new to the entire concept of this "gritty and authentic, horror survival hybrid experience", actually experiences when he/she first spawns on the coast of Chernarus. 

Just look at how beautiful this game is now. Screenshots are at times worth printing and framing above your bed, and a gamer oblivious of DayZ (the do exist believe it or not) wouldn't think twice of it.

We are concerned about lack of content. I am not sure when I actually played last, but it was a long time ago. Back then I had still not had the pleasure of experimenting with all of the content. There were many weapons I had not yet fired, and many places I had not visited. Barrels were fairly new and I did not even get around to dye any clothes before I decided to not contaminate myself further, and wait for the finished product. This is after a couple hundred hours of game play. Many could possibly sprint themselves everywhere on the map, server hop and try out all the gear etc within a week, but that is not my play style. 

Imagine installing DayZ for the first time today, without any or much knowledge of what you are getting yourself in to. It would take a very long time before game content would be your main complaint. It would take a very long time before you would find your way around, or instantly realize where you are when you spawn. I think with the new update, it would even take a long time before you felt the world of Chernarus was repetitive.  

However, it would not take more than 30 minutes, on a full pop server, before the first erratic sprinter would show up, flying around like a whirlwind, not at all interested in your bambi ass, looting the first little village dry in 3 minutes blank, a village you cautiously approached out of fear of not knowing what to expect, and leaves you with a pink dress and a horde of aggro infected. If the whirlwind does not decide to circle you, like an annoying wasp on a hot summer day, screeching some annoying song on VOIP, slashing you once with a sickle and then leave your ass to die with a fading "noooooooooooooooooob" as he disappears in the horizon. 

I am not trying to be rude, emuthreat, but I think you are dead wrong. I do like your idea of a morale system, and I think it would complement the idea of a more realistic stamina, weight and movement system beautifully. But to say that (more) realistic movement would drive players away, instead of enhancing the overall experience, is just wrong. The only players it would drive away, if any (because I am confident such changes would make it a better experience for everybody), would be loud and obnoxious Pewdiepie type players and tea bagging teens. Of course they would be welcome to stick around, but they would not be able to break immersion for anyone, as the game itself would "force" them to conduct themselves in a more realistic manner. I am not saying elite forces survival simulator 2.0 here, where you have to spam keys in a particular order to lick the bottom of your tuna can. Simply slow game play down, add some inertia. That's it!

 

Well, also completely remove 3rd person, this affront to everything that has ever been holy and sacred in video game shooters until console gamers decided to buy PC's... but I guess that's a completely different discussion.

 

Edited June 26, 2017 by Vattenlarv

[emuthreat 2837]

I'm perfectly fine with the stamina system and more realistic inertia behavior.  I'm just not convinced that this will do much to raise the lowest common denominator.  It will definitely make the interaction a bit more smooth and believable, but won't do much to change the types of interactions.

What I hope to see, is more value attached to individual lives.  Systems which reward players for preparation, and allow them greater survivability against players who will pick up the first thing they see and then try to kill as many players as they can before they die of hunger and thirst.
Perhaps even a nascent skill system which would reward longer surviving players with more valuable or more developed skills on their next life.  This would not prevent players from recycling meatbags on the coast all day, but it would reward those who do more with their lives.

I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who would very strongly disagree with my wishes to facilitate what would amount to players eventually being able to survive and thrive long enough to practically have a juggernaut of a character after a few days of being well fed and relatively uninjured.
But the important point is that ANYBODY can do it.  This will possibly create a stratification of players, but that already happens to a degree anyway.  I see little difference between this and the current trend of some people running around the coast with sporters and skorpions PvPing in Kamyshovo for hours, and the players who run inland and get fully geared and set up camps;  a couple well-placed bullets and better tactical decisions will still make the most difference.  It would, however make it much riskier and less likely for a freshy with a screwdriver to be successful against an armored and well-fed player.

If a near-starving player who just washed up on the beach, went to attack a player who has eaten well for days on end, I would reasonably expect the more healthy player to be able to easily shove the weaker player to the ground, spraining an ankle or wrist in the process.

