Abundance of ressources conflicts with survival experience

[Presence- 41]

To provide an authentic, gritty, and unforgiving survival experience, we must give survivors what they need.

Controversially, I can firmly write that at this point, reading about people struggling to survive is a sign of good direction and a moment for a coffee break/laugh for me.

Rationally, how is reading about people struggling to survive in survival content not the point?

Propose them five minutes death-timer and they will pass out.
Then they'll ask "Why?" before threatening to get the fuck out.

When a little good direction is applied, you will see discontent springing up from the weeds.
You know, the weeds that consider the need to drink water in survival content to be masochism.

Contextually, if they are thirsty, we can give them what they need (not what they want) and make them work for it because the experience of survival can be experienced when one needs something, just as it can be experienced when one is faced with a threatening situation.

When that need is satisfied, expectations of future improvement in one's life state are reduced or nonexistent, and the shorter the time to reach that state, the less value is placed on the time and energy required to obtain what satisfies it. Thus, the object itself has little value when it is common and easy to obtain, therefore, survivors do not care about losing it.

The incentive to introduce, maintain or increase the importance of finding and protecting something is a crucial part of how you set the tone, strategy and pace, because it is part of the investment requirements that are reflected in the consequences.

In a certain context, minimising the loss of an investment is tantamount to devaluing it with the time and effort it takes to acquire it, leading users to make rash decisions and actions.

As an extension of the above,
- The incentive to venture out and scavenge for resources fades quickly.
- The incentive to help each other is minimal.
- Decision-making and strategy regarding resources is minimal.
- Exploration is less rewarding and easily accessible in survival content.
- Extended experience is negatively impacted
- Dying is less punishing
- Survival is less of a concern

In a survival content, supplies must be truly rare and hard to find, because being spoiled is the antagonism of confronting a constraint and there is survival in constraints.

[Original_Name62 22]

So what your suggesting is that DayZ should reduce reasources to make the game better and more challenging?

[Riddick_2K 174]

@Presence-

You make a serious basic mistake: the most important thing in this game is LIFE, not objects.

Those who don't understand this, haven't understood the very essence of DayZ (a lot of people, I fear...)

😐

[Presence- 41]

On 11/17/2024 at 11:23 PM, Original_Name62 said:

So what your suggesting is that DayZ should reduce reasources to make the game better and more challenging?

I wouldn't choose the word "better". "Better" for what, for whom?
The assessment of "better" depends on the context and the criteria used for the evaluation.
The “challenge” are to the subject. What is not a challenge to me may be a challenge to you.
Within your parameters, speech and debate are equal. 
This is above all a choice of orientation and this choice may or may not reflect your preferences.
If finding resources for your survival already reaches your challenge and difficulty threshold in DayZ, then this suggestion might not be for you.

[Presence- 41]

On 12/13/2024 at 12:17 PM, Riddick_2K said:

@Presence-

You make a serious basic mistake: the most important thing in this game is LIFE, not objects.

Those who don't understand this, haven't understood the very essence of DayZ (a lot of people, I fear...)

😐

Nothing in my post suggests that one is more important than the other, nor does it address this issue.
Contextually, subjects and objects can be considered interchangeable when each label is applied only from one angle or another. It is not the objects as such that are the problem, but their subject.

"You" can be expressed as the subject and "life" as the object.

Your character is an object and his life is also an object insofar as its constituent parts, such as something being done to it.

As for the word "life", it all depends on the properties you attribute to life because it can apply to an object; the life of an object or the life span of an object.
Before assessing error to a subject, you have to understand what the word "object" is being subjected to. 

By extension, life is your object and an object can be your life.

According to you, objects are subject to restrictions, as is “life”, which can be illustrated by complexities, cycles and a multifaceted nature. Therefore, dissociating these chosen words from their possible relativity is an unwise thing to consider, as it not only leaves the inquirer stuck in his own restricted limit, but also keeps him in subjective ignorance and objective error.

What's more, rushing to assert that someone is wrong because of your own flaws and shortcomings is a low-effort brain problem that will trip you up, yet again, and make you the textbook example of one who “doesn't survive as long as possible” on my post.

[Original_Name62 22]

On 12/16/2024 at 1:52 PM, Presence- said:

I wouldn't choose the word "better". "Better" for what, for whom?
The assessment of "better" depends on the context and the criteria used for the evaluation.
The “challenge” are to the subject. What is not a challenge to me may be a challenge to you.
Within your parameters, speech and debate are equal. 
This is above all a choice of orientation and this choice may or may not reflect your preferences.
If finding resources for your survival already reaches your challenge and difficulty threshold in DayZ, then this suggestion might not be for you.

Ok i see

The thing about DayZ is that its difficulty is not based on actually surviving. Only a minimal amount of zombies in each town, with plenty of ways to get food and heat. Project zomboid is a great representation of a game where you have to survive only against the zombies.

