Going Hardcore is "how to expell"

[walnussbaum 26]

Hello Guys and Girls, my 3rd Post and I hope you don't expell me because of this dramatic post. ;-)

I want to explain and take care of what is given to us by the devs right now and how it is not good. But I won't discuss the stress-test situation, that's a tick to dramatic.

This post is about the direction DayZ is going in which is calling hardcore gamers for traveling, hiking and just looting. In my opinion, that's a totaly wrong way. If we look closer in the very small view the devs gave us actually in the playable exp version, we can see a loot things had changed in difference from 0.62 to 0.63. There are a few main parts beside the technical stuff like engine, that makes it a completly game changer.

- Why it has to be a game changer? It don't has to be, the devs just want it.
I think they are in aware of what they are delivered in the past, which is not good, which is not much, and now want to get recognition from players. At this moment this game, in going further, will be destroyed. The game itself, its gamedesign, in 0.62 is not the problem, that massive amount on bugs and misslead communication (if there was a communication at all) from devs. 0.63 game design, as we can see it by now, is completly driven away.

- Inventory
That's the most actual point I can deliver from my point of view of how they are trying to change the game by making it way more, as they would call it, "innovative". In real it's just way more complicated. There is no argumention that this in need because of that new crafting system. That's just a bad implementation that frustrates players. If I have a complicated system in a game, I would try it because i'm interested, or it's to cheesy to try it. Mostly it's too cheesy, that's where good game-designs comes in handy. Or not.

- Stamina
Okay, now we got a stamina system, that's not bad at all. It's a realistic consequence for DayZ. But, the stamina system at the moment is just blocking any good movement feeling yet. There is no big difference between no backpack and a backpack and of course it is not in a realistic setting yet. If you don't want players run all over the map, you can do it by setting the max to 3-4 minutes running, not 20 seconds. Than you feel good moving. Even with vehicles that aren't available yet.

- Communication
That's by far the worst a dev team every delivered on a half-way mid-stopped project that is like 50% but nevery reaches 51% of releasing. Even after every stress test there is a sentence like "finished soon". That was about 2-3 month ago. The devs are doing "community streams" or "dev streams" in which they are showing the already known status. Do this on every other product in a real economy and the people are going rage. The devs do not take the customers serious because they can't or they won't. Both options are not good looking. 

And this is how you expell casual gamers, gamers that played DayZ 250-500h which is already much, by doing everything for the 3000 players that are actually playing. The devs, in summary, just ignores which makes them popular, gave them money to do their work, to live their live, by ignoring the thousand of players NOT PLAYING DayZ right now. No thank you.

There are still a lot of other things that could be discussed, but I'll just leave this here. My planet needs me!

 

PS: My Person: DayZ played since 2014, over 2200 hours, playing 0.62 nearly every evening.

Edited June 30, 2018 by walnussbaum

[Parazight 1599]

This thread needs more logic, facts and supporting evidence.  And a lot less subjective bad feelings and conjecture.

[walnussbaum 26]

3 minutes ago, Parazight said:

This thread needs more logic, facts and supporting evidence.  And a lot less subjective bad feelings and conjecture.

this thread won't be a scientific work. What do you expect? You could have simply wrote "no, i don't agree". furthermore you are denigrate it.

Bad feelings are part of it, neither it isn't constructive. 

[green_mtn_grandbob 594]

If you build some thing, and then it don't work the way you wanted it to work, so you start over and savage what you can, but it still takes time to build it again.

you can't just click your fingers and have it done.

Edited July 1, 2018 by green_mtn_grandbob
add a word

[odin_lowe 3686]

Total misconception of what the DEVs had to deal with.

When I first played DayZ, it was a simple mod for the game ArmA2, but it was a unique experience.

We had the chance to have an independent game made from it with the Stand Alone, but Bohemia screwed the DEV team a bit by making them create their own engine for it instead of providing a better platform from the start.

So when I first tried the stand alone, with the 0.18 Alpha build, I wasn't too surprised to see it was basically the mod with a different inventory system, which was already light years better than in the mod. Don't get me wrong, I loved the mod (about 1500 hours in it) but the clunkyness of it was atrocious. 

If the DEVs have had the option to simply build their game instead of making everything, things would have been very different.