I can understand this type of system leading to a grind, which the quest for loot arguably already is.  But it gives the players choices as to what type of game they wish to play, based on the amount of effort they put into developing each life.  People who value life less, will not get the benefits of increased skill development, nor will they likely see the benefits of preparation to ensure comfortable survival and attaining a higher standard of living.  In all honesty, they may not much care, unless they really start to flame about not being able to one-punch that geared guy who came back to the coast looking for netting or car batteries.  A player who has fooled around on the coast for a few days, with a dozen or so different lives, would have a bit of a tough time getting back up the food chain; but it would be possible if they chose to pursue that.

Stamina might just concentrate the bullshit in smaller areas, increasing suicide-spawns, and leading to an increase of the less-fulfilling meta of coastal RnR.  Maybe people will have to farm a bit on the coast to make it viable after apple spamming is removed, but that is really the only outcome I can see from the stamina system, on that particular segment of the playerbase.  Player inertia will surely lead to new behavior metas when it comes to coastal melee attacks; certainly less circle-jerks in the streets, but a likely increase in ambush tactics inside buildings.  One thing it will certainly do, is teach people to move more carefully, and will likely drive more players into the trees to travel, as they can no longer fearlessly serpentine sprint down the road while taking fire.  It will make snipers have a much easier time, that is for certain...

I think we both want the same thing in the end, better and more varied player interactions.  We just might see different ways of coming about that end.

[sneakydude 480]

I am ok with kill them all, KILL THEM ALL theory :)

[Vattenlarv 81]

On 6/26/2017 at 0:07 PM, emuthreat said:

I'm perfectly fine with the stamina system and more realistic inertia behavior.  I'm just not convinced that this will do much to raise the lowest common denominator.  It will definitely make the interaction a bit more smooth and believable, but won't do much to change the types of interactions.

 

Not only will interactions be more smooth and believable. Your own approach to any potential interaction would be crucial to the outcome, as your intentions would be identifiable by your movement and overall behavior. With the lack of inertia and a stamina system everybody moves in an unrealistic manner, so you can only guess by whether or not the other player has a clown mask or a weapon drawn if he/she is hostile or not. Also, it doesn't really matter what conclusion you come to as the outcome of the interaction / altercation / fight / shoot-out will solely be a result of who has got the most rounds, semi- or fully automatic fire mode, or simply who is best at A-D-A-D twitching. 

With a system like this, the overall quality of- and skill required to do anything from planning the route of your next 2 km travel, how you tactically advance toward a popular loot spawn area, how you cautiously approach another player due to the high risk of him/her and the infected, hunting etc, will be raised to a rooftop bar standard. This will make you care about your character more, it will make you care about others more. It is the one and only pure and unconditional change the developers can make to DayZ that does not limit people's intentions, that does not turn DayZ in to a grind, that is fair and equal to everybody and would make the overall experience better for EVERYBODY.

The only argument against the implementation of such a system I can appreciate is the increased time it would take to travel. However, this is a matter of patience on each player's behalf (I don't see how anyone with a short attention span can play DayZ, not even at its current state), and something that will not be an issue when vehicles, especially bicycles, are in. Then it would make even more sense to have such a system in place as the conscious decision of speeding up your travel by getting on a bicycle, or getting in to a car, would have to be weighed against the risk of giving away your position and having to stick to the main roads. 

 

On 6/26/2017 at 0:07 PM, emuthreat said:

Stamina might just concentrate the bullshit in smaller areas, increasing suicide-spawns, and leading to an increase of the less-fulfilling meta of coastal RnR.  Maybe people will have to farm a bit on the coast to make it viable after apple spamming is removed, but that is really the only outcome I can see from the stamina system, on that particular segment of the playerbase.  Player inertia will surely lead to new behavior metas when it comes to coastal melee attacks; certainly less circle-jerks in the streets, but a likely increase in ambush tactics inside buildings.  One thing it will certainly do, is teach people to move more carefully, and will likely drive more players into the trees to travel, as they can no longer fearlessly serpentine sprint down the road while taking fire.  It will make snipers have a much easier time, that is for certain...

I think we both want the same thing in the end, better and more varied player interactions.  We just might see different ways of coming about that end.

Do you really believe that a stamina system would deter players from traveling long distances in Chernarus? I think it would do the complete opposite due to the fact that it would be a greater challenge, with greater rewards. When I last played, Cherno and Elektro was always full of players, while the rest of Chernarus was a barren wasteland. It seems like the supernatural ability to cover tremendous distances in no time at all by simply jamming down W with a toothpick, does not encourage players to do so. Maybe the developers should try something different?

