Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 10:55:31 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: H1Z1 (Zombieapocalypse: SOE edition?) 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: H1Z1 (Zombieapocalypse: SOE edition?)  (Read 69668 times)
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #105 on: January 16, 2015, 07:19:18 PM

More on the airdrops from a Dev. I must admit that it sounds completely different this way, very original, and kind of fun. Also note that every airdrop comes with an escort of zombies.  why so serious?

Quote
The dev team loves airdrops, and in testing, every time we used one, they were highly contested where the person who actually called in the airdrop had to earn it through a gladiator style brawl. They usually weren't the one that ended up with the airdrop but no matter what, the person who called it in was satisfied with the event that they got to make happen. That event is the magic we are trying to capture with everyone. The last thing we want is it to be a boring item that someone can sneak around and quietly get to find gear without it being contested. In our opinion that is basically cheating and nobody should be able to do that.

Whether you agree with us or not, that is how we want airdrops to work. We are going to be tuning them throughout early access until we can get them to work that way, here are the first pass initial changes.

1) Make the plane move slowly (53% of current) This increases the ability for other players to react to the plane coming in.
2) Make the drop fall more slowly (80% of current) This increases the ability for other players to react to the plane coming in.
3) Less accurate maximum drop radius (was 250m now 700m, so with these settings it would drop up to 700m from the calling player)
4) New minimum distance of 250m for airdrops to appear from a player. This is a little less than ½ the player density of 700m distance with 120 players on a server. Therefore more players are likely to be near the airdrop when deployed.
5) Increase the minimum number of required players to 120 (a little higher after more discussion about player density being important to keeping airdrops contested)


H1Z1 Airdrop Events and drop percentages:


Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #106 on: January 16, 2015, 07:36:19 PM

I dunno, I'm not poor. I don't mind paying $20 for a game I might want to check out before it "releases". I don't have enough time to get worked up like Haem about these things.

I didn't buy into this game, and really have no interest. But I know a lot of people that get $20 worth of fun out of some broken games. Who gives a fuck?
Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27449

Badge Whore


Reply #107 on: January 16, 2015, 07:51:54 PM

Barnum would have loved you and all the other 'gamers' with you.

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #108 on: January 16, 2015, 08:00:04 PM

I dunno, this day and age if I get a few hours of entertainment out of something and I only spend $20 on it, I'm pretty happy. It's the cost of a few drinks at a bar or going to the movies. If you are laughing at people getting their monies worth of entertainment, then you're a sad little man.

If you feel like being smug and pointing at people, go find a few Star Citizen doners.
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #109 on: January 16, 2015, 08:00:58 PM

One thing I don't quite get about the bitching about air drops is sure there may be a gun. But anybody in the area has about as much of a chance at it as you do and can kill you to take your stuff if you happen to get it.

The game world is 64 miles wide and to airdrop there need to be only 50 people on the server apparently, so it certainly seems like you could time a drop during a low pop time and have very little realistic chance of it going to someone else.

I think the airdrop is a cool idea. Gives a focal point to the action, is sort of a communal event. The problem is they said the game wasn't P2W then added a P2W element. And yes, Early Access is no different from launching. (Only pay if you're happy with what you get right now, because it could be abandoned or get worse)

Now that they are offering refunds I don't see what the problem is. But I understand why people were angry before that.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #110 on: January 16, 2015, 08:29:02 PM

I dunno, I'm not poor. I don't mind paying $20 for a game I might want to check out before it "releases". I don't have enough time to get worked up like Haem about these things.

I didn't buy into this game, and really have no interest. But I know a lot of people that get $20 worth of fun out of some broken games. Who gives a fuck?

No I STRONGLY advice against it this time. It's ridicukously bad at the moment. Maybe in 4 months, but not now.


EDIT:

The game world is 64 miles wide and to airdrop there need to be only 50 people on the server apparently, so it certainly seems like you could time a drop during a low pop time and have very little realistic chance of it going to someone else.

That minimum number of people required on a server has been raised at 120. You won't be able to call a drop unless there's 120 people on the server.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2015, 08:31:44 PM by Falconeer »

Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #111 on: January 16, 2015, 09:14:04 PM

So, I watched a stream of this game pretty much all day.  Well, to be more accurate I had a stream of this on most of the day while I was doing other stuff, but whatever.  