The process was very interesting, but I think we had access to the project way too early.  Although I'm at 2874 hours, and loved every minute of it, I think the overall reception would have been more positive with the current build of the game, and it would have taken a lot less time since they had to fix so much stuff that is now gone. (the legacy code, and everything related)

TL,DR      DayZ is life. Long live DayZ.

[DannyDog 532]

2 hours ago, odin_lowe said:

We had the chance to have an independent game made from it with the Stand Alone, but Bohemia screwed the DEV team a bit by making them create their own engine for it instead of providing a better platform from the start.

If the DEVs have had the option to simply build their game instead of making everything, things would have been very different.

This doesn't make any sense? The dev team IS Bohemia. They made their own decision to start with that engine and they made their own decision to rewrite a completely new one. You sound as if they had no choice because of third party decisions. In the end it worked out because now they have learnt so much from this entire process and have a "future proof" engine they can use for future titles. DayZ 2.0?

In regards to OP. They're taking the "it'll be done when its done" approach by keeping silent and not hyping things up only for huge let downs like in the past. I mean you already have numerous examples of them giving out dates only for them to be delayed or pushed back again and again. Now you have posts like these saying they're not giving any dates or their communication is crap. Like seriously lol. The counter argument is that "they should just release things on time then?!" in which i concur and also don't give a crap anymore.

[cirkular 178]

12 hours ago, walnussbaum said:

this thread won't be a scientific work. What do you expect? You could have simply wrote "no, i don't agree". furthermore you are denigrate it.

Bad feelings are part of it, neither it isn't constructive. 

Yeah, it sure is not scientific. Not posting "scientifically" about a "scientific" subject such as the ongoing development and features that are to change here and there, all this while fighting the bug issues and plans to fulfill is exactly what's wrong with this thread too.

You need to be on the same level. But you are just a player talking about game design. You and some other people keep trying to grab the steering wheel from the devs while some of us have to slap you on your hand to prevent killing us all and keep telling you that you should let them drive instead. It's not like that but it's a subjective feeling for sure. You can ask or propose where we should go, but we don't have to go where just you want us to go. You and your buddy. But I'm also positive that what you write and propose is all being looked on and noted by the devs for the future. Don't worry.

In the best case all of this is like:

https://media.giphy.com/media/3orieZg4GzSMjQ1YKk/giphy.gif

[emuthreat 2837]

I think the problem is that too many people got used to playing a placeholder that was going to be more or less completely scrapped and reworked.  Lots of the new content that made it into pre .63 builds was a waste of time just to keep the project alive. Some things like the CLE and tents and vehicles were likely added both to give us something to do, and for the devs to gather data about player habits.After a certain point, they had to have known that it was all going to be scrapped, yet added and bugfixed more stuff for us anyways.

To all of those who are disappointed that the new experience doesn't line up with the crappy, bug-ridden, placeholder experience:  Oops.  They got me too.  I don't like the new inventory; locking out hotkeys while tabbed open is unnecessary, as is forcing a stop when inventory is open--instead of slowing to a walk.  Having to use the "F" key to pick stuff up, and not the mouse is frustrating; but not as frustrating as having to hold down LMB and not even have the option to use "F" key to perform continuous actions.  Stamina needs balancing.  The system for raising weapons likewise forces the player to hold down a key tediously long, while also having to use yet another key to ADS.  This part about having to hold a key to raise weapons they explained was because someone was annoyed that players would constantly walk around with their fists up or thier gun raised.  So why not just leave the controls alone, aside from making spacebar a hold instead of toggle function?  I am VERY curious to see what the default XBOX control assignments are.

Hopefully they make some  quality of life adjustments for these things that have been made arbitrarily more difficult and offer no compelling benefits to how the game is played.

[odin_lowe 3686]

21 hours ago, DannyDog said:

This doesn't make any sense? The dev team IS Bohemia. They made their own decision to start with that engine and they made their own decision to rewrite a completely new one. You sound as if they had no choice because of third party decisions. In the end it worked out because now they have learnt so much from this entire process and have a "future proof" engine they can use for future titles. DayZ 2.0?

 

The DayZ devs are from Bohemia Interactive, but they ARE NOT Bohemia themselves. The executives who takes the big decisions behind projects. The devs who are currently making DayZ, are they the ones who made ArmA3? Argo? Take on Mars? And what about the new game Vigor? No. There's about 250 employees at Bohemia, and they don't all work on the DayZ project, that's just not how it works.

