• Hello Guest,

    Welcome to the Survive the Nights community forums. Please feel free to share your ideas with the team and discuss current game features. Please do not report bugs here, use our bug tracker for that.

    The team at a2z(Interactive);

Don't take the easy way out, devs!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter #1

MrMoose

Real talk
Backer
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
222
Likes
310
Points
63
Location
USA
Something I touched on in another thread, and wanted to bring up in it's own topic is this mentality that some seem to have about making arguably 'important' gameplay features a server setting, effectively allowing players to tailor the game experience to their taste.
Although I'd say it's generally good to give server owners more options, cause why not, let them play how they want; the problem is that this generally leads to a pussification© of gameplay. This then attracts a broader audience who may not be 100% "in" to the whole zombie apocalypse theme/mentality, which generally turns gameplay into something that has very little in common with what the game was intended to be. [See DayZ].

I'm not a hipster, I swear! But when a gameplay experience is so dependent on the community, such as STN is, I feel as though forcing players to play with hard(~ish) core features will deter enough players that those that are passionate about the game and theme will stick around, or at least be the majority.

To elaborate I'm talking about things like time scale, weather, loot spawn rates, invisible hud/crosshair, etc. Or whatever features may come in the future, this is more a rule of thumb rather than specific things I don't think should be server options.

What are other people's thoughts? Also curious what @JB_ 's or other devs thoughts are.
 
Last edited:
Moderator #2

DemoCar82

This is it... the apocalypse.
Community Mod
Backer
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
1,440
Likes
1,687
Points
113
Location
Michigan, U.S.
I do absolutely agree with you and I try to be very good at analyzing and breaking down things, and am willing to look at things in several ways at least semi-deeply before making an absolute decision.

Personally, I want the game to be super complex, as realistic as possible within reason of fun game-play and functionality of the engine. I don't believe a game in this genre should be easy or simple... this is going to be a apocalypse survival game FFS. o_O I have a fairly decent rig that will run most games pretty well, and am not restricted by purchasing new hardware if needed to have a good gaming experience... So if games are intensive, I'll be there no matter what... it is worth it to me. But, not everyone can be.

I'd also trying to point out is that the devs must build a game that the largest spectrum of people will buy, for it to be profitable enough for their team to continue doing what they are doing and making hopefully great games. I think others that play The Long Dark, DayZ, H1Z1, Stranded Deep, The Forest, Miscreated, etc. will also buy STN, whether or not they like certain aspects of it against the others. I personally feel these guys could change the genre some with what they are doing here, so I am willing to support the shit out of that... kind of why I hang around here trying to give my advice to hopefully persuade the devs and other potential players on what -could- make, what I feel would be a very good game. I, for one, really appreciate the devs taking their time to put this thing together, and be active on the forums and engage in conversation.

I like the idea of server options just to keep players coming back and having the ability to have the game feel "fresh" if they tried a different combination of options. These options wouldn't be to fundamentally change how easy or hard the game is. I like the ability of changing the difficulty of zombies, how many there are, how much loot, and those types of things. I would not however have a "normal" mode and a "hardcore" mode, where players need less or more damage to be killed, or I would go as far as a crosshair (dot specifically) only be used when NOT holding a weapon or firearm of any kind. I believe, these types of decisions make people work at being good over a longer time, which keeps more players involved and trying to improve... and it adds to immersion IMO.

I have several strong opinions mainly because I've been very critical of how other games have handled certain things wrongly or right. Another thing that I've seen, and done myself is... purchase the game if I am remotely interested in it mainly because the genre is still young and teams are trying several things to come up with that 'thing' that makes their game awesome. DayZ Mod, IMO, started all this, it gave people something way outside of what they were used to, and along came DayZ SA with its clunkyness but still very authentic and "one-of-a-kind" style of interactions... H1Z1, Miscreated, and many others are riding on the wave that DayZ Mod started, along with The Walking Dead, this genre was a hit quick. I'm not saying DayZ Mod/SA is the greatest thing ever, because it has many issues that I will openly tell anyone because they piss me off... and they've only done some things right. Another reason why I support STN because they were willing to do things I had only heard other people talk about... mental health to deter KOS specifically... the one thing I probably hear people bitch about the most about DayZ. Take the straight up KOS out of the game... make killing someone affect you and alter the game play enough to mean something!

