Trending Games | WildStar | ArcheAge | Guild Wars 2 | Elder Scrolls Online

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,776,843 Users Online:0
Games:723  Posts:6,191,731
DayZ (DZ)
Dean "Rocket" Hall | Official Site
MMOFPS | Genre:Horror | Status:Beta Testing  (est.rel N/A)  | Pub:Dean "Rocket" Hall
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:Free | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

DayZ Forum » General Discussion » In an effort to make serious contributions to the game, I wrote a white paper detailing salient design issues.

2 Pages 1 2 » Search
21 posts found
  Jsteiner

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/12/07
Posts: 221

"The two riders were approaching and the wind began howl." -Jimi

 
OP  4/13/13 12:26:04 PM#1
Link for viewing or download below - pdf format.

http://issuu.com/t80...per?mode=window

The ultimate solution to every problem: more space marines.

  Loktofeit

Elite Member

Joined: 1/13/10
Posts: 11914

Currently playing EVE, SMITE, Wildstar, and Combat Arms

4/13/13 12:28:40 PM#2
Very nicely formatted.

  User Deleted
6/16/13 3:28:52 AM#3

Very nicely formatted indeed.

 

DAY Z would benefit from a design which discourages FFA PKing. Allowing players to choose SURVIVOR, BANDIT, or ZOMBIE- would be infinitely more entertaining if given the same gameplay elements, the same game.

Survivors would not be allowed to shoot other Survivors. That's it.

Bandits could shoot anyone.

Zombies would be absolutely enthralling and amazing experience, especially if populated with NPC's or was overwhelmingly popular in each server. Also allows room for special zombies or 'leader' zombies, if the lore allowed for it. (At least, it would allow for players to use NPC's to their advantage like AI teammates).

 

Really, there is next to no restriction. The ONLY restriction added to the game is that if you choose Survivor, you cannot shoot other Survivors. This encourages teamwork. This doesn't mean the game couldn't present opportunities for Survivors to become Bandits, or for Survivors to betray other Survivors in indirect PvP (such as locking a door behind them, trying to get the other Survivor killed so they can go back and loot.)

This is a game where Survivors would be ENCOURAGED to grief other Survivors. A game where Bandits would be ENCOURAGED to kill anyone but their friends (or even betray them like the scum they are). A game where Zombies would be ENCOURAGED to work together or follow hordes of NPC's prowling for brains.

 

 

IMO, DAY Z is a failure of a game. A failure because it could have been infinitely better in an infinite number of directions. Instead, the developers are among the religious minority who would never dare betray their horrendously flawed version of the game.

 

edit: After reading the rest of the article, I noticed you said very similar things. Great article.

  GroovyFlower

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/12/11
Posts: 1252

Skyrim

6/17/13 5:14:59 AM#4

Let me first say i belong to those who ask " Are you friendly " and if im sniping i won't if i can snipe survivors.

So im no gangker or pk im ANTI who hunt down zombies and bandits.

Im friendly player unless survivor or not if threaten will shoot if needed.

Do you guys and that guy from article even slighest understand what im trying to say here???

I, ME myself DESIDE what should happen and behave in games like DayZ not the developer(Dean Hall understand this concept  perfectly) it seems you guys still dont understand at all or dont want to(i think the latter)that a game like DayZ is SURVIAL APOCALYPS FREE FOR ALL if dying your DEAD NOMORE LOSE ALL whats so difficult here to understand???

If the gamers the community don't understand this concept thats there problem don't blame the developer DayZ is true survival game where players can form the playstyle FREELY.

That many who i think come from COD or similar games thinks its a fragfest kill on sight think laters thats also not fault of DEVELOPER.

ITS FAULT community and the ones who scream loudest that they want carebear heaven are the bandits.

DayZ many realy try in beginning form groups or be friendly but as i know many who at first try to be friendly eventually showed there TRUE NATURE and became bandits.

Im still after more then a year FRIENDLY player i still dont kill on sight and im still playing, 99% do not ask they just shoot THATS SAD FACTS,  thats realy sad indeed but that don't mean DayZ should change to this disgusting ideas that this article have or nightmarish origin mod which is real BAD mod.

