What if I told you that there are 2 kinds of difficulty?

[bloodriot 13]

So I was reading this thread: http://dayzmod.com/f...y-too-hard-now/ and I was already thinking about what I'm about to say for some time now because of many other comments from other users around here.

Before I actually begin, I will say that games which cause you to CARE if your avatar dies are the best kind. I remember Freelancer with the Ioncross Total War mod as one of my best experiences online (I won't go over the huge differences that mod introduced, but suffice to say that much like DayZ, if you died, you lost everything you worked for). This thread is aimed at the players, not Rocket or whoever is workign with him.

On to the subject at hand then:

Most problems with difficulty some people point out, and strangely some other people defend, are not necessarilly intended or proper difficulty. Rather it is clunky mechanics or some other quirk or bug of the arma engine or dayz code.

I'll use this example to illustrate my point. It's not the only one, but i'll stick to it. So you've got an axe and a rifle...super. Wether you have alpha on a Zed or he spots you and rush you have to make a choice of shooting it, possibly aggroing more of them, or you could use your axe for a silent kill. Let's say you agro one. As it is now, Zeds are too Automan Lamborghini (means they are lightning fast and pull no inertia 90º turn zig zags without losing speed, for the ones that get the reference) to be reliably fired upon at a distance if they aggroed already. I don't agree with the decision of giving them super olympic sprint powers, but i'll leave it for another topic.

So most engagements, unless inside a building are made at point blank range. In this scenario the hatchet is the better solution in every conceivable way you can think of. Now, how many of you can and will switch to the axe in this scenario? None of you should as it is now. Because EVEN if you have enough inventory space in your backpack to not delete the gun and/or ammo by accident, it simply takes way too long to access the inventory and do it. Were it a simple change to hatchet option like it is between rifle and a handgun, most people would probably have less issue in switching.

This scenario shows that the game is hard, not because Zeds or the environment is hard, in this case your are not only fighting the Zeds... you're also fighting against the inventory system. You're fighting a game mechanic. Fighting the interface. This is NOT proper difficulty. This game should be hard as nails, but you should be fighting or evading zeds and other players... NOT your player interface.

Interface and mechanics should not hinder the player. They should allow and help the player to do whatever the player desires within the game's scope. And for the realism advocates around here... it's well established that rifles have slings and it would be way more natural that if the player drops the gun, it will simply hang on it's shoulder by the sling much like he does when you select your handgun. And even then droppign the gun requires you to enter the inventory, drop the gun and equip the hatchet and THEN reload it.

Next time you defend Zed difficulty, do so knowing if you are actually defending an intended proper difficulty, or if you're defending an unintended quirk of the engine that unnecessarily makes the game...well not only hard, but frustrating too.

I can even go as far and say that while I play Arma 2 and Arma 2 OA for over a year before DayZ ever came out. Most people I tried to get to play the game were put off by clunky game mechanics, not by the concept of the game... hell, they wanted to like the game.

I'm not saying it's all rocket's fault... NO. It's mostly the engine and hardcoded stuff that he can't do anything about at the moment. So yeah, while this mod is in Alpha, the clunky game interfaces, bugs and quirks of the engine that add the wrong kind of difficulty SHOULD NOT BE DEFENDED, so that when standalone comes, you get a proper difficulty that most players can enjoy because they feel they are suriving the setting and not the engine.

Cheers.

[Turr 17]

The only reason that the inventory is "bugged/broken/etc" is because it was never intended to be used for an arcade-like zombie mod. It is a realistic game, so you shouldn't be able to run as fast as you can while checking your bag and taking out that SAW you need. The interface is hard to get used to, but after a while it isn't the biggest problem in the game, it was never even intended to make a game where you can run-and-gun your way through.

[bloodriot 13]

I feel you miss the point. I'm not saying we should run and gun. i'm saying that preciselly because the inventory is not optimized for dayz that it makes the WAY you interact with it harder than it should. The inventory was used as an example to illustrate that some people dfend the wrong kind of difficulty.

