Status Report - 26 September 2017

[smofi 18]

I agree removing the eye zoom. More use for binoculars and similar items.

[ImageCtrl 719]

2 hours ago, smofi said:

I agree removing the eye zoom. More use for binoculars and similar items.

No worry similar items like a magnum will have a zoom.

[Sqeezorz 839]

58 minutes ago, ImageCtrl said:

No worry similar items like a magnum will have a zoom.

 ;-) 

[Trnc84 50]

I'm loving the .63 progress so far and can't wait for full release.

It's also nice to see that some items are now given more value in the game, like gloves to keep infections away.

One thing that I would love to see implemented is reduced sun glare by wearing sunglasses. 

So when you are wearing sunglasses the sun's glare is significantly reduced in a situation where you are aiming in the sun's direction.This would give sunglasses actual value in the game as well, and give a slight advantage over someone who is not wearing a pair.

[smofi 18]

22 hours ago, Trnc84 said:

So when you are wearing sunglasses the sun's glare is significantly reduced in a situation where you are aiming in the sun's direction.This would give sunglasses actual value in the game as well, and give a slight advantage over someone who is not wearing a pair.

jeah you are on to something there ! Like tinted sunglasses when worn make you see for example in green,brown maybe even pink tint....also when ruined or badly damaged glasses are worn a crack or maybe even mud, dirt or such would be present when used. 

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

I would rather they took out freelook or 3PP than "eye-zoom".

Though it's not a deal breaker for me either way.

[DannyDog 532]

7 hours ago, ☣BioHaze☣ said:

I would rather they took out freelook or 3PP than "eye-zoom".

Though it's not a deal breaker for me either way.

Hopefully you don't mean ALT free look.

[Espa 711]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the main reason why they wish to remove the 'Eye-Zoom' is the flickering details of meshes and such in the distance? Removing it, or like I proposed to shrink its' focusing power to about 1/3 the current, would make it so extra details in the distance don't have to load in at higher detail. 

[RaptorM60 392]

On 27. 9. 2017 at 7:57 PM, Sqeezorz said:

I am a little confused about the reasons of removing the Eye_Zoom (for my focus). I am not a player of the Eye_Zoom often, but rarely, but with natural reason (I am not advocates and also not opponents of Eye_Zoom, me it is only about the technology / engine of the future)

I have the feeling that BI does not want to tell the full truth. There are simply too many controversies, I try to write once with my bad english.

Let me assure you, you're seeing conspiracy where there's none. Peter has produced a lengthy text expressing his thoughts and motivations on resolving his game design dilemma. We're as honest and open as it gets. No final decision has been made, and all the arguments for and against a complete removal are still on the table. 

Accusing our developers of "lies" is completely out of place, and I would like to ask you to review your text next time you intend to hit the post button - you may find out that your comments come across as quite rude. 

[green_mtn_grandbob 594]

15 minutes ago, RaptorM60 said:

Let me assure you, you're seeing conspiracy where there's none. Peter has produced a lengthy text expressing his thoughts and motivations on resolving his game design dilemma. We're as honest and open as it gets. No final decision has been made, and all the arguments for and against a complete removal are still on the table. 

Accusing our developers of "lies" is completely out of place, and I would like to ask you to review your text next time you intend to hit the post button - you may find out that your comments come across as quite rude. 

I agree, some people are going off half cocked, we who understand are pained to read what some people post here on the forum.

[sausagekingofchicago 4711]

On 9/26/2017 at 5:09 PM, joe_mcentire said:

Shirley, you can't be serious. I very much agree that it's easy to get used to and rely on it but i do not think that it is a requirement. there can be other ways i strongly believe.

 

How about an automatically initated dynamic zoom for when you stop, stand still and stare into the distance for x seconds. This triggers your dynamic zoom mode and you can carefully watch with enhanced vision, a movement or  a cooldown after y seconds (decreasing focus) and you are out, the view goes back to normal...?

It makes sense to somehow reward the use of ingame objects like binos 

Here's my problem, I never stare in one direction for very long.  I play like a paranoid bunny with freelook because you never know when some a-hole pops up behind you over the ridge.   This is probably a behavior I learned in the mod when hackers would pop up behind you but it is what it is and has saved me even in the SA.

[sausagekingofchicago 4711]

On 9/27/2017 at 9:44 AM, LordBlackwolf said:

It's funny how so many people are bitching and moaning about eye zoom being removed, but I bet those same people have no problem playing other games that don't have eye zoom just fine so if you can play other games without any type of eye zoom then  you should be able to play DayZ without it as well. 