It seems like we do want the same thing, to some extent. I just do not see why seasoned DayZ players would have any reason to oppose (more) realistic movement in a game like DayZ. It is a conundrum, I tell you that. 

Edit; Maybe it is the classic fear of change that is such an uncomfortable thought for so many DayZ players. They have played this alpha for three years, and have become very good at it, and a change that would have them learn it all over again, and after all this time become equal to new players with hardcore "milsim" experience in other games such as EFT or Squad, would be a blow to their self-esteem... or something. I seriously can not figure this one out, it is just a mind-boggler. 

Edited July 9, 2017 by Vattenlarv

[emuthreat 2837]

@Vattenlarv  I do not oppose this new stamina and inertia system at all. I just think you are MASSIVELY overestimating the ways it will affect player behavior.

When players are up in arms about simple things like getting cold from being drenched in the rain, and not finding enough food on the coast, how do you think they will react to not being able to run fast anymore, let-alone not be able to "A-D" juke the bambi-snipers on their way off the coast?
It is a bit too counterintuitive to me, to think that decreasing travel speeds by foot, will cause players to spread around the map more.  Have you been keeping up with recent discussions about the state of the game??  People are LIVID that everybody has seemingly moved inland, and that they can no longer use their preconditioned behaviors to find easy combat.  People complain that the CLE has completely ruined the game by not allowing them to get geared and die on the coast within an hour of spawning.

It really seems that a large portion of the playerbase wants very different things out of this game than you and I.  People want fast and easy PvP, in easily accessible and predictable places, with a minimum of resistance from game mechanics.
It's almost as if they would prefer that fine-dining establishments would server them a well-done filet steak with ketchup and tater-tots, out of a drive-thru window, than to go through the trouble of being groomed and well-dressed, and sitting inside where they might have to not behave obstreperously for an hour.

[Vattenlarv 81]

@emuthreat I am not saying YOU are against such a system. I am more "screaming" at the world. But I think you look at it from a different angle than I do.

You question the actual impact it will have on player behavior. I don't really care how people behave. DayZ is not a Pulitzer Prize dinner, and whether people are complete assholes or not does not concern me. What does concern me is that players that look for a "gritty survival experience" has that experience ruined. Not by other player's behavior per se, but by the sense of hopelessness when the A-D-A-D twitcher shows up and plays Mario 64 with his ass (while being an annoying little shit). This game- and immersion breaking event could be reduced to an absolute minimum by realistically limiting the way a player moves. A physical altercation would greatly increase the risk of taking a serious beating yourself, as you would no longer be able to, inertia-less and full speed, twitch your character out of harms way.

Players can be as annoying as they want. If they would suffer a much greater risk of having their asses handed to them, they would probably even consider a different play style. Why should the DayZ developers listen to whiny complaints about not being able to PvP on the coast, when they have been clear from the beginning that they want to create a different experience. There are literally hundreds of fast paced shooters, even in similar environments as DayZ, that cater to that specific crowd. DayZ Standalone had a revenue of over €100,000,000, some 3 million copies sold, like two years ago. There is absolutely no reason for them to NOT create the ultimate experience.

About getting shot by bambi snipers. This is not something I would even take in to the equation. I'd much rather be shot by a bambi sniper on the coast every once in a while, which would most likely be a result of my carelessness rather than the stamina system, than not being able to hit a A-D-A-D twitcher when emptying a fully loaded Python at point blank range due to highly unrealistic movement, and I guess the added complications with rubber banding that becomes more of an issue because of this.

There are endless ways to counter bambi snipers other than keeping a ridiculously unrealistic movement model. Like I have briefly mentioned before; Not being able to sprint out of dodge like a god damn go-cart is going to make one think twice before pulling the trigger. A lot of infected nearby, the new meaning- and risk of attracting unwanted attention, a re-worked loot economy with less ammunition, etc. The vision of a suspenseful and beautifully played game should not suffer due to a couple of short-attention-span-players that wish to spawn and die on the coast within an hour and call it a night. That is giving up way to easy.