I still play on many servers mainly europe with 50/50 who are PURE SURVIAL NO RESTRICTIONS even with patch 1.7.7 which is even harder then before.

If you want DUMBDOWN versions of DayZ i suggets make your own game and let us true hardcore free for all PERMADEATH gamers have our game THANK YOU.

Dayz is simply not for casuals and carebears its simple as that why you guys don't understand this is BEYOND ME?

Plenty of games out there with casual play fluf instance safezones please go play those and leave DayZ to those who understand how to play this kind of games.

From true ANTI(thats who kill pk/gankers)gamer and fan of hardcore free for all permadeath games.

Players make game not developers form ANTI groups hunt down BANDITS thats what should happen.

Cya ingame from "sneakyattack" roaming euroservers(no origin thats for pussy's)

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10422

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

6/17/13 7:33:16 AM#5

Nicely formatted or not, why should the developer listen to some random internet person? It's not like the developer doesn't have their own ideas about the game, and it's not like the developer didn't get a couple million players using their own ideas and developing the mod exactly the way they wanted.

Not trying to be a Debbie Downer, but is the document actually for the developer, or is it something to show off to people like us?

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Jsteiner

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/12/07
Posts: 221

"The two riders were approaching and the wind began howl." -Jimi

 
OP  6/17/13 6:59:38 PM#6

It's for all of us. Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to get the developers to read it, nor many people on reddit (it was lost in the deluge).

I take pride in these positions and truly believe that their serious consideration would do the game very well.

The ultimate solution to every problem: more space marines.

  lugal

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/13/08
Posts: 504

6/17/13 7:11:06 PM#7
If somebody is a carebear, they need to play another game.
Dayz is successful inspite of carebear conventions, for it attempts to bring a slice of reality(how people really act to one another) within the scope of fantasy. Adding restrictions does not enhance the gameplay experience, the fear and the adrenaline rush are needed. Without them, its is a borefest.

Roses are red
Violets are blue
The reviewer has a mishapen head
Which means his opinion is skewed
...Aldous.MF'n.Huxley

  Jakdstripper

Apprentice Member

Joined: 2/14/10
Posts: 2108

6/17/13 7:14:36 PM#8

Dayz is a MOD not a game. it is probably the single most successful mod to date, and the best zombie/apocalyptic "game" ( it's not a game remember) out there, period.  

and here you are explaining how it should be better.....the gall you have sir!

 

Dayz is just amazing. if anything should be seriously fixed is how easy it is to cheat/hack/exploit. that is truly the BIG issue with Dayz. Sadly when you get "the community" involved you invite the good with the bad and Dayz has almost no way to weed out the bad.  as far as rules/mechanics/art style/AI/spawns/etc this mod pretty much go it all spot on. it's just fantastic. a brilliant concept, exquisitely simply and incredibly immersive. 

 Just be happy it exists at all please.

 

we can only wish that half of all new mmos would be even remotely as fun as Dayz is.

  13lake

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/14/10
Posts: 122

6/17/13 8:31:13 PM#9

No, no and no, how about no again, carebears are not welcome in a real hardcore player's game. WE WANT OUR DEATH WE WANT OUR GRIEF, WE WANT OUR FREEDOM.

 

This sir what u wanna do is destroying our freedom, u want to make us slaves, ...

Stop this nonsense before it gets out of hand, do not bother developers with this weak man, fake mean antics, ...

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10422

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

6/17/13 8:39:31 PM#10


Originally posted by Jsteiner
It's for all of us. Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to get the developers to read it, nor many people on reddit (it was lost in the deluge).

I take pride in these positions and truly believe that their serious consideration would do the game very well.




That's somewhat sane. If you expected the developer to actually make the changes, then it would be a not so sane expectation.

I read this on Cracked.com, and I think it's a good benchmark for things that can change in games. Let's say the game cost a million dollars to produce, and the change you suggest would cost $100,000, it's not likely to happen. If the change you suggest would cost $5,000 or $10,000, then it's possible, if a lot of people like the idea and the developer likes the idea. Basically, the more expensive your idea is to enact, the less likely it is to happen, unless it's something that the developer was planning on anyway.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Jsteiner

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/12/07
Posts: 221

"The two riders were approaching and the wind began howl." -Jimi

 
OP  6/18/13 12:15:06 AM#11
Originally posted by 13lake

No, no and no, how about no again, carebears are not welcome in a real hardcore player's game. WE WANT OUR DEATH WE WANT OUR GRIEF, WE WANT OUR FREEDOM.

 

This sir what u wanna do is destroying our freedom, u want to make us slaves, ...

Stop this nonsense before it gets out of hand, do not bother developers with this weak man, fake mean antics, ...

I'm sorry. I can't let this continue. I love the hardcore aspect of the game and in no way was recommending dulling or diminishing that aspect.

Could you provide a quote or reference from my paper that you think supports this idea? 

Frankly, the quote you made above is distorting my position.

The ultimate solution to every problem: more space marines.

  Jsteiner

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/12/07
Posts: 221

"The two riders were approaching and the wind began howl." -Jimi

 
OP  6/18/13 12:19:10 AM#12
Originally posted by lizardbones

 


Originally posted by Jsteiner
It's for all of us. Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to get the developers to read it, nor many people on reddit (it was lost in the deluge).

 

I take pride in these positions and truly believe that their serious consideration would do the game very well.




That's somewhat sane. If you expected the developer to actually make the changes, then it would be a not so sane expectation.

I read this on Cracked.com, and I think it's a good benchmark for things that can change in games. Let's say the game cost a million dollars to produce, and the change you suggest would cost $100,000, it's not likely to happen. If the change you suggest would cost $5,000 or $10,000, then it's possible, if a lot of people like the idea and the developer likes the idea. Basically, the more expensive your idea is to enact, the less likely it is to happen, unless it's something that the developer was planning on anyway.

 

I absolutely agree - I had a paragraph or two about instances and how they would fit nicely into the design paradigm of the future base-building mechanics. If they plan now, it can be done in tandem before they look back and say 'gosh, I really wish we had foreseen players wanting dynamic, evolving, and even community-created experience that we can drop in to the environment.'

I like to be brief, but I can elaborate more on this idea if you'd like.

The ultimate solution to every problem: more space marines.

  Grailer

Apprentice Member

Joined: 6/13/06
Posts: 819

6/18/13 12:25:20 AM#13

Reminds me of how UO was ruined because of carebears .

 

If you died in UO all your items dropped on the ground and you became a ghost till you ran back to corpse .

Pkillers would usually chop up your body and leave it where you died .

 

 

 

But imagine if instead of being able to kill other players you could play as a monster instead? That would make combat a lot more interesting instead of dumb AI lol . Probably be abused tho as usual , some one would allow their friends to kill them for easy loot . Would have to have some system that punishes player monsters for dying as well .

  aspekx

Advanced Member

Joined: 12/24/05
Posts: 2152

6/18/13 12:53:36 AM#14

i have played, and had fun, DayZ as it was in the beginning. this is coming from someone who will not play pvp servers and is thinking twice about ArcheAge.

 

i have a few salient points as well:

 

1. FFA PvP'rs need their own games that are designed around their preferred mode of gameplay. there is no need to take that from them. i have been saying this about FFA PvP'rs need for games like this for a while now.

 

2. however, there can be no harm in creating a game that allows players to set up their own server with their own server rules. if those rules shut out FFA PvP, or even if they make the death penalty more damaging for the really hardcore, then so be it. FFA PvP'rs speak of freedom, lets see if they really  mean it. create a game with all of the options adjustable serverside by those hosting.

 

3. frankly, i think most games could benefit from having at least one FFA PvP server somehow implemented even when hosted on the company's servers. there's usually an RP server (for good or for ill that's what they are called at least) i dont think RP is any less valuable a mode of play than FFA PvP.

 

just my thoughts on this whole debate. one that clearly extends past simply DayZ for many players.

"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse

  ElgarL

Novice Member

Joined: 11/20/07
Posts: 191

6/18/13 2:13:10 AM#15
The ONLY place DayZ falls down is that it's a mod for Arma II. Arma has the WORST interface and inventory management system I have EVER seen.  It's pretty much unplayable for many people.


Creator of ELTank and Nostalgia

  GroovyFlower

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/12/11
Posts: 1252

Skyrim

6/18/13 4:42:59 AM#16
Originally posted by Jakdstripper

Dayz is a MOD not a game. it is probably the single most successful mod to date, and the best zombie/apocalyptic "game" ( it's not a game remember) out there, period.  

and here you are explaining how it should be better.....the gall you have sir!