I play all sorts of games but I won't waste my time playing a survival game without freelook or eye zoom.   I can certainly play a game made of nothing but blocks or even a game in a tiny arena but I wouldn't be happy if DayZ became something like that.

 

Since someone else mentioned the change increasing the need to use of binos and optics, yes, I use them too as they are far more effective than eye zoom but the ability to scan your surroundings with a bit more detail still helps.   Unless binocs become super common this change for whatever technical reason will lead to less interaction and more KOS.  I for one am far more likely to let someone carry on about their way if I don't already have them zeroed in with my crosshairs on center mass.

(btw, i loathe this new forum software.. yuck.. where's my raw post so I can properly multiquote?)

[Sqeezorz 839]

6 hours ago, RaptorM60 said:

Accusing our developers of "lies" is completely out of place, and I would like to ask you to review your text next time you intend to hit the post button - you may find out that your comments come across as quite rude. 

Sry, I have never felt the "that they are lying", if that appears so excuse. I was only concerned about not quite comprehensible arguments which somehow show opposites. The internal roadmap and the technology and planning are only known to them and the team.

(maybe I should stop such thoughts or not write them anymore)

 

[LordBlackwolf 656]

3 hours ago, Sqeezorz said:

Sry, I have never felt the "that they are lying", if that appears so excuse. I was only concerned about not quite comprehensible arguments which somehow show opposites. The internal roadmap and the technology and planning are only known to them and the team.

(maybe I should stop such thoughts or not write them anymore)

 

Isn't that how it is with every game since forever? Internal roadmaps and technology change and I can understand why they haven't shown what the internal roadmap shows as things can happen that could push back the roadmap which as we all know, would cause people to bitch worse than they already do. I, for one, think that they did the right thing by not release their internal roadmap. 

[RaptorM60 392]

I just want everybody to know this: there are not that many things that we DO NOT share with you guys. I know it may be hard to take my word for granted, since I'm technically on the developer side of of things, but regarding what content makes it into updates, regarding major design decisions... as soon as things start taking some concrete shape, or when we know when and how we want to deliver them in the game, we share that information with you. Sometimes literally on the day we make those decisions, or exactly on the day when new features are finally implemented in our internal build.

Based on the past negative experience, the team is no longer sharing detailed, longer term roadmaps, especially not those that would mention (be it only estimated) dates when players can expect certain features. Based on the previous experience, we're also more careful with our ambitions for delivering cool, extra features that don't necessarily add up to the core gameplay, and we're generally more careful when estimating time needed for major technology changes. But that's it.

Other than that, we really do make sure we communicate as openly as possible - as soon as a plan, or a design intention is at least somewhat solid, it is communicated in Status Reports, or as a forum post, or as a video on our YouTube channel. When we face a dilemma, or a problem that we think may use your input for, we share that with you.

While we may have some deficit in the overall detailed definition of what exactly will the 0.63 experimental, BETA and 1.0 updates bring to DayZ, the up to date progress always makes it out the moment we achieve that progress. More than often, you have the chance to learn about our progress faster than most other teams and people within Bohemia that are not directly involved in day-to-day DayZ development tasks (that includes our company management, for example).

Our community, and our existing player base are of the utmost importance to us. All of you who keep engaging with us over official channels are of the utmost importance to us. We don't hide things from you. We don't intentionally confuse you, and most important of all, we do not lie. Ever. 

[pilgrim* 3514]

2 hours ago, RaptorM60 said:

..//..

Speech !

I understand and appreciate your point. Also, not every gamer can follow the explanations of particular software problems and solutions. To many players its just "run, shoot, jump, drive, eat, upstairs, downstairs, in the backpack."  They don't understand when they close a door and the zombie thinks the door is open and walks through it. (I know YOU understand)

But just look at this one topical case:

We have known for a LONG time there is difficulty in changing field of view in Dayz - it uses processing power, it means textures have to be changed, the player interaction field is modified.. this happens - to an extent -  for the width of field manual control AND  it happens - to a greater extent - for the scopes, but the scopes are more static by nature. And of course you no-way just CANT have a gun & combat game without scopes and binocs...  So you are stuck with all those texture and location specs and the time it takes to shove that info onto someone's little flat screen and match it to what the other player is actually doing, right down to what color his boots are and if he has a clip in his AK or not.

