SAKHAL: Random player Feedback (1/2)

[Asmondian 372]

SAKHAL: RANDOM PLAYER FEEDBACK (1/2)

It’s well known that this forum is neither massive nor very popular among the DayZ community. But perhaps that makes it the best place to try to get this feedback out there for the Devs without ramifying the debate in absurd subjectivities or even risk to sound completely ungrateful towards a new DLC in a game that is over 10 years old and has given me thousands of hours of enjoyment. As I understand that the Devs regularly visit this place because of their institutional responsibility towards it, I will keep my hopes high that some of them will dedicate a few minutes to read my post.

Without further ado, after playing it for over a month, I will try to offer my personal feedback of Sakhal in an orderly and quick way (probably oversimplifying some things in an irresponsible manner), to finally comment on how the map could be improved, thus achieving its best version.

 

NOT IN THE MOOD TO READ: CHECK THIS TLDR

Sakhal is probably the most aesthetically appealing map of the 3 official DayZ maps and the one that really deepens the survival element of the game through permanent PVE threats. However, in my experience it is sinning of the same mistakes that Livonia DLC had in its beginning where the points of interest of the map were not attractive enough to provide a cyclic and constant gameplay through them, regardless the to the classic loot/tier progression.

What this thread proposes is that the path to take to revitalize and re-signify these points of interest is not only through exacerbating the quality and quantity of loot (like adding more military loot everywhere) but to do it in conjunction with a deeper lore that allows some kind of linearity in the gameplay, more precisely with an organic mission and a global event. The map has plenty of realistic elements to make this possible.

If many people feel the same way regarding Sakhal points of interest and are interested in publishing an idea of what could be an organic global mission, I can do it in a future post.

 

POST INDEX 

1) Introduction: some general concepts

2) Gameplay global balance in a DayZ Map

3) Sakhal feedback after playing for a month.

4) How could Sakhal be a much better map.

5) Some final words

 

1) INTRODUCTION: SOME GENERAL CONCEPTS

A) About this feedback: This post is just the opinion of a random DayZ PC player with almost 12k hours in the game and with a preference for hardcore vanilla style. I clarify this not because it could somehow give me more “argumentative authority” over a new player or those who enjoy a more casual experience, but simply to contextualize who says it, from point of view or preference and who this feedback may eventually represent. The dayz community is quite heterogeneous, with many playstyles and servers, so I thought that this precision was needed beforehand.

In addition, my observations are made from a strictly in-game evaluation and sensations. I am fully aware that there are external factors such as the DLC as a product behind a commercial reasoning, its initial price, the possible questionings on having used and old map terrain and the fact that the two DayZ DLCs (Livonia and Sakhal) often receive subsequent support that expands their original content and that their first builds do not usually maximize the map's attributes, and that all this could have its incidence in a general evaluation of Sakhal.

B) Maps are much more than just a terrain: They have now an essential function for the gameplay with a new standard that has evolved throughout the years. I’m not talking only in their general features but also in their impact on the actual gameplay, becoming more and more relevant every time.

The fact that DayZ is a multiplayer sandbox does not imply that the map itself cannot provide with lineal objectives for the player in parallel to the natural free will. In other words, DayZ always has some core “passive organic goals” that are intrinsic to the game such as the survival of our character and the natural progression based on loot/tiers/zones, but over the years, it has been incorporating more and more “active organic objectives”. Examples of these could be the toxic zones in Chernarus/Livonia (and NBC suit), the bunker in Livonia, the briefcase in Sakhal, the dynamic events, the PVE incidence and threats, some particular CLE settings, etc. In conclusion: a map is far from having a passive role.

C) Underestimate linearity that a deep map lore could provide: One of the elements that is usually overlooked in all the official DayZ maps is it’s the idea of a global organic mission to work alongside with lore of a map and the game, complementing it and allowing to address the gameplay in a linear way and re-signify most of the points of interest around the map (apart from their original relevance in terms of loot progression). Neither Chernarus, Livonia nor Sakhal seem to be committed to exploiting these depths in a noticeable way. Instead, it is always done in an extremely subtle and background manner in order to provide with some “flavor”.

