Start Walking

[IMT 3190]

12 hours ago, Solopopo said:

There is actually a substantial difference. The rate of food and thirst decrease is very high when you are sprinting. It is not a direct trade off. It doesn't balance out like that. This is from my experience, but also the red arrow that appears when sprinting seems to suggest this as well. What I am referring to are the single, double, and triple arrows that appear on your food and thirst icons. The third arrow is red, indicating critical loss. It is always red when you sprint. Jogging is much preferred if you don't have many supplies. You will run yourself to death. I did it several times in the stress test. Once you start limping from lack of nutrition, you aren't going to survive if you don't have supplies on you or nearby. You will get progressively slower and then just go black. It doesn't take long. But if you don't sprint, you can get much farther. Also, if you stop moving completely your food and thirst decay slows to a crawl.

Well we won't know this absolutely 100 % sure if we don't have the numbers. We can estimate and you're probably right but we won't know for sure. I do know about the arrows and I do know how the icons work and what they represent.

But to know what the difference is and if it's positive or negative we need the numbers itself. Testing it is hard as well because, well... we don't have the numbers so the tests aren't 100% accurate. We also don't know how much of an increase/decrease an arrow is.

I'm sure we can find the numbers but the question is, do we want to know? Knowing these things makes the game easier of course.

6 hours ago, ImpulZ said:

Well, when it comes to this you can still eat the dog...

That escalated quickly.

[Mantasisg 172]

I am starting to find 0.63 quite impressive. Also really liked how I was sometimes finding something, I am not sure if thats the finaly unleashed proper loot economy, or it was just because server was fresh and not yet outlooted everywhere. 

Haven't had fights with other players, but zombies seems perfect to me, they seem to lag a bit in some occasions, but not a big problem. You really don't want to get on them with bare hands, an axe is huge help.  I am starting to believe that PVE can be super involving one day, adding other players as a threat, predators and weather and it is going to be really nice, adding increased intensity at military zones, and as it was once teased chemical hazzard zone (probably tissy), really kool. But walking still would provide only frustration 95% of the time. 

[Guy Smiley 534]

10 hours ago, Sqeezorz said:

@Mantasisg

I know what you mean. But the last stress test showed me: Forget the urge to get from A to B quickly. it was not slow or tedious .... I've never had so many interactions with "foreign" players until I found my buddies. Our goal was: do we survive that? So we played it, it would have taken 5-7 hours until we arrived at NWAF.

we were on the UK 0-4 (1pp)

That's the point.  You're not suppose to get to point A to point B in a few minutes.  It's still a survival game and it's suppose to be difficult.Not instant pew pew.  Risk vs reward.  Do you risk running to that town you see way up the road just to find out it's barren, burning your thirst and hunger in the process?  Not to mention, berries and apples don't seem to be in or they're not working or I'm doing completely something wrong, so finding food is a little difficult right now.  Also, stress test.  Not all features are working or in at the moment.

[Solopopo 330]

15 hours ago, IMT said:

Well we won't know this absolutely 100 % sure if we don't have the numbers. We can estimate and you're probably right but we won't know for sure. I do know about the arrows and I do know how the icons work and what they represent.

But to know what the difference is and if it's positive or negative we need the numbers itself. Testing it is hard as well because, well... we don't have the numbers so the tests aren't 100% accurate. We also don't know how much of an increase/decrease an arrow is.

I'm sure we can find the numbers but the question is, do we want to know? Knowing these things makes the game easier of course.

We don't need 100 percent accuracy when the difference in nutrition loss is as large as it is. All we need to know is whether the difference is in fact large. We don't need exact numbers for that. All my tests seem to indicate that jogging isn't just a little preferred, but often the only way to survive. And when I say "tests," I really just mean my desperate attempts at survival. Many times it was clear I just wasn't going to make it alive if I chose to sprint. Many times I did actually succumb faster while sprinting. The HUD, which i'm assuming is intended to be intuitive, seems to agree with this logic. They may have tweaked things for this one though. I'm still testing. I suspected that they may have increased the rate of nutrition decay while jogging for this patch, but I think it may have been influenced by other factors, perhaps the endless rain that was falling earlier. It's back to normal now though. It's true that we can only infer so much without numbers, but some things we can at least be certain of: sprinting kills. The degree to which it kills is obviously still in question. What is not in question is whether or not sprinting will help you get to food faster, and therefor help you live. It won't. It will kill you faster, unless you are chasing a chicken. Your sprinting speed and nutrition decay rates do not balance out. This can be empirically proven with statistics, without any prior knowledge about the game. Jogging equals a higher chance of living. That has been my experience. I encourage you to try and see. You won't need to go out of your way. Just pay attention next time on the stress test.