So  as always you guys NEED to get some spare processing time in hand - a lot of stuff needs to happen at once through the server, limited processor power, limited look-up table space, multi-threading, limited memory, standard bandwidth problems ..  So let's see where we can to take out a few TECHNICALLY expensive problem areas. What is processor intensive that we can scrap?

WELL :

To be STRAIGHT (if that is policy)  - In my opinion you should FIRST up front say "we have a technical limit to deal with here  - we are looking at ways of winning extra processing elbow-room to employ on things we (you) want".

But what has in fact happened (just taking this one case in point)?

You should REALLY NOT start a "this-comes-from-nowhere-really" rumor that mentions the depth of field on-the-fly function is cr@p and no one needs it, it's unrealistic, it was never important, it worked badly, its crazy, its not useful, the human eye doesn't function like that .. etc etc...  The DEVS never actually SAID this up front anywhere - but word came from "nowhere" and  the "decision-that-was-never-made-officially  becomes REAL and already in the PAST..  because you know you will always have SOME fragheads who agree to anything, some others who have no idea what's going on, and some who plain don't give a damn about the game, they have 100 games.. and the forms of words and comments coming FROM BI are playing down interest in that one "expensive" aspect of  the gameplay are SO OBVIOUSLY spin doctor excuses

.. people who are interested can see that WAY up front.

.. you have a tech problem, so you would like to think that no players will notice when you take that function out of the game.. and hope that maybe it wont HARM the game too much and average players will not notice and accept it's just another DOOM-LIKE, so what the hell, players will grumble, the problem will blow over the game will be LESS - and you'll have your extra clocks to squeeze more XYZ in because you just squeezed ABC out   ...

OK - not your fault RaptorM60 - I FEEL for you dude.

BUT you would have SERIOUSLY more support if you said;

<< Hey - we got this fast unique eyesight thing to work great a while back - it was a great unique idea, it was functional and immersive, and a lot of people LIKE it and it seems a  great BI-first - a way of imitating a realistic human eye experience on a flat 2D scree.... BUT  if we keep that in we can't ATM figure a way to eg respawn zombies fast enough, we can't get more players on one server, we are using clocks we now want to be using for OTHER stuff, we have player interactions we cant  nail accurately inside the tick limit, ... so we have run into a Game Problem ! A wall ! A hard limit. So we are going to have to make the game SIMPLER.

Ask the players what they think, instead of trying to tell them.

And give them BACK their access to all the hundreds of threads and suggestions on this forum over the last two or three years... many of those already go into these subjects but it has been arranged that players are not aware of the ongoing discussion, or the forgotten replies of the DEV and BI teams and decision makers.. they can't FIND that info that WAS right here on this forum.

  *

The way it comes across on the Forum is the exact opposite of "technical"

It comes across as :

<< So lets hope and pretend the function is "useless" and pray - and even ignore, threaten and cajole - to "prove" no one cares about it,  and keep mentioning it indirectly non-technically, encouraging pretty low-level casual comments that the depth of field eyesight function is LOW grade and uninteresting and NON-REALISTIC and no one cares and it OUGHT to be dumped to improve the game!  (pause to lol here) ..

And then we programmers will determinedly with honest dedication stick to what has "somehow" become the OFFICIAL  line (hey, WE didn't invent the official line.. it just turned up on our desks and in meetings..) .. and the GAMER'S problem in DayZ will talk and argue itself out until it fades away (again)
Then - right now in fact -  we ARE and WILL move to use that freed up processing power for something else. We are already working on it. >>

= So yes  RaptorM60 - I FEEL for you - I spent my time working freelance for small games companies and for AGES for the BIG serious folk with name that rhyme with HeychP and Philipz - and I KNOW how it goes down and how the meetings work and how the personalities operate.

You NEED = NEED = BIG MEGA NEED = a PROFESSIONAL  PUBLIC RELATIONS  TEAM -  of just 2 or max 3 people, Totally Full Time and they MUST = MUST link SOLID with the Players. And that is NOT easy to do.  And they have to be tough enough to stand up to (even stand against) the Boss and the Team Leaders and the Software Engineers.. because what comes out from the crunch of those "big three" is the GAME and the only thing important to the game is the PLAYER. And the only thing important to the Player is the Game.

That's the end - boring.. right? -  You must tell your clients the TRUTH or you must professionally lie through your teeth to them 100%.. there is no middle way.

- you sound like a good bloke, thanx for your comment. Remember, RaptorM60 dude "Hearts and Minds" ..

= Hearts a Minds =  don't ever forget it.

 

 

 

xxPilgrim

Edited October 3, 2017 by pilgrim*
< & there is a lot more software savvy around DayZ players than on the average game forum> xxx

[felthat 84]

i hope some work on recoil is planned, currently its only camera shake and movement, would be nice to actually see gun move

[Troll_Hunter 54]

Real life FOV and eyezoom.

I like the eye zoom.

In real life I have a FOV of ~180. The width of my monitor cover only about 60 degrees. I think the Eye-zoom should match that 60 degrees.

Speed dependent eyezoom. I also like the idea that one cannot use this eye-zoom function when walking fast, or it's effect being reduced dynamically by the player's speed.

Binocular. To promote Binocular use, make it's use easier, press B to use the bino with your left hand and see a near instant wide clear view with a 8 x zoom, FOV 8 degrees. Most scopes are 4x, show only a FOV 16 degree circle, while the 8x bino will offer 2x 8 degrees fov using the full with of our screen. Hopefully we can find a military bino with integrated compass and distancing reticle so we can use it as a spotter.

Level Of Detail: In order to avoid the very immersion breaking popping up of objects and object changes I would set the LOD in such way it does not change for FOV 100 to 60. Maybe the LOD's models need more work to make their transitions SMOOTH? - I believe some engines have this. When I have to choose: I rather have less detail up close to avoid having immersion breaking popping of LOD models.

Key layout.

I believe the devs need to consider the hours people put in the game, designing ergonomics that are easy on player's hands. Holding a middle or right button and pressing another to fire is not ergonomic. Although you don't want 'a toggle' to aim down sights, I do think it can function when connected to player speed and movement to avoid jogging or running while aiming down sights. I can envision the following action and key use: When running with a gun in hand, pressing 'fire' will 1) slow player to jogging pace and point his moving gun from the hip forwards. (Bayonet charge?) Pressing fire again will fire a shot from the hip, accuracy heavily depending on movement. Pushing the 'scope key' slows the player to a walk and brings the rifle to the shoulder and into ADS / scope if mounted, gun and camera moving a lot since the player is walking. Pressing the walk forward key would cancel the aiming, bring the gun down and have the player jog again. Double forward brings the gun down and start sprinting. The 'scope' key can also be used to cycle between scope/ irons or zoom levels. Pressing fire when not holding a weapon brings the fists up, in initially a blocking pose then transitioning to a regular boxing pose. This way players have a better chance blocking a sudden melee attack.

PS. On the LOD, when I notice the LOD detail popping, like on the startup screen, I notice that the it first cycles through the lower quality models before arriving at the appropriate LOD model. Loading the lower quality models first and changing them does cost cpu cycles, maybe the model chosen must be simply based on the distance from the player? Maybe the LOD setting for graphics should mostly affect the close and medium distant models, so the medium long and long distance models are not affected, not yielding visual gameplay advantages. Maybe the objects need more LOD transition models to make the transitions appear smoother? I would love to have a LOD transion slider like in the old Flashpoint days. I wonder with today's GB's of graphics memory if the models could be stored in there so the gamed does not need to fetch them from the RAM or HD? Maybe have a LOD setting on depending VRAM size?, so the game can load the most used models and textures in VRAM and cash the rest in RAM. Avoiding copying memory around would be important I think. Hopefully my rambling will trigger some good ideas.

Finally, thank you for your hard work, openness, status rapports, questions. I think the new player controller and smooth animation system will help BI a lot for their future projects. Maybe an overhauled LOD modeling module would just as beneficial?

Courage!

Edited October 13, 2017 by Troll_Hunter

[VVarhead 185]

On 28.9.2017 at 6:06 AM, Dancing.Russian.Man said:

I believe someone (Eugen? I'm paraphrasing.) said that it wasn't intended behavior and that the camera was attached to the gun's barrel in the Gamescom build, but there just wasn't enough time to change it for Gamescom.

Apples will be physically hanging from the trees, and disappear when you pick them up one by one.
Searching for stones is also going to change to something similar -- you'll actually see rocks on the ground, not just in a texture.

 

 

THANK YOU FOR THE APPLE TREE CHANGE!!

This is awesome!!

 

But please dont remove eye-zoom... 3rd person is the problem.

Edited October 16, 2017 by VVarhead