At the start of the project, Dean Hall wanted a different engine than simply use 90%+ of assets from ArmA2, but Bohemia executives didn't let him, so they had to make their own from scratch, all the while they provided an "alpha" build of the game to consumers. But all this time they knew they would eventually switch, as the first time I heard about the splitting of the team to create the "new" engine and getting rid of the legacy code was from Eugene, back in early 2014.

VBS3 would have been very interesting to use for the core DayZ engine, but BIS didn't want to. You know BIS spun from BI Australia right?

Anyway, we know the story. We're here today, and that's what matters.

Edited July 2, 2018 by odin_lowe

[DannyDog 532]

1 hour ago, odin_lowe said:

The DayZ devs are from Bohemia Interactive, but they ARE NOT Bohemia themselves. The executives who takes the big decisions behind projects. The devs who are currently making DayZ, are they the ones who made ArmA3? Argo? Take on Mars? And what about the new game Vigor? No. There's about 250 employees at Bohemia, and they don't all work on the DayZ project, that's just not how it works.

At the start of the project, Dean Hall wanted a different engine than simply use 90%+ of assets from ArmA2, but Bohemia executives didn't let him, so they had to make their own from scratch, all the while they provided an "alpha" build of the game to consumers. But all this time they knew they would eventually switch, as the first time I heard about the splitting of the team to create the "new" engine and getting rid of the legacy code was from Eugene, back in early 2014.

VBS3 would have been very interesting to use for the core DayZ engine, but BIS didn't want to. You BI and BIS are under the same roof right?

Anyway, we know the story. We're here today, and that's what matters.

My memory about all this is so foggy. I legitimately don't care about it anymore. I've never had the notion of these shady things you're implying which is entirely throwing off what i remember following this project from the start.

Didn't dean hall get contracted for a year to work closely with the devs to make a standalone version of his mod using in-engine functions and not just as a mod?

Didn't they release a video "lessons learned from early access" about NOT starting a project without finalizing technical resources?

Aren't BI and BIS entirely separate and are only linked because they were the same company with BIS previously being a division that was created in early 2000s to focus on developing digital software solutions for military training around the world? Haven't devs replied to numerous questions of whether or not it's possible to use VBS3 tech in DayZ or future titles saying that BI and BIS aren't the same company?

https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/160751-not-just-yet-but-next-gen-is-possible/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-2521195

This is absolutely the first time i've ever heard this story. And i use to follow this project like a religion.

Edited July 1, 2018 by DannyDog

[-Gews- 7443]

19 hours ago, walnussbaum said:

- Stamina
Okay, now we got a stamina system, that's not bad at all. It's a realistic consequence for DayZ. But, the stamina system at the moment is just blocking any good movement feeling yet. There is no big difference between no backpack and a backpack and of course it is not in a realistic setting yet. If you don't want players run all over the map, you can do it by setting the max to 3-4 minutes running, not 20 seconds. Than you feel good moving. Even with vehicles that aren't available yet.

Needs tweaking, but don't think you should be able to run a 4 minute mile, either. If you can sprint for 3-4 minutes straight that means stamina has basically no effect on combat. Despite the new character movement, unrealistic zig-zag is still very much a thing, when combined with sprinting and no acceleration or momentum, 3-4 minutes = way too much.
 

20 hours ago, walnussbaum said:

- Inventory
That's the most actual point I can deliver from my point of view of how they are trying to change the game by making it way more, as they would call it, "innovative". In real it's just way more complicated. There is no argumention that this in need because of that new crafting system. That's just a bad implementation that frustrates players. If I have a complicated system in a game, I would try it because i'm interested, or it's to cheesy to try it. Mostly it's too cheesy, that's where good game-designs comes in handy. Or not.

Example of overdesign = adjusting channels on the handheld transceiver.

[odin_lowe 3686]

3 hours ago, DannyDog said:

 I legitimately don't care about it anymore.

 

And i use to follow this project like a religion.

Ok

[DannyDog 532]

8 hours ago, odin_lowe said:

Ok

Sorry. I meant to say i don't care about the story/history of dayz (If you thought i was implying i didn't care about this game at all). Tho thanks for taking the time to reply with one word. Good talk.

Edited July 2, 2018 by DannyDog