 

Dayz on the other hand is focused more on the player to player interactions. On video from fresh spawns, a DayZ streamer says the biggest tip isn’t how to craft stone knifes or where to find a water pumps, it’s using your voice. Being able to bluff and weasel your way out of a fight is better than aim or assault rifles. A likeable personality can save your life more times than a tactical bacon. DayZ does a great job of subtly pushing players as the biggest danger, because if you play on a private server you can make it to Tisy faster than it took me to get shot nine times on a public server. 
 

I think that yes, DayZ could be made harder and it would make the game more challenging and more hardcore. However, if you want to make it harder you shouldn’t decrease reasources. What happens then is one team finds the only full auto rifle on the server and makes a three mile radius of coastline unplayable.

 

When you are about to leave the coast on a server with a decent amount of loot but you are hungry, you are incentivized to risk taking buckshot to the face in order to kill or rob for a baked beans. On a server with low loot, when you are hungry you will just fish or loot the outskirts, because every other person likely has nothing you want.

 

I think that making DayZ harder or more gritty, as you said, it boils down to pushing players together. If you’ve seen the last of us, one of the core ideas is that humanity still had a chance to survive the long run, but our natural distrust and greed split up the last reminants of the military and the government. DayZ relies on playing at the players cruelty and mistrust. If you count all the times that you’ve died the last times you’ve played the game you’ll see what I mean.

 

for example my deaths look like this:

- Fell of the ATC trying to get a good angle on the plane

- Bled to death as a fresh spawn

- Stabbed after loosing a race to a hunting stand

- Shot at the airfield

- Peppered by 22 lr for a badly damaged hunting knife

- Burst to the face by a geared player 

-Sickled to death in a fist fight

- Car crash (lag)

A good game leaves you smiling about the time when you got turned into Swiss cheese because you didn’t have a round in the chamber. A bad game gets deleted after you spent 3 hours getting killed by a geared player because you couldn’t find a gun. Part of making DayZ harder is focusing on the geared players. If you decrease food and bandage spawns that doesn’t effect them because they have cars and plate carriers. The way to make the game harder for the geared players is to give more fresh spawns a bk18 and a dream.

[Presence- 41]

I must say that I have a hard time deciding which approach should be taken to answering you because not only you completely missed the point of my suggestion but your reasoning is fallacious and many of your assessments are objectively refutable.

Also, you skipped over the answer I gave about "better" and "challenge" and you risk facing your rerouting argument being dismantled for not being prudent with my previous answer.
I really don't appreciate people trying to trick me and redirect my suggestion to another issue with unsound arguments. You tried to insert the Red Herring Fallacy the first time with your question and then proceeded to ignore my previous answer to your question in which you were preparing this fallacious reasoning that distracts from the main point of my topic.

I'm going to believe that you didn't do it on purpose, so I'm going to take the time to respond to your assessments point by point and put things in context so that we can both understand each other because I appreciate and value this suggestion so as not to let it be subject to a reckless and unjust attempt to divert it from its path with reasoning error.

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

The thing about DayZ is that its difficulty is not based on actually surviving.

Are you objectively correct? 

This statement comes from faulty reasoning, a misunderstanding of the definition of survival, is objectively refutable, and furthermore contradicts your own subsequent points of reasoning.

Survival is both a means of protecting yourself, and a reallocation of your resources to what's most pressing and demanding.

Here are some questions to make you think about your statement. Please read your assessment very carefully and then come back to these questions.

• Do you not survive against the elements in DayZ?
• Do you not survive against others?
• Can you not survive with others against others?

 

• How come there is no difficulty in surviving?
• How is surviving despite difficult circumstances not a matter of survival?

 

• Can you survive without eating in DayZ?

- If the answer to the last question is negative, which it is, then how come it is not difficult to not find enough food to survive?
- Doesn't night vision make it easier for you to survive at night and therefore increase your chances of survival?
- Doesn't clothing make your survival easier by having camouflage, insulation, protection adapted to a certain situation?
- Can't first aid kits save your life when you are injured?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

Only a minimal amount of zombies in each town, with plenty of ways to get food and heat

What is your argument against my suggestion on this? How does this go against my suggestion?
Isn't it because of the abundance of resources (food and clothing)?
You can literally catch food with a snare trap in minutes now and you can still just walk away for an abundance of food by going AFK for a few minutes (mushrooms and fruits).
Don't you need food to survive? Don't you need heat to survive the cold?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

Project zomboid is a great representation of a game where you have to survive only against the zombies.

Stay on my topic, sir.
I did not suggest to survive only against zombies.

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

Dayz on the other hand is focused more on the player to player interactions.

How is my suggestion contradicts with player to player interactions? 
Can you please explain. 