It looks - and I mean to the eyes - just terrible.  I mean, really bad.  The animations are bad.  The textures aren't great.  It just looks extraordinarily dated for a game that is using the same engine as Planetside 2.

The game world is weirdly static.  I'm not sure what was buggy and what was "intended" but sometimes the guy would pick up an item (like a bottle of water) and the bottle of water would go to his inventory, but still be in the game world.  It looked like he could not pick it up again.  So maybe it was a static spawn where everyone could pick up one bottle?  Maybe it was a bug and it wasn't supposed to display anymore? Who knows, but it was clunky as hell.

Taking a crowbar and beating the shit out of a wrecked car earned you "scrap metal" the way that hitting a tree an axe yielded wood (and trees that actually fell over, impressively enough I guess).  It's pretty goofy to see a bunch of guys standing around banging on a car to gather crafting materials.

Searching cabinets and other boxes did not play any animation of the thing opening and closing.  I don't know why that bothered me so much but just seeing a little opening timer and then having the inventory UI open up so that you could drag things over from the container into your inventory felt really hokey and out of date.  Once you searched something you couldn't search again right away, but I wonder if items respawn or what.

But then, that crafting system was pretty impressive and deep, and the ability to build forts and bases from scratch is pretty cool. And there was definitely a *feel* of that post-apocalyptic survival thing that they kind of did get right.  Just enough sparkles that seemed like they were on the right track to make you think it might be worth the jank and it certainly seems to have no shortage of jank.  

In the end, the execution looks so amateurish, or perhaps just so unfinished, that I couldn't see myself paying real world dollars to play it.  I'd definitely play the game it's trying to be.  But I don't know if it will ever be the game it's trying to be.  We'll see I guess.  


Also, I'm just going to link to this hilarious video of physics gone wrong:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSDe-i9r8AY
« Last Edit: January 16, 2015, 09:25:30 PM by Malakili »
koro
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2307


Reply #112 on: January 17, 2015, 06:27:20 AM

Just remember guys, this was the game that was supposed to scratch the itch people had for SWG.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #113 on: January 17, 2015, 06:57:26 AM

Well, it has some of those elements.  You know, if they worked at all.
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472


Reply #114 on: January 17, 2015, 09:14:03 AM

So I was playing some Landmark when I saw that Smedly message on an RSS feed on my other monitor and though about how unhappy i was with the bait and switch pay to win aspect of H1Z1. So I used that email and got an auto reply that gave me instructions. Went to steam account details -> store transactions and pressed button for refund. Refund was applied instantly to steam wallet.  Twenty minutes later I decided to log back into landmark to work on a new drawbridge to my castle and couldn't log in. This was weird. I try to log into Planetside 2, also cannot log in. Try to log into SOE website. Account has been suspended.

Sony can go fuck themselves. You don't offer a no questions asked refund and then fucking ban your customer from all the games and shit they have purchased from you over the course of a decade and a half.

"See?  All of you are unique.  And special.  Like fucking snowflakes."  -- Signe
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 23612


Reply #115 on: January 17, 2015, 10:45:02 AM

awesome, for real
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472


Reply #116 on: January 17, 2015, 11:56:42 AM

So I got a email back from support. They are looking into why some accounts are getting banned after requesting a refund through steam. I hate Sony so much. The only positive is they say they are going to turn my SOE account back on.

When your CEO tells people that it is okay if they want a refund and can receive one with no questions asked, you should damn well turn off the automatic mechanism that bans people for what ever charge back refund fuckery that you normally like to get away with.

"See?  All of you are unique.  And special.  Like fucking snowflakes."  -- Signe
veredus
Terracotta Army
Posts: 521


Reply #117 on: January 17, 2015, 12:00:33 PM

I got my refund last night. I don't really care about the air drop thing but what I do care about is that I spent 2 days trying to find the fun with no luck, it just wasn't there. I spent more time picking and eating blackberries to stay alive then almost anything else.  Ohhhhh, I see.