Enough for now I suppose, I almost put myself to sleep. :confused:
 

FuzioN

Well-Known Member
Backer
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
120
Likes
79
Points
28
Location
Sweden
i think there should be server options, becuse for instance you yourself have one taste another have another one.

i dont get why mods and rulesets on servers should not be allowed, sure if its extreme code and complex and annoying and buggy.

id understand its not in alpha or in the game for the first year in alpha, however just ignoring it as a feature i doubt that is wise.

Becuse there is many players who dislike some ideas than others.

for instance we dont agree:d on the sneaking system? should i then ask for money back since im forced to play with a system i think is newbish when its lauched?

I just take that as an example, sure you cannot have mods and things for every small thing, but sort of things like forced First person sound system, spawnrate and zombies, if mutated ones will exist with diffrent abilities.

Or lets say amount of zombies that can spawn for that hardcore feeling.

Or weapon jam, since some wont like it.

Major things like that i dont see why they should not be able to host a server for their audience liking,

the big qustion here is just how much time and effort would it take to code the mod injector?

if it took very long time well maybe save it for launch or end of alpha.

or just skip it and do a poll, about how many want what of the backers.


this is my philosofi atleast that it should if not to much work and annoying that you should be able to tailor the server, imagine if you could make mods out of the game later if you wanted to?

that would make the game longlivity long, just look at DayZ its DayZ appoch that is played now, community driven mod project as an example.

Most successful games that been picked up has been created by the community first.


as gabe newell once said, a developer should never put strings on the community work with them, becuse you can never compete with the community, they will run you over, give them the tools, and see the magic that happens.
 
Moderator #4

DemoCar82

This is it... the apocalypse.
Community Mod
Backer
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
1,440
Likes
1,687
Points
113
Location
Michigan, U.S.
The only thing I can say is to that is like @MrMoose mentioned, you've got to be a little bit careful giving certain options, or making the game what I think many of us on the forums would call too "powerpuff" or easy, because it will turn into a silly FPS deathmatch, like most of the other open world survival games have become. H1Z1 is the best example... By far their most popular game mode/servers is Battle Royale... aka, a huge deathmatch... If that is what they are shooting for fine, but STN should not also fall victim to that crowd IMO.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
273
Likes
243
Points
63
Location
Universe
I think freedom is most important thing here.
Admins should have freedom to customize their server.
Player freedom is to choose servers that he will find most suited for him...

Making it all like Hurr Durr don't give them options I don't like is quite selfish and in some part arrogant...
If someone want's a all vs all deatchmatch... sure. Let him have it...
Full Roleplay... Yeah, here You go...
Main advantage of DayZMods (after OpenDayz) was the ability to mod, change and tweak everything You thought of... If not by yourself (if lack of skills) then by gigantic community... And this, IMO, is the way it should go... Not restrictions but possibilities.
 
Thread starter #6

MrMoose

Real talk
Backer
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
222
Likes
310
Points
63
Location
USA
At the end of the day, a game is just a collection of (hopefully) unique mechanics, with some moving images thrown on top. By allowing players to arbitrarily pick and choose these mechanics, and their difficulty, is it really the same game anymore? What's the point of STN's innovation, and addition of mechanics rarely seen in other games, if it gets turned into some watered down version simply to please a larger player base.

I want a game that is uncompromising in it's mechanics, and the experience/game it aims to create. People talk as though ostracizing players who might not like certain features as a bad thing. In my opinion if you're not doing this, you're not doing anything new or exciting.

There are rarely that many options to change gameplay in a single player game. Forcing players to play the game the way you intended is what differentiates it from other games, and if you don't like those features, tough luck. In my opinion the answer to that isn't to change the game to fit you, but to find another game.

Anyway, on a phone, will post some more when home.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
273
Likes
243
Points
63
Location
Universe
I want a game that is uncompromising in it's mechanics, and the experience/game it aims to create. People talk as though ostracizing players who might not like certain features as a bad thing. In my opinion if you're not doing this, you're not doing anything new or exciting.
And this is the freedom i was talking about. You have Your vision and will freely choose servers providing You with wanted gameplay (or have Your own server, because... Why not?)... Ignoring those not fit.
But on the other hand. With given freedom to choose whatever server You would like, i don't see a reason to take away admins freedom and possibility to make the game as they want it.
 
Moderator #8

DemoCar82

This is it... the apocalypse.
Community Mod
Backer
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
1,440
Likes
1,687
Points
113
Location
Michigan, U.S.
I agree with what Moose is saying because what you end up doing in the end is making a powderpuff version of a very good game. Asgaroth, I absolutely know and partially agree with what you are saying, and am kind of torn on it... if you guys have read my posts, I reference back to Project Zomboid quite a bit, and PZ (in Sandbox mode, or in multiplayer servers) does give you several options to make your gameplay unique, HOWEVER, PZ is not anywhere near being geared towards PVP for the most part, people do it, that is inevitable, but the main focus in the multiplayer PVP servers isn't just to run around KOSing everything you see, it is build a base, stay safe from roaming zombies, and if you fight over shit, so be it... I've said before making something like a first person version of PZ would be totally epic shit! Not copy, just use some techniques for inspiration... The options they allow to tweak things in their game make for many many variants in game play and difficulty really, but not in the way that makes more or less bullets kill you. I would never ever want to see STN "nerf" damage ratings on zombies or players, period... or make skills easier to learn on some servers, or have all skills unlocked, or options like making typically rare loot, common... like firearms and ammo.

If you want to give people freedom in server options, don't ruin the fundamental part of the game that makes STN different than others in the genre. DayZ Mod and H1Z1 are perfect examples of that, and DayZ SA (when server admins are given more options) will be too. Anyone who played back in the original DayZ Mod Vanilla days will know what I mean, everyone didn't run around shooting each other, almost all interactions were genuine and unique and intense as hell. Then came along the KOSers, CoD kiddies, and general douche bags than ruined that experience, and it is carrying over to DayZ SA and H1, Miscreated, etc... it is stupid, lazy, and for players that aren't skilled at the majority of what the game is "supposed" to stand for.

Giving options to servers is good (if they are the right ones), but too many will cut the throat of games and make them yet "just another zombie apocalypse game". Make the game complex and difficult... do things no one else has the balls to do in the genre or hasn't tried and you will stand out, and potentially set the pace for now. I have faith in these guys, I really think they know that from what I have seen them doing.
 

FuzioN

Well-Known Member
Backer
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
120
Likes
79
Points
28
Location
Sweden
I agree with what Moose is saying because what you end up doing in the end is making a powderpuff version of a very good game. Asgaroth, I absolutely know and partially agree with what you are saying, and am kind of torn on it... if you guys have read my posts, I reference back to Project Zomboid quite a bit, and PZ (in Sandbox mode, or in multiplayer servers) does give you several options to make your gameplay unique, HOWEVER, PZ is not anywhere near being geared towards PVP for the most part, people do it, that is inevitable, but the main focus in the multiplayer PVP servers isn't just to run around KOSing everything you see, it is build a base, stay safe from roaming zombies, and if you fight over shit, so be it... I've said before making something like a first person version of PZ would be totally epic shit! Not copy, just use some techniques for inspiration... The options they allow to tweak things in their game make for many many variants in game play and difficulty really, but not in the way that makes more or less bullets kill you. I would never ever want to see STN "nerf" damage ratings on zombies or players, period... or make skills easier to learn on some servers, or have all skills unlocked, or options like making typically rare loot, common... like firearms and ammo.

If you want to give people freedom in server options, don't ruin the fundamental part of the game that makes STN different than others in the genre. DayZ Mod and H1Z1 are perfect examples of that, and DayZ SA (when server admins are given more options) will be too. Anyone who played back in the original DayZ Mod Vanilla days will know what I mean, everyone didn't run around shooting each other, almost all interactions were genuine and unique and intense as hell. Then came along the KOSers, CoD kiddies, and general douche bags than ruined that experience, and it is carrying over to DayZ SA and H1, Miscreated, etc... it is stupid, lazy, and for players that aren't skilled at the majority of what the game is "supposed" to stand for.

Giving options to servers is good (if they are the right ones), but too many will cut the throat of games and make them yet "just another zombie apocalypse game". Make the game complex and difficult... do things no one else has the balls to do in the genre or hasn't tried and you will stand out, and potentially set the pace for now. I have faith in these guys, I really think they know that from what I have seen them doing.
i dont see how it will become catered game and easy game, there will be some servers that will be more unforgiving(giving that the tools and possbilities are there for servers) than theyself ever could make.


However i never said i dont agree what moose wants, i dont want everything to be a mod or changable somthing should stick to the formula and the base foundation of the game and theme.

But its up to STN to found out what the backers player base wants.

one is for sure we all can agree on, we want many zombies and the zeds to be the highest threat not a player like all other survival games where it becomes a pvp only game.

But i dont think third person and aspects like that should not be unable to force FP on specific servers.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
273
Likes
243
Points
63
Location
Universe
Standalone DayZ right now isn't the best choice for example... Lack of features, shitload of bugs and early development stage makes it kind of dull... And to be honest. There isn't much to do rather than sightseeing or R&G (Run & Gun) right now there.

DayZMod... That is different. At start. When mostly no one knew about the mod and the community was small, gaming was (mostly) all about survival (Except of few idiots who KOSed You anyway). Then it got popular... This is what made it worse... And better. More KOS, CODKiddies and all stupid hackish bullshit... From the worse part.
But on the other hand. Back in the days, when DZM server code was opened, i was helping my friend to manage DZM Epoch server. Being able to modify and tweak server files and scripts gave us opportunity to, give gameplay some new (not know in Vanilla DZM) twists, like real paradrops of random equipment in crates instead of those Epoch ones spawning on server start(ok. this sometimes made life easier, but gave the community chance to interact. And it's a kind of neat) or zombie hordes freely roaming over the map. Thanks to this freedom, i was also able to make the game far more difficult, just using small simple map editing trick, making popular POI swarming with zombies.
And to be honest. We didn't made any big community, but people choosing to play with us were far away from simple KOS/pvp gameplay...

As for other like Project Zomboid, H1 or Miscreated... I can't tell cause i haven't or didn't wanted to play it online....

Oh. And there is Warz/Infestation, killed by beeing total dayz ripoff and hacking... A great example why good ac mechanics are a must...

As for a little sum up (tl;dr): Sure, You can give as least tweaking options for admins as possible. But it WILL kill game diversity... So it's not the best way
 
Last edited:

SpaceBaldy

Player and part-time fruit bat
Backer
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
97
Likes
178
Points
33
Location
England
Its great to see that there is passion for realism of STN which aligns with the Devs vision for the game.

Thats why were are all here - the Devs want to build a game that is the one they always wanted to play rather than the DayZ ''bandwagon' games we have seen to date.

To be commercial STN needs to address the mass market as well as the die hard survival fan. There still needs to be the facility for the KOS fans, the builders, the crazies, the casual player, the beginner, etc... Its needs to be the game that we talk about with different audiences. Twitch is a good barometer for gamer trends with the MOBAs and FPS' riding high so why not cater for them as well?

Server Options

Giving the admins server options is key to providing sufficient variety in the game to keep it alive in Community.

The ability to change weather, zombie strength, number of zombies, item spawn rate, length of night, temperature, decay rates, etc.. can make every server unique and interesting. Want to play in a snowy wastland? Go to XXXX server. Long Night - XXXX server is for you. BattleRoyal - XXXX server is for you. The environments and scenarios can be limitless. This makes the server admins part of the Community and gives players the ability to create their own stories.

Whatever options are put in place zombies need to remain a serious threat for whatever gameplay mode is created by the server admins. We need to be scared. On edge. People need to make mistakes and pay the consequences. This is realism.

Plan for the future

I think the Devs are on to a winning formula. The video updates, images, forum posts, and sheer co-operation with the Community has not been seen before (even with Star Citizen).

Keep it up guys but plan for the long run so your efforts aren't forgotten.
 
Moderator #12

DemoCar82

This is it... the apocalypse.
Community Mod
Backer
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
1,440
Likes
1,687
Points
113
Location
Michigan, U.S.
Ok... I will strongly recommend not to make "powderpuff mode" in STN.

That being said, I would hope that everyone looks at these photos, this is what Project Zomboid does... without making the game easy and silly.

This is the single player "Sandbox" mode... there are a couple more options below what these two screen show, but they aren't anything real important IMO... I also personally prefer that weapon rarity was non-tweakable myself, but to each their own I suppose. (In the sandbox games, I leave weapons on "Rare" or "Very Rare" just for difficulty.)





These are the server options when setting up a multiplayer server.

 
Last edited:

Fatigue

And so begins my watch.
Backer
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
202
Likes
135
Points
43
Location
South Devon, uk
While I Agree with this post, I cant help but think its something that cant be stopped.
Reason being, when people buy the hosting rights for the server, they do it so that they can adjust the settings to tailor the gameplay to the server managers individual needs.
Especially when people begin to roll out mods for the game, which is inevitable.

I think if you just don't give the option to take out or dumb down the zombies, any other changes aren't going to impact the way the game is played.

Plus if you limit the amount of changes the server managers can make, how are they going to pull players from different servers to their own?? they wont, because they cant offer any better features. So in turn less people with bother with managing servers, which in turn limits the amount of servers we, as the players can access, also limiting the amount of people that can play the game..
 
Thread starter #14

MrMoose

Real talk
Backer
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
222
Likes
310
Points
63
Location
USA
Plus if you limit the amount of changes the server managers can make, how are they going to pull players from different servers to their own?? they wont, because they cant offer any better features. So in turn less people with bother with managing servers, which in turn limits the amount of servers we, as the players can access, also limiting the amount of people that can play the game..
Well, two things. First, what are "better" server features? I mean, vanilla STN would be every mechanic/feature included, so what would "better" be?
My guess is that "better" for most is cheap, easy, deathmatch.

The last part of your post is flawed. If the amount of people playing was really that "limited" by the amount of servers, people would just buy more servers.

After mulling over it for a while I don't see the devs doing this anyhow. Whitelisted RP servers will be my place of refuge.
 
Last edited:
Moderator #15

DemoCar82

This is it... the apocalypse.
Community Mod
Backer
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
1,440
Likes
1,687
Points
113
Location
Michigan, U.S.
While I Agree with this post, I cant help but think its something that cant be stopped.
Reason being, when people buy the hosting rights for the server, they do it so that they can adjust the settings to tailor the gameplay to the server managers individual needs.
Especially when people begin to roll out mods for the game, which is inevitable.

I think if you just don't give the option to take out or dumb down the zombies, any other changes aren't going to impact the way the game is played.

Plus if you limit the amount of changes the server managers can make, how are they going to pull players from different servers to their own?? they wont, because they cant offer any better features. So in turn less people with bother with managing servers, which in turn limits the amount of servers we, as the players can access, also limiting the amount of people that can play the game..
I don't think that "taking out" the zombies should ever be an option for a server. Just for the fact this is supposed to be a realistic open-world (sandboxy) zombie apocalypse survival game should be the determining factor in that... I mean, I didn't come here because I seen all of the Concept/Kickstarter videos and said, "This games looks like an awesome shooter I wanna play!" The other games have done that, DayZ, H1Z1, Miscreated... all good games, they get boring quick, and since the core gameplay for all of these games isn't there yet, we resort to PVP (I am very guilty of it)... because it's the last challenging thing to do in the game. If you make the fundamental parts of the core gameplay really stress the player, rather than be a minor nuisance, you won't even consider being able to PVP as the main part. You should be too tied up with the game itself, along with the interactions between players. Rather than a random free-for-all w/ a couple zombies and food/drink systems.

Obviously, everyone wants a slightly different experience with games, just throwing my POV out there.
 

Fatigue

And so begins my watch.
Backer
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
202
Likes
135
Points
43
Location
South Devon, uk
Well, two things. First, what are "better" server features? I mean, vanilla STN would be every mechanic/feature included, so what would "better" be?
My guess is that "better" for most is cheap, easy, deathmatch.

The last part of your post is flawed. If the amount of people playing was really that "limited" by the amount of servers, people would just buy more servers.

After mulling over it for a while I don't see the devs doing this anyhow. Whitelisted RP servers will be my place of refuge.

Well... in my eyes the Vanilla version of any game is the best, because that's how it was created for us to play!! however some others would class a better server as one that doesn't have a proper day/night cycle, less zombies, more loot, no PVP etc..
Because lets face it, most players favour certain servers because of the way the gameplay is set.

You say the last part is flawed? I'm not so sure. I, for one would not buy a server if I could not make changes to it and make it my own. Because like I said, if you cant change anything, what have you got to offer other players.
Lets use Arma 3 for example. I play a lot of Wasteland, and it has always been the players that are the threat, no matter what server I went on. I then heard of the WS.ARMA wasteland servers, which have the A.I on stupid settings, meaning they too, are a great threat. Its small changes like that, which draw people in, because it gives the player more of a challenge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top