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

On video from fresh spawns, a DayZ streamer says the biggest tip isn’t how to craft stone knifes or where to find a water pumps, it’s using your voice.

The "biggest" tip of your beloved streamer might not apply to a situation where the "biggest" tip is to keep your mouth shut to get out of a situation.
I don't appreciate it when someone justifies a certain social status which incidentally is out of context, to counter my suggestion instead of dealing with the information itself.
You also need to find water to survive and a knife is a useful tool in a survival setting and this can also be your "biggest tip".

Also, how does my suggestion contradict whether or not you should use your voice?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

A likeable personality can save your life more times than a tactical bacon.

How does my suggestion contradict this?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

DayZ does a great job of subtly pushing players as the biggest danger, because if you play on a private server you can make it to Tisy faster than it took me to get shot nine times on a public server.

Which private server?
How does my suggestion contradict this?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

However, if you want to make it harder you shouldn’t decrease reasources.

You can't live if you don't eat.
Furthermore, the goal of my suggestion is not to make it harder but to have a look at the abundance of ressources aspect. 

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

What happens then is one team finds the only full auto rifle on the server and makes a three mile radius of coastline unplayable.

Unplayable is to the subject.
That is playable for me.
When I was being chased as an unarmed freshie by other hostile encounters, I didn't say it was unplayable, I was just trying to survive the situation and I was actually playing.
Not to mention that this possibility is also currently happening due to the server change, coastal teleportation, and abundance of resources.

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

When you are about to leave the coast on a server with a decent amount of loot but you are hungry, you are incentivized to risk taking buckshot to the face in order to kill or rob for a baked beans.

Isn't this scenario one where you don't have enough resources to survive? You are running out of resources (food) and so you are taking the risk of getting that resource to continue despite the constraint. This argument should be mine on my suggestion, not yours, because it doesn't contradict my suggestion, in fact, it correlates with it.

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

On a server with low loot, when you are hungry you will just fish or loot the outskirts, because every other person likely has nothing you want.

You won't know until you check what the other person has.
You haven't found any fishing resources and you spot someone fishing or having a fishing rod: this is your PVP interaction getting fixed.
Also, fishing resources are abundant, even for the outlying areas.
Read my suggestion and use your imagination for the scenarios that can arise from it.
The loot is too abundant on official, don't try to defend it with rerouting the argument to a player to player interaction.
My suggestion does not contradict player to player interactions.

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

I think that making DayZ harder or more gritty, as you said,  it boils down to pushing players together.

I did not say that my suggestion have the goal to make DayZ harder. It might come as result depending on the situation but harder or not harder is not the goal.
What does pushing players together have to do with my suggestion?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

If you’ve seen the last of us, one of the core ideas is that humanity still had a chance to survive the long run, but our natural distrust and greed split up the last reminants of the military and the government. DayZ relies on playing at the players cruelty and mistrust

What does this have to do with my suggestion regarding the issue of resource abundance?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

If you count all the times that you’ve died the last times you’ve played the game you’ll see what I mean.

What do you mean?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

A good game leaves you smiling about the time when you got turned into Swiss cheese because you didn’t have a round in the chamber. A bad game gets deleted after you spent 3 hours getting killed by a geared player because you couldn’t find a gun.

You validate my previous message that I gave you.
It is your preference and your threshold.
Your reality is not absolute. 
Where you delete the game is where I install it.
Where you might call it bad, someone else might call it good.
Don't you dare define my threshold for me. You could have at least had the decency to start with "for me" but you didn't.

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

Part of making DayZ harder is focusing on the geared players.

Harder is not the goal.
What this have to do with my suggestion?
If you want to make your own suggestion about player interactions, go ahead, but don't try to hijack my suggestion to sidetrack it for something else.

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

If you decrease food and bandage spawns that doesn’t effect them because they have cars and plate carriers.

Geared or not geared survivors don't eat cars and plate carriers. They eat food.

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

The way to make the game harder for the geared players is to give more fresh spawns a bk18 and a dream.

This is true but it is a double-edged sword because then you make it even more easier for those who have less to lose and more to gain.
Once again, the goal is not about harder or not harder.
Also, don't you contradict yourself above with this following statement below?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

Being able to bluff and weasel your way out of a fight is better than aim or assault rifles.

Why don't you apply that here instead of asking more BK18 for fresh spawns? 

The assessment of "better" depends on the context and the criteria used for the evaluation.
You might need a gun but you don't have it.
So aren't you facing a difficult circumstance in this situation?
You may need a weapon to survive this situation, but you can't find it yet.
Isn't this a difficulty in survival? 
Would you survive or would you delete the game?

On 12/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Original_Name62 said:

The thing about DayZ is that its difficulty is not based on actually surviving.

Are you objectively correct?