Luckily I can still log into my other station stuff so don't have to deal with that hassle also.


Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #118 on: January 17, 2015, 12:05:11 PM

Twenty minutes later I decided to log back into landmark to work on a new drawbridge to my castle and couldn't log in. This was weird. I try to log into Planetside 2, also cannot log in. Try to log into SOE website. Account has been suspended.

That can't be right. I am sure you can get it fixed, which doesn't change the fact that it's unacceptable that it happened or that you now have to bother yourself with mail and stuff to get it fixed.

Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #119 on: January 17, 2015, 07:59:39 PM

Oh...I said it was 64 miles wide, it's actually 64 kilometers square, which is a HUGE difference. The game world is actually very small from what I've seen watching streams.

It looks kind of fun in the exact same way all these games are kind of fun - wacky hijinks without much in the way of goals, gameplay or interesting mechanics. It seems like the only threats are other players and boredom.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #120 on: January 17, 2015, 08:08:23 PM

I think they said at one point that they wanted it to be 64x64, but in its current version it is 8x8.  There is no way they are going to increase the size by that margin if they've only got that right now.  Are zombies broken?  It seems like zombies just stand around and/or bug out from what I've seen.

But your assessment seems about right, and at any rate, this has inspired me to play more Project Zomboid agian, much to my delight.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2015, 08:14:42 PM by Malakili »
Flood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 538


Reply #121 on: January 18, 2015, 03:57:56 PM

I paid the 20 bucks and I've played 4-5 hours total across a couple of different servers.  PvE servers.


- There was a system-wide error with the login servers right at the launch and people went batshit - but it got resolved within 24 hours.

- I still get disconnected randomly, but less frequently as time went on.  I've seen servers taken down for 15-30 minute hotfixes a couple times also.

- Do you like it being dark and hard to see? (AKA "atmospheric") Or, better yet, rainy, dark and extremely hard to see?  Well pay the 20$ and get involved because it's fucking dark all the time.  I've never had a play session occur during the day.  One time it was lighter (dawn?) than others but not by much.

- Zombie AI is all over.  Sometimes one will see you from what seems to be pretty far away and chase you like a hyena after a wounded impala for like a mile.  Other times you can kinda sidle past them.  You can crouch and go prone, but I'm not sure how much difference those statuses make in being detected.  I think crouching is "stealthy" but WTFK.  If there is a group they will start to swarm if one of them alerts to you and that's bad news for you.

- You get hungry, tired, and dehydrated at an astonishing rate.  Read that as: a completely un-fun rate.  80% of the time you're playing is looking for food and (drinkable) water.  Apparently this has been tweaked to a more mellow rate in a recent hotfix, but I haven't played since then to verify.

- Looting and scavenging is like trying to win the lottery and a real dick punch.  At this point the loot tables apparently aren't optimized and it's tough to find anything useful in urban areas.  Which is ironic because scavenging and crafting is supposed to be a big part of the game.

- Related to above: it's generally easier to survive out in the wilderness because of "blueberry bushes" which can be picked and provide both food and water.  Caveat you have to eat a shitload (2% regain per berry) and, conveniently, they don't flag as a lootable item through the interface, you just have to know what they look like and click them.  I only found out after reading the game forums.  Also, if you're lucky enough to craft a fire-bough, it's easier to get potable water out in the boonies due to making campfires > collecting rain > boiling water (If you found an empty water bottle that is.  Stress if.)

- Crafting looks like it might be kind of cool, you can "discover" recipes and such, but due to some of the points above it's sort of hit or miss.  Most of the time you're focusing on not dying from no food or water anyway.  For example I've heard you can bang on wrecked cars if you have a sufficiently strong item (crowbar?) and get metal pieces to make axes and spears and stuff but...it's mostly berry picking simulator and stumbling around in the dark avoiding zombies.

- Did I mention text chat isn't working?

- I think I read that voice chat works intermittently, but I'm misanthropic and I don't play games to chat I play games to crush so I mostly turn voice chat off.