If we are talking about numbers though, the ones I am most interested in seeing at the moment are the damages of strong and light attacks.

Edited May 19, 2018 by Solopopo

[IMT 3190]

11 hours ago, Guy Smiley said:

That's the point.  You're not suppose to get to point A to point B in a few minutes.  It's still a survival game and it's suppose to be difficult.Not instant pew pew.  Risk vs reward.  Do you risk running to that town you see way up the road just to find out it's barren, burning your thirst and hunger in the process?  Not to mention, berries and apples don't seem to be in or they're not working or I'm doing completely something wrong, so finding food is a little difficult right now.  Also, stress test.  Not all features are working or in at the moment.

Apples now spawn next to the tree. No idea if they respawn, but sometimes you need to look really good to see them. They're not far off the tree though, they're close to the trunk. Berries, I have no idea of, haven't checked those yet.

6 hours ago, Solopopo said:

We don't need 100 percent accuracy when the difference in nutrition loss is as large as it is. All we need to know is whether the difference is in fact large. We don't need exact numbers for that. All my tests seem to indicate that jogging isn't just a little preferred, but often the only way to survive. And when I say "tests," I really just mean my desperate attempts at survival. Many times it was clear I just wasn't going to make it alive if I chose to sprint. Many times I did actually succumb faster while sprinting. The HUD, which i'm assuming is intended to be intuitive, seems to agree with this logic. They may have tweaked things for this one though. I'm still testing. I suspected that they may have increased the rate of nutrition decay while jogging for this patch, but I think it may have been influenced by other factors, perhaps the endless rain that was falling earlier. It's back to normal now though. It's true that we can only infer so much without numbers, but some things we can at least be certain of: sprinting kills. The degree to which it kills is obviously still in question. What is not in question is whether or not sprinting will help you get to food faster, and therefor help you live. It won't. It will kill you faster, unless you are chasing a chicken. Your sprinting speed and nutrition decay rates do not balance out. This can be empirically proven with statistics, without any prior knowledge about the game. Jogging equals a higher chance of living. That has been my experience. I encourage you to try and see. You won't need to go out of your way. Just pay attention next time on the stress test.

If we are talking about numbers though, the ones I am most interested in seeing at the moment are the damages of strong and light attacks.

As I said, you're probably right but in DayZ a lot changes, even unannounced. As long as we don't have numbers we can't assume anything. Normally jogging is 2 arrows down on water and 1 or 2 on food. Already here is incosistency since hunger fluctuates between 1 and 2. Yesterday there were some major inconsistencies for me, jogging had 3 arrows for both food and water. Where does this inconsistency come from? Was it the rain, making my clothes heavier? Is it the fact that I was wounded? Was I cold? Are arrows a constant or a variable? So many questions, inconcistencies and variables that coming to a conclusion is hard.

I've been sprinting a lot yesterday together with Thurman, from Staroye to Guglovo to Novy and finally Stary. We had no trouble whatsoever with maintaining our stats and we didn't even loot all the houses. You do know that you can still eat or drink even if your icons aren't yellow or red, right? The limit for water used to be 4 liters and a whopping 20.000 calories for energy. I ask this because I have seen enough people only eating or drinking when they're hungry and stop when they're neutral. That means that they're constantly struggling with hunger or thirst.

Edited May 19, 2018 by IMT

[DannyDog 532]

28 minutes ago, IMT said:

Apples now spawn next to the tree. No idea if they respawn, but sometimes you need to look really good to see them. They're not far off the tree though, they're close to the trunk. Berries, I have no idea of, haven't checked those yet.

They respawn and despawn based on if people come in the vicinity etc.

[Sqeezorz 839]

20 minutes ago, DannyDog said:

They respawn and despawn based on if people come in the vicinity etc.

Confirmed, Apple have not despawn timer like other items, only you and your distance are the values.

[Parazight 1594]

12 hours ago, Guy Smiley said:

  It's still a survival game and it's suppose to be difficult.