Make no mistake, I do understand the risk of a full lore I fully understand the risks of delving too deeply into a lore that should always remain open-ended and I know the effort behind the 3 maps by replicating the realism of the areas taken as reference and the logic they possess is a marvelous task that no other game usually does. But But here I am not referring to a lore that provides answers, but one that deepens the questions and has much more impact on the gameplay.

The expectations of this to happen with the Livonia DLC where huge because everything - from the bunker to the trailers, the mysteries, the clues, the toxic zones - gave us the feeling that this would finally happen. But after almost 5 years of its release, it has not yet reached that that depth or relevance besides adding an amazing new point of interest with the bunker. In other words: Neglecting the potential of an active lore in a map that could provide a more cyclical and interesting experience miss out a lot of the potential that each map could offer.

 

2) MAPS: GAMEPLAY GLOBAL BALANCE

In my experience as a player, each map should logically aspire to achieve a “gameplay global balance” when you add together all its pros and cons. Always with the intention of offering an organic and, above all, a cyclical gameplay, one that you can repeat over and over again without fear of exhausting it. What do I mean by “gameplay global balance”? That the map manages to compensate for its weaknesses by maximizing its high points and not that everything on the map is just “there”.

Imagine assigning a qualification to each one of the features of a map (terrain, points of interest, basebuilding suitability, pve focus, lore incidence, dimensions, CLE distribution, pvp focus, assets, biomes, wildlife, predators, dynamic events, static events…), keeping in mind that the result of the addition should always be 10. No more, never less. A great map can have a very low score in terms of its suitability for basebuilding due the lack of an extensive terrain or loot progression (Namalsk for example), but it could compensate this by having extremely well defined (ergo, extremely populated) points of interest and or a permanent PVE threat (cold).

Now, what happens when a map does not reach this “gameplay global balance”? What happens when you get less than 10 after adding all its elements? The consequence is that the gameplay becomes stagnant quite soon after exhausting the passive organic objectives (Surviving and transitioning between tiers.). Considering that in DayZ there is not really a character progression that is independent of our gear (there are no passive skills to develop, intrinsic benefits of survival time or relevant global stats or even a deep cosmetic reward besides beards), just surviving for survival's sake does not seems to be appealing enough. Even games that have this objective build it in parallel to a linear global mission (TLD for example). There must always be something else.

 

3) SAKHAL FEEDBACK: IS IT BALANCED ENOUGH?

Following with the above criteria, I believe that these early versions of Sakhal have established it as an average map in terms of gameplay global balance and I’m going to try to explain why:

It is a map that for the first time (officially) offers a latent PVE threat (weather, frozen food) that serves as a rhythm for the gameplay and at some point, collaborates with the idea of grouping players (I have experienced friendlier interactions in Sakhal than in other maps and I don't necessarily attribute it to the novelty or server, but to the survival factor in a map large enough to think twice about pvp). Aesthetically beautiful, the map is probably the most beautiful of the three official maps. On another note, it has managed to revitalize fishing and added a new step of difficulty in relation to food and water. I also see as positive that the lore of the map now is merged more with the CLE (Russian gear exclusive, cold clothes…), even if this means partially relegating content (equipment, dynamic events, toxic zones, etc.).

However, even when Sakhal does this better in those regards than the previous DayZ maps, its points of interest are neither better nor more well defined than in Livonia or Chernarus. I initially thought it might be a result of unfamiliarity and that they would then re-signify themselves organically over time. But after a month of playing, analyzing the CLE and seeing the loot and tier distribution I notice that most of the points of interest lack a reason to visit them, or if you do it to get to know them or for reasons other than mere progression, you will not find many reasons to visit them again.