 

Greet what arrives, escort what leaves, and rush in upon loss of contact
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #122 on: January 18, 2015, 04:45:14 PM

Honestly, I don't see any point in complaining about anything that is broken at the moment or just featureless as it's an alpha and whoever paid for it knew it or should have known it cause it's written everywhere. And an alpha is not a beta, so it can only be broken broken broken or it wouldn't even be an alpha build.

My problems with the game are not about its present state, but with its direction:

- it doesn't seem to offer anything more than the other DayZ clones, WarZ, 7 Days to Die, Rust, DayZ itself, and a few more whose names I can't recall.
- it doesn't look better. Maybe graphics are placeholders but it just looks utterly meh.
- it is not in a more advanced state of development than the clones, in fact quite the opposite is true.
- it's free to play, and that usually means an infinite amount of cheaters and exploiters since they can create infinte accounts.

Based on what I know now, I don't really think it has much potential. The only aspect that I think it's intriguing would be the story aspects should they decide to work on that. They mentioned NPCs, an evolving story, an ingame live radio with developing events influenced by the players and even the world changing with the passing of time. That could differentiate it from the other DayZ clones, but as of now I find it nothing but an uninspired clone.

Shatter
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1407


Reply #123 on: January 19, 2015, 05:34:43 AM

After watching a bunch of Twitch live streams...I dont get it.  Like Falc said, this game is very similar to a handful of other games out there and it looks worse and it seems buggier.  Second, it looks boring as hell.  Zombies dont do shit, they stand there most of the time even when people run past them so its basically just a pvp game with some inactive mobs and the PvP is almost non-existent.  Even for $20 this looks horrible. 
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #124 on: January 19, 2015, 06:31:09 AM

Yeah. But even for ZERO dollars it's horrible at the moment. Not worth more than 5 minutes. But that's OK, because it's Alpha so it has all the rights to stink and be broken. By the time it'll get to Beta, Zombies will be fixed, textures will be improved, etc. The point is: how much room does it have to grow into something with a little bit of personality in the next 12-24 months? Doesn't look good to me.

Right now, the only people who can have any kind of fun with it are those who never played any of the parent games, so they are having that unique exhilarating thrill that pretty much everyone has the first time they have been ganked in a DayZ clone, voice chat abuse included. They really have to try and do something new with it, or there's just no point.

LC
Terracotta Army
Posts: 908


Reply #125 on: January 20, 2015, 12:41:31 PM

Not really interested in DAYZ after watching streamers run around the forest for hours collecting sticks and berries. Not to mention everything you build can just be destroyed by some determined jackass while you sleep/work. The small 200 man servers are another turnoff.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 12:43:31 PM by LC »
Cyrrex
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10603


Reply #126 on: January 24, 2015, 02:53:05 AM

I really wanted to be able to come in here and offer counterpoints to the mostly negative opinions of this game, but I can't really do it, at least not with much conviction.  That said, it isn't all bad news.

Graphics/Engine:  Actually, I don't have much of a problem with this, other than the samey looking characters (that will change for sure).  On a decent rig, the game runs smoothly and has pretty good FPS controls (way better than the DayZ dogshit), although the melee hit detection and feedback needs some serious work.  The world itself is also decently constructed and looks okay.  Honestly, however, it is not a beautiful game in any way and really needs to run better than it does.  Oh, and the game will crash my computer completely once in a while, which basically means I don't want to even bother playing it.  Does not crash my laptop, but otoh my laptop doesn't have enough horsepower to run this game at settings I can live with.

Crafting system seems cool.  You just have to be able to live long enough to make use of it.

Loot is a problem.  It is too rare, and while I know they need to have a way to make cash, finding food and water (other than blackberries) is way too much of a chore.  The same is true for other kinds of loot as well, but since your hydration and hunger meters deplete so quickly, you tend to worry mostly about that.