I dare anyone reading this to find a clip of e.g. Squad, EFT or even Insurgency (a very fast paced shooter) where someone is A-D-A-D twitching around another player slicing them up with a knife while dodging bullets, like many players do in DayZ. You know what, don't bother. You will not find a single clip throughout the whole of the internetsis. Still, combat in each one of these games is intense and exhilarating. Why shouldn't we ask (even demand or cry viciously) for an equally awesome experience within DayZ?

Edited July 14, 2017 by Vattenlarv

[Irish. 4886]

This shit is amazing.

 

Keep up the great work folks!

[green_mtn_grandbob 594]

I hope they stick to what dayz is meant to be, and don't add a lot of stuff that has been suggested by players who don't know what goes into making a game. I trust the developers know what they want the game to be. 

[Vattenlarv 81]

I have gone and bought myself a new gaming rig. I could not contain myself. Winter is coming. 

I have been playing Arma 3, Squad, some War Thunder, a couple of matches in Company of Heroes, a few raids in Darkest Dungeon... good fun.

I logged on to DayZ randomly a few weeks ago and looted a little bit, just to look at the new graphics, and did not pay much attention to anything really. Yesterday I decided to finally check out the "new" world of Chernarus for real. 

I did, as I usually do when playing DayZ, try to immerse myself as much as possible in this barren wasteland. I set "walking" as toggle, and only jogged longer stretches between clusters of buildings in the Berezino area. Did not sprint once. It was amazing. I had full control. I got close and personal with the infected before I split their heads open with my trusty axe. As I was walking silently and patiently I had full situational awareness and was never caught by surprise, and felt like an eventual hostile survivor would be in big trouble, even though I only had one round loaded in my 1911. During my 2 hour stroll through the greater Berezino area I found a new appreciation for the game. The atmosphere was awesome, the environment felt eerie and hostile. I could almost feel the strong winds cooling me down, the urge to take shelter. I only had two Pipsis to drink, that I looted off of the infected, but never got hungrier than I was when I logged on. So I guess more movement = higher metabolism, less movement = conserving energy, which I liked a lot! 

I met one other survivor. He looked like a fresh spawn, running past me with an infected on his tail, and we only exchanged a "hey dude" before he disappeared further down the road. I had been thinking, just before this encounter, that a little more dense population would be great, so the timing was perfect. I still hope for 100 slot servers though. 

With the later dev updates in mind, how they are about to implement a stamina system, addressing the "erratic movement", smoother and more intuitive player controller, etc. Damn, I am hopeful and excited about this title again! 

 

Side note; I saw a thread about walking in the game to appreciate it more, or something like that, some time ago. I could not agree more. Less stressful, more situational awareness, less likely to get jumped by another player, or the infected, and if my metabolism theory is accurate there are even more reasons to slow it down. The world becomes alive in a whole new way. If you are NOT looking for automatic assault rifle PvP action only, it felt like walking and keeping full situational awareness while conserving energy is a good survival strategy in DayZ. 

Edited October 8, 2017 by Vattenlarv

[SeizLex 4]

I like what post. Now game is too easy. Make game more hardcore,and game will be reborn.

[Sqeezorz 839]

42 minutes ago, SeizLex said:

I like what post. Now game is too easy. Make game more hardcore,and game will be reborn.

It does not take a lot of mechanics to make the game more challenging. It is enough to reward the items for the right use, or to punish the abuse.

As an example, stone knives: open cans = much loss of contents / very fast wear / possibly becomes even a stage worse (contamination by wear).  ----> So the best for the cans must be a can opener.

The same for the skinning of animals, nothing is better than a hunting-knife. The hunting-knife can also be used for cans, however some loss of content, and the knife suffers from abuse.

But this aspect would change a lot as you play, or what you want to do. (will you open the can with 50-60% loss and the risk that the damaged can go to badly damaged and become useless, or wait until you have found something that gives you better efficiency ... or you see someone maybe the one canopener has and no can?)

 

Only a few small things are necessary to move the game in a completely different direction. I have very big hope in the new player controller, because the "old controller" are missing these small "possibilities"

[Mantasisg 172]

pls dev increase HARDCORE VALUE in difficulty.ini, or whatever file is controling the dificulty, also change the line GOOD_GAMEPLAY from FALSE to TRUE. Thats it - solved. 

I guess when 0.63 will hit exp branches the servers will be flooded, like it happened with 0.6 haha It was terrible.

Edited October 8, 2017 by Mantasisg