In this sense Sakhal repeats a bit what happened with Livonia before the adjustments to its terrain, the addition of more POI´s and the presence of the bunker (remembering that Livonia was released in March 2019 with version 1.06 and had perhaps its best moment after version 1.19, almost 4 years later). And I particularly doubt that DayZ players can wait another 4 years to revitalize a map with a fundamental addition like that.

I think Sakhal tries to drive the gameplay only through the progression of tiers but without this being so determinant or hard as to completely re-signify the points of interest across the map. And what happens when there are no well-defined points of interest? Simply the interactions are much lower and Dayz is all about player interactions. So in my eyes the issue with Sakhal is clear: the map still does not offer enough reasons to make the points of interest attractive enough to visit. Neither through what they offer in terms of loot, nor their novelty in terms of features, nor through a lore or global mission that justifies their presence.

 

4) POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT: RESIGNIFY THE POIs

The development of Dayz in its official and community maps and the immediate antecedent of Livonia have shown that there are two ways to improve the points of interest 1) Only through the central loot economy (adding more loot or high gear as a reward) or, 2) Through a map internal lore that proposes a cyclic tour of these points of interest (along with a loot progression, of course).

The first alternative has been seen a bit with the last modifications of the map: add more loot rewards to the visit of certain places, even if they are not necessarily related to the context (Example: militarize the geothermal plant). Even when I do think this is the right move in the short term, it is definitely not the best alternative to follow from now on.

What I propose then is that the lore of Sakhal offers such a depth that gives a reason of life to the multiple points of interest around the map (again, in collaboration with the CLE of course) in an active and, why not, global way. The mere presence of a latent global mission would allow to re-signify the different points of interest through the map working as a complement to its already existing raison d'être (working in parallel). Sakhal needs some kind of linearity in the absence of strong points of interest along the map. It needs a guide that allows a cyclical gameplay and nucleates players. And it needs this guide to be visible to everyone so that it can be noticed as soon as one respawns dead of cold.

To be concrete: Sakhal needs a difficult, deep and rewarding global mission. Continuing with the same superficial style and small winks implemented in Livonia has shown that this lore only works as filler and does not give real transcendence to the gameplay. People visit the Livonia bunker only for the loot reward and the novelty of the darkness, not because it is part of a much more complete endgame with impact on all the rest of the players.

I fully understand that there are risks when talking about lore because the story of DayZ must necessarily throw up questions and not answers. But what is asked here is not to sacrifice the mystery or modify any story, but to give more depth and impact on the gameplay through the fundamental questions linked to the story of DayZ. Otherwise, we will repeat the story of Livonia having remained a mere attempt at narrative depth and excellent trailers.

 

5) SOME FINAL WORDS

I hope this opinion is taken in accordance with the intention behind it: to achieve the best version of the map in a game that I consider to be the best survival that has been created to date. I am fully aware that, regardless of the good intentions and ideals of the Devs towards each new DayZ update, here is a company that must also sustain and reconcile the viability of a product and its development having already completed a cycle of +10 years. I understand that perfectly. That's why this feedback tries to be measured in the criticism and aware of what DayZ may eventually continue to offer in the future.

In case this post turns out to be interesting or valid enough, I can then share my idea regarding what could serve as a deepening of the lore and/or dynamic global mission within the guidelines and context offered by Sakhal, always considering the technical boundaries of the game, the possible deadlines and development team and of the ambiguity and mystery that the lore must always preserve.

Thank you for Reading!

 

[dayzplayer1234 17]

Nice long post with editing and all. Doubt devs ever bother to read it tho.

Devs seem "lazy". They can't even release a decent dlc. Just reworked a map and make it Perma cold( wow so much depth to survival) . Later they release small updates to it cuz they realize how shitty/broken/unbalanced their work actually is when it gets " review bombed". 

After 11 years of dayz (and already releasing a reworked dlc map) you would think developers would do better?  Nope. Even worse.

( Idk are they testing how little they can get away with while cashing in???)

Lore? Still no real lore. A guy with a yellow helmet is all they come up with. And not much on that guy either.

In-game lore is basically non-existent.

Many things just seems half assed. Like somebody started on something and just gave up after making a shitty prototype of it.

BUT instead of working and improving on it, that pile of shit is delivered to players on a silver plate saying it's the next big thing for dayz. Alot eat that up and then thank the devs for feeding them shit and compliment on the gr8 job.  People that call them out on it being literal shit get just tagged as haters and "review bombers" 

 

Edited December 9, 2024 by dayzplayer1234

[Parazight 1599]

Bro, they stopped using the term "CLE" like, 7 years ago.

Most points here are okay.  Running through the forest is still like a video game, and nowhere near real life.

[Riddick_2K 174]

@Asmondian

I've been playing "only" since 2020, I immediately had a vanilla server and, a few years later a modded one (the vanilla one mainly for personal fun and learning, the modded one I had online for a while), I have 2 different accounts (NOT for PvP) and between both I have more than 5000 hours of gameplay. Exclusively interested in the "survival" PvE part... if I have to hunt humans, I have other video games made specifically and better (Battlefield first and foremost. I've been playing it since the 1st title "BF1942").
Having said that... I won't amaze you with special effects but I'll get to the point.
I, personally, don't care about any special "artifice" to "continue the game" (missions, high-level monsters, aliens and space-time transports, etc... all bullshit that has nothing to do with the lore of the game.) The game is sold as: "to survive as long as they can, by all means necessary".
This is what I bought it for and this is the purpose for which I play it.
EVERYTHING else is of no interest to me.
I also played a bit of Namalsk, but I didn't care at all about the space transport and the space base on another planet (I think it was supposed to simulate that). I visited it offline with DCOM (DayZ Community Offline Mode), just out of curiosity, but I think it has nothing to do with DayZ, and the "real" purpose of DayZ... in fact... it just distracts from the real purpose of the game.
Not that it can't be fun to try to complete that mission, but it's "another game within the main game". It does NOT help DayZ in any way, in fact... it distracts from it.

NOTE:
Some Battlefield games also had these "games within the game"... more of a "puzzle" than a game. Try searching for "Peackekeeper" from Battlefield 1. I had a blast solving that long puzzle and getting that gun... but then it was over. With "normal and regular" BF1 games it has no purpose... and that gun, moreover, is not even that great: I used it a bit (it randomly makes stupid and annoying animations on its own) and I immediately abandoned it.
It was a fun interlude, but it is useless for the game!

This is to say what: that the missions or the "strange to visit" points of the game can also be fun to try, but generally they are useless for the main game.

What a survival game really needs is that it is:
1)
Without big and/or annoying bugs (and this one still has too many).
2)
The greatest possible realism (and it has been stated that this game does NOT want to become realistic 😞 😞 😞 )
3)
That it is written and managed for what it is: "unforgiving, authentic, open world sandbox online game [cut] follows a single goal - to survive as long as they can, by all means necessary." (and we are not there yet, the list would be long).

This is why I do not share your (excellently described) opinion.

Adding missions and "various stories" to an open world sandbox does NOT help the "general and long-lasting" gameplay, but "distracts" it. Maybe it will attract new players who will want to experience that "weirdness" seen on YT, but it will not help players who seek survival to continue playing, bug after bug, mistake after mistake, and "absurd and grotesque unreality" after "absurd and grotesque unreality".

🌻 🌼 🌺 😉

 

P.S.
Can someone give me a game reason why should I buy a winter map DLC when there is already Namalsk for that ?
What does "Sakhal" (as a map, I mean) have that is important that "Namalsk" does not have ?!?
For survival, I mean, not absurd and grotesque missions.

Edited December 13, 2024 by Riddick_2K