PvP servers:  They need to find a way to make PvP happen less often on the PvP servers (yeah, that's a paradox).  One of the biggest detractors of fun in the game is that it is about 90% likely that you are going to start getting punched to death by some random dude before you manage to actually make any real progress.  Even if you somehow find or make a weapon, you are still pretty much guaranteed to get ganked in short order.  It snowballs.  Now I have to start pre-emptively punching motherfuckers just because I know they are absolutely going to do it to me.  And the population is dense enough on the server that you will not go long without running into someone.  It is beyond dumb and makes the game totally unfun.  It doesn't help that the hit detection is poor as well.  These may same like problems that all PvP games have, but in this case it will drive people away from the game completely.  It is just all too likely that you are going to last five minutes into your game and have to restart.  Unless you want to hide in the wilderness picking berries the hole time, but there's no fun in that either.  Not sure how they will solve this, but they need to.

PvE servers:  At least on the PvE server, you will live long enough to actually get some loot and craft some things.  Unfortunately, where PvP servers are too dangerous, the PvE servers are too safe.  Zombie implementation needs work.

What it all adds up to is an experience that isn't fun enough to warrant spending any money on.  On the other hand, it feels like this game has the most potential of all the zombie games.  Even more than DayZ, which honestly has not improved at all since the launch of the standalone, IMO.  They need to work on the loot tables, and the rates you need to find food and water.  Fix the PvP punch-fest.  Pretty up the visuals a bit.  Fix hit detection and/or feedback.  These seem like mostly surmountable problems, but we'll see.

"...maybe if you cleaned the piss out of the sunny d bottles under your desks and returned em, you could upgrade you vid cards, fucken lusers.." - Grunk
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #127 on: January 26, 2015, 09:07:51 PM

The problem with the "potential" is that I don't see what the vision for the game is beyond what it already is.

Is the idea that survival is hard because of zombies? But once you get over a certain hump (almost immediately) zombies are incredibly weak. You can build a house or something to protect yourself from them but...why bother? Other humans are more dangerous, the elements are more dangerous, hell wolves are more dangerous.

A lot of these games have the same problem - if you can survive past the first few minutes you get enough stuff that the world isn't threatening any more. The only threatening elements become other players, because they also get more stuff. It's like an open world RPG where other players are scaling enemies and zombies are fixed-level.

Is the idea to explore? But the world is small and map is fixed.

IMO these sorts of games will devolve into PvP messes unless there is some forward momentum. Like you explore areas but those areas have tougher enemies. Or zombie strength and numbers increase over time, so you have to keep doing better to keep up.

Right now the game, aside from other players, is fixed difficulty. There are zombies and they aren't very strong - once you can deal with them that's it, until another player kills you and you start over.

Maybe it just needs an "AI director" where it spawns more / tougher enemies near players with more gear.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #128 on: January 26, 2015, 09:40:18 PM

As I understand it zombies are essentially broken in this game right now.  I was reading that 1) The AI is broken 1/2 the time and 2) they want zombies not to be individually threatening but threatening in large groups - which seems ok.  The problem is that right now there is a technical issue with spawning enough zombies to actually be a threat causing crippling lag or something like that. ( awesome, for real )

But ultimately you're right. If someone makes a game like this with dymanic/random events (maybe like Rift events?) on the one hand to give players reasons to go out into the world at different times and with an AI director of sorts that magically shows up lots of zombies where there are concentrations of players, then you've got something.  Until then you've got an ok little survival game that people are going to enjoy for 5 or 10 hours if they like that kind of thing, then run out of new things to do, see or craft and stop playing.
Cyrrex
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10603


Reply #129 on: January 26, 2015, 11:22:42 PM

7 Days to Die has the best zombie implementation for these types of games.  On default settings, they are slow during the day and fast during the night.  They react to sound and will literally surround your house at night if you are not careful, trying to smash their way in the whole time.  If you let yourself get immersed in it, it is actually fairly creepy.  And you can tweak the difficulty settings to make them do more damage, while the player does less.

I'd like to see SOE try to emulate that, rather than DayZ.

But you are right that it will be about the danger other players represent.  Which would be fine, except that I think there need to be more compelling reasons to engage in and/or avoid PvP.  Right now it is all about sucker punching the other guy before he does it to you first because reasons.

I will check back into this regularly, because it isn't yet a lost cause.  That said, I think I will avoid investing too much time until they fix the food/water issues.  Last time I was on, I had two empty bottles and was knee deep in a river...and took me more than 5 minutes to fill bottle, drink water, fill bottle, drink water until I was 100% hydrated.  Not fun.