I can give you another way simpler example. You are on top of a building, completely still and you press Z to go prone. instead of going prone on the spot, you make a quick dash forward before going prone, causing you to run off the building unintentionally. This again is the player fighting the engine and mechanics, not because you made a mistake, or because Zeds are hard and are supposed to be hard.

Like I said, the standalone should problably fix most of these things, but what i'm trying to say to some players is that they are defending bugs and unoptimized code as being intended difficulty. Again, the inventory was just used as an example of it.

Edited August 10, 2012 by BloodRiot

[Element47 2480]

ok, this actually touches my field of work..

you are right, that the ArmA UI suffers from some serious flaws. This is beyond arguing. But there will always be a kind of "meta-difficulty".

A student doing exams will face not only the difficulty of the test, but the distraction of the environment. An athlet may not only face the challenge of his sport, but maybe not-so-perfectly fitting shoes.

In gaming, like in many other applications of human-computer-interaction, the UI will always be an imperfect proxy for our actions. Current HCI research intensively explores new methods of intuitive interaction, and user-oriented interface design has risen massively in attention and priority, But for the foreseeable future, the UI will remain a compromise, it will remain an abstraction of real action and feedback.

to pickup your example - someone wrote regarding the hatchet, that it is highly unlikely that he would have both an assault rifle and an axe in quickdraw holsters, so it cannot be expected to switch between the two within a second. It is a valid point, and the UI design needs to compromise between accesible gameplay and realism. In most cases, there is not one valid solution, but many different paths of sacrificing one aspect over another. Do i think the ArmA interface could have been done better? Sure, in many ways. But this is my personal opinion, and in my daily work, i encounter programmers, engineers and UX experts everyday who have qualified, valid opinions which diametrically differ from mine.

bottom line: UIs will always be imperfect. They can be argued to represent the meta-difficulty of our actions, which is beyond prediction or simulation. And no single UI will ever appeal to everybody. So, as much as you present a valid point, there isnt really a solution to it.

[mio.rogvall@gmail.com 107]

Op you are an idiot man. Arma 2 was never designed for heavy inventory management because it doesnt revolve around collecting gear. You should know this and not post trash here that is completely obvious to both BI and Rocket. Just save us a few bytes and think for a minute next time.

[bloodriot 13]

Ok... Maybe I just suck at explaining stuff, cuz I get the distinct feeling you people think the point is criticising the inventory system... but I will be direct this time. My post is NOT about changing stuff. It's not criticism at the inventory per se. It's not aimed at Rocket or BIS... Of course UIs are imperfect and i'm pretty sure it is obvious to the devs.

I posted in order to tell the community to be mindful of what kind of difficulty they choose to defend. You can't defend flawed systems such as bad interface or bad physics as intentional game difficulty. You may learn to live with it. You cope and adapt to it. However you simply should not defend it as if it was an intended feature of difficulty.

I know perfectly well how to deal with the inventory, but forget the inventory.. it was just the example i chose to illustrate the wrong kind of difficulty.

Imagine a platformer game with crappy controls. The difficulty comes not from the level design posing a challenge.. but because you can't control the avatar properly. Again, you can cope and adapt if you're inclined to do so, but you shouldn't defend that as good difficulty.

If you disagree with me then fine... it's allowed in a free society, however disagree with me because you understand that i'm merely makign a distinction between difficulty of the setting(survival, zombie apocalipse etc) and things that are more akin to bugs or are simply in the game because of limitations of the code and engine.

Oh well... get it if you want or don't.

Cheers.

[Turr 17]

Fair enough, but you keep going on about the inventory ;)

These issues are engine-based problems, which can't be simply fixed with a mod. Unless rocket gets access to the ArmA2 engine they will be very hard to fix. It's like modding a car, you can make it all fancy-looking with your pink-white colorway, spoiler and what-not, but diving under the hood and actually opening up the car engine to fix the way it works is a whole other level. And unlike a car engine, a game engine is compressed and compiled and is therefore harder to access.

[Banicks 55]

The two kinds of difficulty are nighttime (ridiculously easy) and daytime (let's aggro zeds from halfway across Chernarus).

Nighttime is practically free reign and the only thing you have to be concerned about is hypothermia.

Daytime is prone everywhere remotely near zeds.

[bloodriot 13]

"What we've got here is failure to communicate

Some men you just can't reach..."

[Jex =TE= (DayZ) 218]

The arma system is shit - download the original Operation Flashpoint and play it - you will groan as you suddenly realize it has hardly changed in 12 years. It has nothing to do with realism - you cannot configure a rifle correctly, instead the inventory of a weapon crate has to have every variance of one rifle because u simply cannot attach a scope or a suppressor leaving you with ridiculously long weapon inventories. Add to the the clunky, awful movement, getting stuck in narrow openings, the animation loops u get stuck in, the transitions between stances - it's all awkward and difficult instead of being fluid like the body is - it's almost like playing someone who's disabled or has a bad back

[thefonztm@gmail.com 86]

"What we've got here is failure to communicate

Some men you just can't reach..."

Perfect timing with that quote. I see OP's point. It is valid.

Slight OT, I'd love to see a hatchet added to the game. Not the 2 handed axe we currently have. A small, one handed, hatchet. Equipable to the pistol slot. Maybe 2-3 hits per zed. Would be a nice stop-gap fix to the OP's example.

[xximrtwoixx 104]

I don't really think it matters, I get what Op is saying and I even agree there are two kinds of difficulty but there are also a million ways to skin a cat.

If the UI was great and you switched to hatchet via simple mouse wheel or key command but then went into a 20 second animation where you pulled the hatchet out of a sling/rail on on your pack after slinging your gun to represent getting the weapon out of storage would it be very different? Of course you can't move while this is going as the animation stops movement also.

You have the same exact scenario but alot more content to accomplish it, ie animations, code, etc.

I'm not saying BI made the UI crappy intentionally but I think that it almost servers a purpose in its clunkyness.

[fraktal 6]

I approve of this post sir... Hopefully standalone fixes all this :P

[bloodriot 13]

@xXI Mr Two IXx

Trust me when I say that I mean no disrespect whatsoever. But you are a good example of what i'm trying to ....warn against.

It does matter. If the animation is 20 seconds long it means it was DESIGNED to take that long. People complaining about it or defending it would be discussing a valid point of difficulty.

Rocket works with what he's got. Limited access. Compromises were made and the result can be much better when he releases the standalone. But you should not defend or rationalize this limitation as serving a purpose. The mechanic was not created to serve a purpose but rather it exists because in it's current form, the mod cannot change it.

Would you defend Alt+F4? Opening/Closing doors crippling or killing you? By recongnizing what is proper difficulty one can actually improve the game and provide valuable input in order to make the game hard but enjoyable even if you die...specially if you die.

Loosing hours of hard work in the game to a zed horde you inadvertently aggroed because of a mistake or bad luck is a totally different thing than loosing those same hours to a door you opened that killed you.

I don't take the devs for lazy bums and neither should you. Defend our much wanted hardcore difficulty by improving it's merits, not condoning it's limitations.

Cheers.

[markevens 15]

This game has so many parallels to EVE.

The early EVE had absolute shit interface, shit tutorials, and was a brutal pvp world to live in. When CCP started improving the interface and tutorials there was the same uproar from the people who 'learned the hard way' that CCP was making the game too newb friendly. The results of those changes was more people actually playing the game which meant more opportunity for pvp.

So yeah, I'm in complete agreement with OP. Defending bugs as part of the difficulty system is retarded. Maybe rocket should introduce more bugs if you like them so much?

[bloodriot 13]

NOOOOO!!!!!!... then they would be intentional and I could not complain about people defending them :D

[77white 2]

Its very easy to lose zeds,in houses, in cities, in forrests, in bushes. You dont have to shoot at all. Btw its not that hard to kill them before they can hit you, its only about aiming.

[mio.rogvall@gmail.com 107]

Ok... Maybe I just suck at explaining stuff, cuz I get the distinct feeling you people think the point is criticising the inventory system... but I will be direct this time. My post is NOT about changing stuff. It's not criticism at the inventory per se. It's not aimed at Rocket or BIS... Of course UIs are imperfect and i'm pretty sure it is obvious to the devs.

I posted in order to tell the community to be mindful of what kind of difficulty they choose to defend. You can't defend flawed systems such as bad interface or bad physics as intentional game difficulty. You may learn to live with it. You cope and adapt to it. However you simply should not defend it as if it was an intended feature of difficulty.

I know perfectly well how to deal with the inventory, but forget the inventory.. it was just the example i chose to illustrate the wrong kind of difficulty.

Imagine a platformer game with crappy controls. The difficulty comes not from the level design posing a challenge.. but because you can't control the avatar properly. Again, you can cope and adapt if you're inclined to do so, but you shouldn't defend that as good difficulty.

If you disagree with me then fine... it's allowed in a free society, however disagree with me because you understand that i'm merely makign a distinction between difficulty of the setting(survival, zombie apocalipse etc) and things that are more akin to bugs or are simply in the game because of limitations of the code and engine.

Oh well... get it if you want or don't.

Cheers.

Again. The Interface is not flawed. In fact its very good for arma 2. However its not good for dayz, and rocket knows that.

[Blindingsun 233]

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/22063968.jpg

[bloodriot 13]

@Goldeen

you are 100% right. The inventory is perfectly fine for vanilla Arma2 and like i said.. i'm sure it wont be an issue in standalone.

[Heiduk 265]

What! Trees weren't designed to kill me?

I agree 100%, the game should be hard because it was designed to be hard not because it is buggy.

Its very easy to lose zeds,in houses, in cities, in forrests, in bushes.

Of course, bugs also introduce the wrong kind of easiness too.

[Killlg 5]

What you speak of is referred to as artificial difficulty I believe. Although if I had a gun in my backpack I imagine it might take some time to put it away/take it out. I wouldn't want it to be loaded probably, so I'd also have to find a clip and reload the weapon. You refer to a sling, but I don't think I'd want two assault rifles or any other combination of weaponry hanging from my shoulders. Your prime example is with a hatchet and I hope there's a melee weapon slot in the standalone game but unfortunately I think the clunky UI is here to stay until the game goes standalone and Rocket fixes it.

Also, bugs are bugs, DayZ is in alpha as I'm sure everone knows; trees may kill you but being a proper adult means you should understand that this is unintentional and while frustrating easily excusable. Aside from the UI though I can't think of too many instances of artificial difficulty present in DayZ and even the example you've shown isn't all that bad, it requires planning and forethought to know what weapon you're going to need and having it out when you need it.

[xximrtwoixx 104]

@BloodRiot

I think its BS to compare UI to clipping and character model glitches. The first is a system that is designed and tested by the studio, the second are bugs that you have even recagnized as not being intentional. As pretty much everyone has agreed that the UI works for vanilla, but not for DayZ or other mods that have significant inventory management (Life mods), you can conclude that because inventory isn't important in vanilla this was the biggest reason the UI is the way it is. A secondary consideration that I think your OP disregards is that you don't always need polish to accomplish something. I think that without polish a mechanic is going to be open to interpertation, because you can't distinguish poor design and intentional design or exclusion.

I also think that people have priorities wrong in terms of complaints, yes people should hold rocket and devs over the fire but on the right things. What really breaks the game and isn't something that can be "Fixed" but is more of an issue of the game/design. (Like altf4 or KoS) IMO getting/switching equipment should be slow and I don't care if this is accomplished with an animation or my inability to switch to stowed weapons easily because of UI. I think focusing on things that players think will improve playability (Bugs/UI/Etc) are all things that should occur later and the real concentration needs to be on content and finishing the last half of the game.

Edited August 12, 2012 by xXI Mr Two IXx