Sorry, I'm totally lost now.  Survival is supposed to be difficult?  Sure doesn't seem that way.  Might be a bit of a grind sometimes, but it never seems hard.  Could you provide a link to where the devs state that survival is supposed to be difficult??  Or could you give any example where it's actually hard and not just time consuming?

Many of your posts and points are conjecture with a lot of hyperbole on top so I'm having a difficult time believing you.

Thanks.

[Guy Smiley 534]

6 hours ago, Parazight said:

Sorry, I'm totally lost now.  Survival is supposed to be difficult?  Sure doesn't seem that way.  Might be a bit of a grind sometimes, but it never seems hard.  Could you provide a link to where the devs state that survival is supposed to be difficult??  Or could you give any example where it's actually hard and not just time consuming?

Many of your posts and points are conjecture with a lot of hyperbole on top so I'm having a difficult time believing you.

Thanks.

Perhaps if you quoted the rest of my point on the difficult part you'd actually understand instead of just cherry picking what you want just like you always do.

[IMT 3190]

1 hour ago, DannyDog said:

They respawn and despawn based on if people come in the vicinity etc.

 

1 hour ago, Sqeezorz said:

Confirmed, Apple have not despawn timer like other items, only you and your distance are the values.

Good to know, thanks for the information. Although we haven't seen any apples yesterday at all but that might be because of a player or multiple players which picked them up before us. Had the same happen to me at Mista and low and behold, a guy tried to kill me when I was filling my bottle.

[Solopopo 330]

15 hours ago, IMT said:

As I said, you're probably right but in DayZ a lot changes, even unannounced. As long as we don't have numbers we can't assume anything. Normally jogging is 2 arrows down on water and 1 or 2 on food. Already here is incosistency since hunger fluctuates between 1 and 2. Yesterday there were some major inconsistencies for me, jogging had 3 arrows for both food and water. Where does this inconsistency come from? Was it the rain, making my clothes heavier? Is it the fact that I was wounded? Was I cold? Are arrows a constant or a variable? So many questions, inconcistencies and variables that coming to a conclusion is hard.

I've been sprinting a lot yesterday together with Thurman, from Staroye to Guglovo to Novy and finally Stary. We had no trouble whatsoever with maintaining our stats and we didn't even loot all the houses. You do know that you can still eat or drink even if your icons aren't yellow or red, right? The limit for water used to be 4 liters and a whopping 20.000 calories for energy. I ask this because I have seen enough people only eating or drinking when they're hungry and stop when they're neutral. That means that they're constantly struggling with hunger or thirst.

Yeah, I guess I kind of just repeated what you said in more words, haha. 

I have noticed this as well. The arrows haven't been consistent for me this stress test. I'm used to seeing both thirst and food with two arrows down while jogging, sometimes one for food. During this stress test I am getting 3 arrows while jogging. But after surviving for a long time it went back to the old way.

Yes, I have been stuffing my face beyond the point that it first turns white. I noticed that the arrows can still point up for a long time after it first turns white, so I figured there is some extra room there. It works this way in the alpha too, so it seems natural.

Edited May 20, 2018 by Solopopo

[Solopopo 330]

14 hours ago, Parazight said:

Sorry, I'm totally lost now.  Survival is supposed to be difficult?  Sure doesn't seem that way.  Might be a bit of a grind sometimes, but it never seems hard.  Could you provide a link to where the devs state that survival is supposed to be difficult??  Or could you give any example where it's actually hard and not just time consuming?

Many of your posts and points are conjecture with a lot of hyperbole on top so I'm having a difficult time believing you.

Thanks.

DayZ is meant to be challenging. I'm surprised you are still arguing this point. The game is extremely hardcore by nature, and that's not hyperbole. Its reputation is built on that. You are speaking about what the game is currently and trying to make the point that it isn't hard because finding food is easy. But you can't consider only the nutrition side of survival alone and say survival is easy. There is more too it than that. There are not as many players on the map as there are supposed to be, so of course if you run off to some barren region with practically no people and apple trees, you'll be fine in the alpha. There are also zombies and wolves to contend with, which are much worse to deal with when people are around. If all you want to do is persist, you will have an easy time in the alpha. If you want to actually play the game, it will be hard. But it is supposed to be hard to survive all the time. It is one of the most basic philosophies of the game. Death is inevitable, and you are just fending it off. DayZ is literally the most brutal survival game on the market. The apple glitch has caused so much damage to some people's outlook of the game, it's crazy. Before people knew about it, it was actually a real challenge to survive in the alpha, with or without people around. The name DayZ Standalone is synonymous with difficulty and challenge. It brings constant hardship and death to most people's minds, so much so that some people even avoid it for this reason. Surely there is a limit to how much difficulty is fun, but I think they've struck a nice balance with .63 so far. 

If you want to hear it from the developer's mouth, heres an article it took me all of 3 seconds to find.

https://www.engadget.com/2013/03/29/gdc-2013-dean-hall-on-the-pillars-of-dayzs-design/

If you do some of your own searching you'll find that Dean Hall also cites the 60 player limit as one of the biggest drawbacks of the alpha build. There are also many articles like this one where he talks about the importance of DayZ's hardcore nature. 

 

Edited May 20, 2018 by Solopopo

[Mantasisg 172]

DayZ definitely has to be hardcore, and it should not be too time consuming. You have to be able to move fast, you have to be able to be alerted all the time, you have to be at good health, you have to continuously look for food and drinks, you have to look for tools, clothes and equipment, you have to look for guns and ammo, you have to look for medicine, you have to run into zombies, you have to run into other players, you have to run into predators, you have to run into hypothermia and hyperthermia.... 

You shouldn't be able to ghost empty to full servers, abuse gamma, avoid harsh weather and night, be camping at one spot for very long (IMO it always should be rather cold, so you would have to move).

But the game should never be too time consuming, it should be time consuming to get great gear and build up your character to high end and so...  But it never should be time consuming to get to play it at basic level. Running for ten mins to nearest town, then running another ten mins to find a can, or something to open it with, then 10 mins more to find a gun, or a bullet just to chamber it in... please no, in 20mins you already should be able to be a bandit with repeater or magnum, or defend from bandits, or try to be a hero and help others.... 

Surviving in DayZ for 30mins should be a challenge, but it is more like a patience challenge if you can stay logged in before soething eventful happens. 0.63 seems very promising, not yet there, I am about to play a bit today. Last time it took about 30mins to find something to open a can, but the economy is in the tweaking. Zombies overall made very good impression to me, just perhaps they're slightly too powerful.

 

[Parazight 1594]

12 hours ago, Solopopo said:

DayZ is meant to be challenging....

...If you want to hear it from the developer's mouth, heres an article it took me all of 3 seconds to find.

https://www.engadget.com/2013/03/29/gdc-2013-dean-hall-on-the-pillars-of-dayzs-design/

 

I read that article years ago. It's not meant to be challenging.  Survival is the easy part. I would tell you to re-read the very article that you linked.  In that article Dean states.. 

Quote

"any story you write will not be as compelling as an unscripted happening between human players."

but as I've said before, what Dean believed (at the time?) was naive.  It's a pretty terrible way to train soldiers 'emotionally' but a great way to introduce tactics and communication.  It's naive because there can't really be moral dilemma.  For example, killing a person in-game has no real life consequences.  His vision was noble, but pretty laughable, really.

Quote

Even if the ideas aren't concrete, Hall sees which of DayZ's moments have the most impact based on the emotion exposed in certain forum posts. He seems to collect confessions like these from his players: "I didn't need anything. I had killed him purely because he was there... I had an intense feeling of regret, I mean, to the point that I felt sick to my stomach" and "I am literally shaking after playing the past three hours."

Lulz.  Get callous, plztks.  At some point, this fades.  After *many* hours of playing, and after many deaths, the wonderful/bitter feeling of dying simply goes away.  Partially because gearing up is easy, because you learn how to outsmart a computer program.

The game really isn't hard.  And it won't be. Ever.  Well, not until AI can evolve and outsmart real people consistently.  I've seen all of those things you talk about.  I've got thousands of hours since .27 was released.  I've followed the progress.  Nothing indicates that PVE will, or should be, difficult.  Note in the article you linked that when Dean talks about DayZ, he assumes you lose everything.  But you don't.  There's persistence mechanics now.  This completely contradicts the concept of putting all of your eggs into one basket.  Underground Stashes for everyone!  You'll be able to have multiple toons on servers.  Same thing.   This will make survival SO much easier.  The game will never be difficult, unless you're in a hurry to get somewhere or get something, or don't know what you're doing.  So many mechanics and features are going to be added that are going to make PVE incredibly easy.  Navigating character status and outsmarting AI is not going to be hard.

 I love the fact that it takes forever to do things.  (the topic of this thread)  A real grind to do things makes the game so much better.  This adds so much to the value you must place on your things and your toon.  You seem to agree with me at the beginning of this thread, so I don't understand why your opinion has changed. 

Quote

...if you know to gear up , I suppose it becomes easy.

Start walking.  Because you have to.  This mostly enhances player versus player action.  Tactical warfare is back!  Hip-firing, 'The Matrix' like bullet-dodging and super human speed are a thing of the past and it's awesome now.  This isn't a hardcore survival game.  It's a PVP game.  You have a large map, players, and ways to kill other players.  The PVE forces you to reconsider rash decisions on your journey, putting more importance on how you go about interacting with other players.

So consider your feedback carefully during beta regarding PVE mechanics.  The PVE in Dayz will really determine how successful and fun PVP is.  The PVP part of DayZ is where the game flourishes the most.  This is the most memorable part and something that DayZ can capitalize on the most, providing great experiences to players.  Being the best PVP environment ever created is something that DayZ has the potential to reach, making it a legendary game.  Lets focus on that and not how 'hard' the new survival mechanics are.

If you need any advice on how to easily navigate the environment let me know via post or private message. Thanks.

[Solopopo 330]

7 hours ago, Parazight said:

I read that article years ago. It's not meant to be challenging.  Survival is the easy part. I would tell you to re-read the very article that you linked.  In that article Dean states..

You read an entire article about the challenge and hardcore nature of DayZ and conclude it's not supposed to be hard? I would encourage you to read people's entire responses to you, as @Guy Smiley suggested. Mine is entirely based on that article man. Did you read it at all?  You can't take players out of the experience and still have DayZ. It is hard to survive because they are there. It is hard to find food because they are there. Obviously the themes discussed in this article apply to every aspect of the game, not just player interaction itself. Why am I the one trying to find an article proving the most basic tenet of DayZ? I challenge you to find even one that supports what you are saying, which will be significantly more difficult, because it doesn't exist. But there are a myriad of articles out there on the subject of DayZ's difficulty.  When I said it took me 3 seconds to find that article, I meant it. You won't find a single one implying anything about the game is easy.

You need to define what you mean by survival if you are going to continue to insist that it is not hard. What exactly are you referring to? If you are trying to say that persisting in .62 with no other players to threaten you is easy, I don't think anyone would argue with you about that. .63 may be a different matter. Getting and staying well fed and hydrated is not as easy as it was in .62. Does that not suggest something to you? Maybe it's supposed to be a least a tad challenging? To me the fact that anyone would suggest DayZ is not supposed to be hard is absurd. Players are dropped in the middle of nowhere in an epic landscape with no map, no compass, no weapon and no food. They are already thirsty. If they choose the wrong way to run they will starve. There is literally nothing but experience to guide you. Honestly, I think you've been playing the alpha too long. Do you seriously not remember how hardcore this game is intended to be? How unforgiving it is to new players? How unforgiving it can still be to you if were to make the mistakes you've already learned from a thousand times before? Just last night in .63 I got completely lost at night in the woods and wound up running the wrong way for 20 minutes. I was fortunately stocked with food, but if I wasn't, I could have died easily, especially if wolves were spawning right now.

The "grind" as you call it, makes your character more valuable every passing moment. And at any moment you can lose it all. At it's core, DayZ is an extreme survival game, and while you may not think it is hard, clearly it is intended to be. Hard, brutal, challenging, real. These are themes that underpin the DayZ experience. To think that they would exclude one part of the game from this philosophy.... why? Why would you think it's not supposed to be hard. Explain.

7 hours ago, Parazight said:

but as I've said before, what Dean believed (at the time?) was naive.  It's a pretty terrible way to train soldiers 'emotionally' but a great way to introduce tactics and communication.  It's naive because there can't really be moral dilemma.  For example, killing a person in-game has no real life consequences.  His vision was noble, but pretty laughable, really.

No comment. This is not relevant to the discussion.

 

Edited May 20, 2018 by Solopopo

[Parazight 1594]

11 hours ago, Solopopo said:

You need to define what you mean by survival if you are going to continue to insist that it is not hard. What exactly are you referring to? ... Why would you think it's not supposed to be hard. Explain.

I will concede that saying 'it's not meant to be challenging' is a bit misleading.  The basic gist of what I'm saying still remains, however.  There are two distinct facets to DayZ.  Player versus Player and Player versus Environment.  Perhaps this is where our fundamental view differs.  You may think PVE and PVP are completely entwined, but I do not.  Partially, yes. Dayz is long moments of boredom separated by short intervals of sheer terror.  Long moments of 'survival pve' and short bursts of tense player combat situations. Maybe this is why I don't see PVE and PVP being totally married.  

BI and the developers assume the title will last many years.  I certainly hope it does.  For this to happen, the game has to retain a player base and not have high player turn-over, right?  These long term players (the expected majority) will have to learn to navigate the environment.  They will have to learn to not die to infected/AI, not die to starvation, and maintain a healthy status as they travel about Chernarus.  There is a learning curve, but it's not bad at all.  The core PVE mechanics won't really change.  Once you learn them, and you will in relatively short order, not dying to the environment is pretty easy.  Easy in .62, easy in .63, and easy at 1.0.  Humans are smart, they will adapt and learn to overcome the static set of variables (pve) that any game presents.  This is what i'm referring to when I state that survival will be easy.  Dealing with the environment will be easy.  That's what this thread started out talking about.  How walking makes the game more tedious. But not harder.  The simple way to realize this is to group up with your friends in this sandbox.  Do this and then realize that pve survival is pretty trivial.  This has been the case for sandboxes since the beginning.  It's there to enhance player interactions.  It provides something to do and a grind to make living and dying mean something.  Not just spawn, kill, and respawn without meaning or investment, like PUBG.

The past reveals.  From UO, Everquest, Asheron's Call, Lineage, WoW, SWTOR, Dark Age of Camelot, Anarchy Online, and more we can see how player interaction is the real obstacle in a sandbox arena.  This is the real wrench that is thrown into the gears of your plan.  Surviving other players isn't something you can just learn to do easily.  Other gamers are nowhere near as easy to predict as PVE mechanics. Over and over the past has shown us that pve isn't really that hard in an open world structure.  This is because you can't have linear progression in a sandbox.  This has been the case for decades.

Quote

You read an entire article about the challenge and hardcore nature of DayZ and conclude it's not supposed to be hard? I would encourage you to read people's entire responses to you...

...No comment. This is not relevant to the discussion.

I absolutely read it all.  I read a lot and have experienced just as much.  Let's not put all of our faith into the articles that people have written.  Just because the developers have written articles and said things doesn't mean that's how it's going to pan out.  What do you call a spade?  You seem like a smart guy.  You should be able to take things at face value and not rely on the skewed perceptions of people that happen to be behind the steering wheel.  People in charge have intentions all the time.  These intentions don't always play out, gaming or otherwise.  Just because (the developers) say something is supposed to be one way doesn't mean it's going work out like that.  Intention isn't that important.

It IS relevant.  This was a great example of Dean wanting the title to be something that's impossible.  What is 'supposed to be' and 'what is' are completely different things and the latter is the only relevant thing.

DayZ is fantastic at providing a place where people can interact, hostile or friendly, with no real world consequence.  This is biggest thing that it has going for it.  PvE doesn't even have to be hard for the title to be successful.  Good thing, because it wont be.  Do you really need handcuffs in this game to not die of hunger or stave of zombies?  PVP is the focus.  That's the consensus.  Go have a look at the endless amount videos out there created by players.  All about player interaction, not fighting zombies or growing pumpkins.

 

I hope this answers your questions regarding my previous posts.  Beans to you.

 

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

On 5/18/2018 at 10:23 AM, Mantasisg said:

bikes, bicycles and stuff

It seems like many people missed the dev post that said we won't be getting 2 wheeled vehicles in 1.0.

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

On 5/20/2018 at 5:07 AM, Mantasisg said:

and it should not be too time consuming.

I totally disagree.

DayZ is very time consuming if you want to experience everything.

You should have to do A LOT of walking and searching to find car parts before you can simply cruise around the map looting and picking up friends.