"...maybe if you cleaned the piss out of the sunny d bottles under your desks and returned em, you could upgrade you vid cards, fucken lusers.." - Grunk
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #130 on: January 27, 2015, 04:01:26 AM

As far as I know Dean Rocket Hall wanted to recreate a survival experience that was based on his endeavours in the army, and had nothing to do with zombies. He introduced zombies to create additional urgency, and to make the mod more popular, but he often stated that zombies are the part he liked the least about DayZ. He was also an Ultima Online lover so it shouldn't surprise that his idea of survival was based on PvP, Permadeath, and basically the human element. Like it or not, that was his idea and in a time that no one would have bet a penny on that he created a genre and then sold 3 million copies of the alpha version.

I agree that there is room for games that draw from that but develop it with more PvE and less PvP (karma systems, no permadeath, etc.), and it's obvious that H1Z1 is going that way since they even offer PvE only servers. I also don't doubt that they will ramp up the zombie invasion. They gloated at the game engine so many times and how it can move hundreds of characters around. I am not worried about that. And they also plan to implement NPCs, storylines, and how the game will have an evolving history, with global events that will change things over time. I think it even plans to have seasons. The question is how long it'll take.

And also, how much a game turns BACK into a more traditional MMOs the moment you dial down the PvP and dial up the PvE.

For my tastes, there's still too many games about fighting or surviving the AI. Reason I love DayZ beyond all the other clones so far is exactly because the real monsters are the humans, and that's what you are really trying to survive from. But I agree that if they could come up in DayZ with some ways for you to reach some tangible milestones in your quest for survival, it would be much better. A layer of long and short term goals on top of the everyday slog for canned beans and ammo, while dodging ganking campers' bullets.

When they'll find ways to add more long term goals in these games without adding stupid player levels or boss fights, it'll benefit both DayZ and H1Z1.

Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #131 on: January 27, 2015, 06:39:58 AM


For my tastes, there's still too many games about fighting or surviving the AI. Reason I love DayZ beyond all the other clones so far is exactly because the real monsters are the humans, and that's what you are really trying to survive from. But I agree that if they could come up in DayZ with some ways for you to reach some tangible milestones in your quest for survival, it would be much better. A layer of long and short term goals on top of the everyday slog for canned beans and ammo, while dodging ganking campers' bullets.

When they'll find ways to add more long term goals in these games without adding stupid player levels or boss fights, it'll benefit both DayZ and H1Z1.

The only issue with humans being the "real monsters" is that at it's worst it makes the game miserable.  At it's best it's fantastic, you're out looking for food or gear, you come across someone, you've got to see if they are hostile, if you can cooperate, or if it's a fight to the death.  That's actually interesting.  But what isn't interesting is respawning and then 20 seconds later some guy broadcasting benny hill music over local VOIP and punching you in the face.

As with a lot of games that are good, there are some high highs and low lows, I'll give you that.  But I do hope someone figures out a way to make a bit more of a consistent experience.

On another note, I saw a stream of a guy doing Battle Royale mode last night and I have to admit it was pretty awesome.  You and all the other players (200?) parachute into the map, and then it's just a free for all where you get one life, last person alive wins. Entirely separate from the main game/servers.  They sell tickets to those events in the cash shop. 
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #132 on: January 27, 2015, 06:48:39 AM

I am really curious about Battle Royale. I have a doubt though: how does it deal with some idiot hiding forever to troll, especially if he/she has no chances of winning? And even considering that, how long does it last on average?

Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #133 on: January 27, 2015, 07:01:46 AM

I am really curious about Battle Royale. I have a doubt though: how does it deal with some idiot hiding forever to troll, especially if he/she has no chances of winning? And even considering that, how long does it last on average?

I'm not sure honestly, the guy I was watching died with about 70 people left alive.  I don't know how long it went on after that.  But what I saw was sure pretty cool.

EDIT: I just read up on it, and apparently a toxic fog starts creeping in from the edges of the map after a while (not sure how long), and forces the players towards the middle of the map.  So, players who want to hide in the corner somewhere just die to the fog.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2015, 07:21:59 AM by Malakili »
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #134 on: January 27, 2015, 07:37:49 AM

Makes sense. I was thinking of something like that. Isn't it the same in the the real Battle Royale and Hunger Games after all?

angry.bob
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5442

We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and so do I.