 

Dayz is just amazing. if anything should be seriously fixed is how easy it is to cheat/hack/exploit. that is truly the BIG issue with Dayz. Sadly when you get "the community" involved you invite the good with the bad and Dayz has almost no way to weed out the bad.  as far as rules/mechanics/art style/AI/spawns/etc this mod pretty much go it all spot on. it's just fantastic. a brilliant concept, exquisitely simply and incredibly immersive. 

 Just be happy it exists at all please.

 

we can only wish that half of all new mmos would be even remotely as fun as Dayz is.

If they fix the hackers/cheaters and exploits plus the warping zombies glitching zombies through walls and make the game with more objectives plus servers run by BI themselfs keep it 100% hardcore, no casual carebear shit im happy.

Playing almost everyday sinds first week of may 2012 so i know a littlebit of game and its community hehe.

  aspekx

Advanced Member

Joined: 12/24/05
Posts: 2152

6/18/13 6:31:32 AM#17
Originally posted by ElgarL
The ONLY place DayZ falls down is that it's a mod for Arma II. Arma has the WORST interface and inventory management system I have EVER seen.  It's pretty much unplayable for many people.
 
actually, i just watched them at E3 here on this site. you won't recognize the UI. looks like they have done a really great job in simplifying w/o losing functionality.

 

"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse

  aspekx

Advanced Member

Joined: 12/24/05
Posts: 2152

6/18/13 6:36:24 AM#18
Originally posted by GroovyFlower
Originally posted by Jakdstripper

If they fix the hackers/cheaters and exploits plus the warping zombies glitching zombies through walls and make the game with more objectives plus servers run by BI themselfs keep it 100% hardcore, no casual carebear shit im happy.

Playing almost everyday sinds first week of may 2012 so i know a littlebit of game and its community hehe.

 

why in the world would you care how other people play a game on a private server?

 

see i secretly believe that all hardcore FFA PvP players deep down inside fear something: if a great game like DayZ had the option to not be as hardcore, then the hardcore servers would be empty.

 

now, i say that they fear that happening. i am not saying that is what would happen. but i think it gives an interesting insight into the mindset of those who are on that end of the gaming spectrum.

 

"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse

  taus01

Advanced Member

Joined: 4/12/06
Posts: 1419

6/18/13 7:15:23 AM#19

 

Your paper fails assuming the biggest threat in an apocalyptic scenario are not other survivors. There is nothing more dangerous and threatening than a human fighting for their life. Well, there is, a human fighting for their life with access to weapons.

There have been scientific studies about various catastrophic scenarios and in every single one of them the outcome is the same: At least a third or more people get killed by other people than by whatever caused the scenario. People will do anything to survive. In the initial panic millions will get killed, trampled to death, car accidents, fighting for resources. Hundreds of thousands will take the easy way out and kill themselves but not before killing their loved ones.

This is what makes DayZ unique and it should never change.

"Give players systems and tools instead of rails and rules"

  Jsteiner

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/12/07
Posts: 221

"The two riders were approaching and the wind began howl." -Jimi

 
OP  6/18/13 3:32:10 PM#20
Originally posted by taus01

 

Your paper fails assuming the biggest threat in an apocalyptic scenario are not other survivors. There is nothing more dangerous and threatening than a human fighting for their life. Well, there is, a human fighting for their life with access to weapons.

There have been scientific studies about various catastrophic scenarios and in every single one of them the outcome is the same: At least a third or more people get killed by other people than by whatever caused the scenario. People will do anything to survive. In the initial panic millions will get killed, trampled to death, car accidents, fighting for resources. Hundreds of thousands will take the easy way out and kill themselves but not before killing their loved ones.

This is what makes DayZ unique and it should never change.

I don't think my positions detract from the danger of 'the most dangerous game' - in fact, I think I point out that the PvP is exactly what makes DayZ so special.

 

More my point was that having so little to accomplish cheapens the PvP experience by limiting the scope and depth of the game.

The ultimate solution to every problem: more space marines.

2 Pages 1 2 » Search