[Mantasisg 172]

If that is "everything" to you, then I am sorry, thats just the tip of the iceberg. Unfortunately, with such attitude we aren't getting anything from DayZ, or at least didn't for a couple of years. It indeed should be time consuming to get to the top, high end gear stuff and so..., but it absolutely shouldn't be so at basic level. You should be able fast pace the game around the coasts if you would like, also you would have to go through it as a freshspawn, then you would get a bit slower pace as you would get further towards inlands, but you would also get more risk to encounter predators and more and more seriously armed players and their unclear intentions, and then finally around military zones, and especially tissy you should totally be shittttttttting your pants the whole time... May i quickly draw my version, of what I would guess could be "game pace" map, red fast, blue slow:

As a base I will use this "safety" map from 2015 (when game was fun): http://www.dayztv.com/pic/dayz-safety-map-of-chernarus-and-chernarus-using-standalone-data/

Room for all styles...


By the ways where Devs said that they, lets not hide it - sorta "canceling" bike and bicycles ? 

I really hope that two wheeled vehicles will be introduced soon after cars, and I hope that they will help to pace up the game. 

[cirkular 178]

13 minutes ago, Mantasisg said:

By the ways where Devs said that they, lets not hide it - sorta "canceling" bike and bicycles ? 

I really hope that two wheeled vehicles will be introduced soon after cars, and I hope that they will help to pace up the game. 

It was a bit before New year... here it is

https://www.dayz.com/blog/status-report-28th-november

Quote

Then, everybody's favourite: bikes and motorbikes. We've said that before, but sadly, as weird as it may sound to a person not involved in game dev, creating single track vehicles properly takes a massive amount of animation and programming work that we want to invest into other parts of the game for BETA - such as achieving overall polish of features like the character movement, double track vehicles, or user actions. 

 

[Mantasisg 172]

haha, it is crazy how littlebird heli is expected to be in before bikes and bicycles... 

I don't see whats so difficult about bikes and bicycles apart animations, of which I believe there are plenty for bikes and bicycles. Regarding physics, it could be basically a very narrow trackwidth car with high CG, fitting torque, not consuming any fuel, and always in balance just for begining... it could get fancy later. Gameplay is more important. They really are saving best for last, aren't they :D

 

[Solopopo 330]

11 hours ago, Parazight said:

I hope this answers your questions regarding my previous posts.  Beans to you.

It does. I agree that there is a difference between what Dean Hall wanted for DayZ, how players now prefer to play it, and even how the current devs view the game. I referred to that article because I was looking for something that spoke about DayZ's core philosophies. It seemed to make sense to start at the beginning. But the current devs, the ones who have their hands on it now, have stated that they don't intend to encourage PvP.  I do in fact believe that player interaction and interaction with the environment is meant to be an integrated experience. We need to have a common enemy in order to not KOS all the time. Zombies are actually dangerous now, and food and thirst degrade faster than before, depending on the circumstances. I couldn't believe it, but I got overwhelmed by just two zombies on my last death in .63. I was fully geared. I got comboed to death. I couldn't even draw my weapon. Working together may be preferable to KOS for this reason, and when players are working together they sometimes betray each other, making any PvE scenario a possible PvP encounter as well. I know I personally have interacted with more people in the past few days of stress testing than I have in months in alpha, and I think at least part of that is because of the additional challenge. I've had many people limp up to me asking for help. As you say, the survival features enrich the experience. But they aren't meant to be a distraction, a passing fancy, as you make it to where the game really starts: the airfield. The survival features ARE the game, at least a significant part of it, along with player interaction and everything else. It isn't something just tacked on to distract from running. I don't think that is the way the devs see it, or how they have designed the beta experience to be. 

But of course, everything is still up in the air right now. We'll see just what kind of PvE experience they will actually give us soon :)

Edited May 21, 2018 by Solopopo

[Sqeezorz 839]

I do not know how clever the CLE can be. However, I noticed in the stress test that there are areas with apple trees where you will never find anything while others were full with Apples. I know there will be berries added and possibly pears. what if these places of "success" change cyclically?

This could happen with the whole loot, that certain things can be found in other places for a few days or can not be found. But the attitude of the CLE in the stress tests is very friendly in order to survive as far as food is concerned.

The reason could be that the servers all start suddenly and are filled immediately by players, because this flood of players will be found in the Exp. Version only at the start.

So stresstests are not a good way to evaluate the real gameplay.

[ZomboWTF 527]

On 17.5.2018 at 6:10 AM, -Gews- said:

I've seen some people claim they often walk everywhere in DayZ. You never know!

i most of the time did this in woods to both not get spotted so easily and help in seeing other players faster, at least it felt like that for me a lot of the time since often times i was able to just prone and let them pass without getting spotted