Reply #135 on: January 27, 2015, 09:33:34 AM

Eh, just let players spawn as a zombie for every X that they Y in the game. Or just let them make a zombie character. Use the same models as they do for AI zombies. Make them a little more powerful than stock zombies, or better yet make them super grindy as shit with a skill tree or smoething but not in a way that makes them unkillable to a newer player. That should make zombies a ton more threatening and something that you always have to take seriously. Plus it lets griefers grief in a way that might improve the game for a change.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
Rendakor
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10131


Reply #136 on: January 27, 2015, 09:42:34 AM

Makes sense. I was thinking of something like that. Isn't it the same in the the real Battle Royale and Hunger Games after all?
Similar. The real Battle Royale had a gridded map with certain areas becoming uninhabitable as the game went on; anyone who stayed, died. It wasn't a strict progression from the outside creeping in, though.

"i can't be a star citizen. they won't even give me a star green card"
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #137 on: January 27, 2015, 09:53:18 AM

Makes sense. I was thinking of something like that. Isn't it the same in the the real Battle Royale and Hunger Games after all?
Similar. The real Battle Royale had a gridded map with certain areas becoming uninhabitable as the game went on; anyone who stayed, died. It wasn't a strict progression from the outside creeping in, though.

It also had a time limit where if more than one person was alive at the end, they just killed everyone.
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #138 on: January 27, 2015, 09:05:18 PM

The last time I saw Battle Royale it was either broken or progressed incredibly slow - some guy was alive along with about 10 other people and just wandered around for a half hour until I got bored and turned off the stream. The pacing is way off once it gets down to a lower number of people.

I've always wondered why someone doesn't make a proper Battle Royale style game. You are dropped on an island with a bunch of people. You have to survive the elements and environmental hazards and also other people. Over time certain zones become off limits, there are things to mix it up like some sort of enemies being airdropped in, landmines, etc. Sometimes it makes sense to team up to fight environmental hazards, sometimes it makes sense to kill on sight or backstab. The whole thing is staged like a reality TV show - when someone dies it's announced and some video monitors pop out of the ground showing an instant replay.

Maybe have a couple win conditions, like being the last person alive, or alternately you can team up with others and try to overthrow the evil organization running the event.

I can see this working in anything from 20 minute rounds to lasting multiple days. It seems like such an obvious idea, especially with the popularity of Hunger Games.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Kageru
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4549


Reply #139 on: January 31, 2015, 01:49:03 AM

The enemy in a zombie game should be inevitability.. The zombies don't have to be strong but they are tireless and ideally growing in number since you are the "last survivors" acting as bait. Resources are vital but depleting and crafting replacements for much of it impossible, and someone who can jury rig some construction, cook or treat wounds is a treasured resource. Wounds heal slowly, impair the ability to work and risk contagion making any tangle with zombies dangerous. But to make that game you'd need a map goal of something like "survive till rescue" or managing to escape. A persistent online game, one that never ends, inevitably misses the point and means you need things like item re-spawn or the ability to craft all required gear. And then you just have tedium.

Have something like there's a set number of players in the game. Death is permanent within that game though your gear can be recovered. A civilian rescue gives you a "spare" life if you have a safe base to stash them. When you are out of lives you can get re-assigned to a new game but will get a summary of how the old one ended when it did.

PvP would even make sense in that system. A random psychopath would be a danger to the survival of all players and encourage co-operative action to contain the threat. If the PvP lone-wolfs "win" by exterminating all the other players then they should be asked to play out how they intent to survive without allies. That would be a fitting mechanic.

I'd see how close H1Z1 comes but I've had more than enough zombies for a while, and SOE games need a lot of time to bake before they become interesting these days.

 
« Last Edit: January 31, 2015, 01:54:43 AM by Kageru »

Is a man not entitled to the hurf of his durf?
- Simond
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: H1Z1 (Zombieapocalypse: SOE edition?)  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC