PC Alpha 19 Dev Diary

[madmole]

Random question: Is snow accumulation back in?

I don't know when it disappeared (A15?), but I hope it makes it back in.  Was it removed because it was too taxing on the system? 

Was one of those little things that was just awesome, loved how it muffled your footsteps and covered everything.

If not for A19, are there plans to put it back in for later release iterations?

No and it won't be back. It was removed because our gfx programmer at the time hacked it in, didn't consider unity updates, mac, linux and couldn't keep up with the endless bugs, broken fog etc. He quit and we didn't have a gfx programmer at the time and to stabilize the game and get rid of boatloads of bugs we yanked it out. The visuals look fantastic now. It was cool but not worth all the bugs. If Unity's new HDLP ever get out of beta and it can be done with that, safely with no performance issues then I'd entertain the idea again.

 

[mdf25]

The buildings are all half wrecked or worse, but the narrative is that the bombs and fires somehow *didn't* destroy the loot inside, but instead means that loot is somehow *more* valuable? That sounds like an argument a Florida real estate agent might make in the apocalypse. I'm not buying it, not for .2 seconds. All the best loot is in the flooded hurricane areas right? Same concept here.

I get the feeling that anytime anyone thinks about "Bandits," what they are actually picturing are Psychos from Borderlands. Bandits are going to be your disaster refugees that banded together to survive by means of force. They are about as likely to stake out a living in a wasteland or a burned forest as you are going to seek a career in coal mining.

Whilst I think it does make sense from a realism standpoint, we have to remember that 7 Days is a survival game but not a complete simulation experience. So it would make sense that the biomes and what is found within them are staged in such a way to create player progression rather than to follow something more logical.

You could argue that the bombs dropped in the waste areas were not high explosive nukes, but say toxin bombs with some top secret new toxin tested by government capable of causing mutation - thus killing and mutating creatures and plants, but damaging buildings less than say a full on nuclear strike. Could explain why buildings have intact loot.

I think the problem with going into the bandits in pine forest idea would be that a player would not have any way to realistically establish themselves before getting killed by tough enemies or weather condition. You got zombie bears in burnt biomes, heat or cold in deserts and snow biomes, ferals in wasteland, or bandits in the forest biomes. A player stepping out of a desert dying of heat stroke to get shot to bits by a bandit in the forest might not be so fun, though could make interesting stories haha.

I think it would turn newbies off quite a bit but if someone wanted to add this idea themselves, then you could [banned word] the game to do that.

Having the forest as the easier biome is better in terms of game design imo because it caters to newbies and veterans. People who want it easier can build and live in forest but those seeking extra challenge can try burnt or wasteland living. It adds progression, slowly going to better areas for better loot as your character levels up which is good also.

 

[Jugom]

1 hour ago, q123 said:

something huge is coming

https://twitter.com/x/status/1266378466372403200

Looks like big Momma is loosing weight.

All that running at night is paying off

 

[TSBX]

Looks like now she won't have to share a wardrobe with the screamer anymore!

 

[SnowDog1942]

Looks like big Momma is loosing weight.

All that running at night is paying off

Yea she looking pretty sexy.  As q123 said, Something Big is Coming

 

[Damocles]

If Unity's new HDLP ever get out of beta and it can be done with that, safely with no performance issues then I'd entertain the idea again.

I dont think moving to HDRP would be worth the risk for the current project. Maybe the next one.

 

[beHypE]

Those sound like small side quests a random survivor would give you not something from a trading organization. Sorry I think those are much less believable than a courier got overwhelmed and stashed his shipment for safe keeping. Get your flask? What? Get off your @%$*#! and get your own flask or while your at it give me your dukes and food because I have a gun and just lost respect for someone asking me to fetch your booze for you. Get your wrench? Ummm dude if you are so lame you can't remember to bring your wrench you probably don't have any dukes set aside to pay me either. Sorry no offense, but I feel like working for an organization that feels organized makes a lot more sense.
 

My examples may have been poorly chosen. By all means keep the amazing trading organization shipment we have now, the original question was more about making it less of a "follow the compass game" and more about "think logically where the room he talked about might be in the house" (Garage ? Probably in the basement. Bedroom ? Definitely first floor. Etc...). Right now there's virtually no thinking involved, it's always the same package, you always follow the same indication that pinpoints to the exact location. Going by your argument of "immersiveness", I fail to see how the current system of having a package located on my compass more precisely than my 5G phone can pinpoint my position is at all immersive.

I guess I'll just wait to see what you have in mind for the future regarding quests. If anything is supposed to change in that area of course.

 

[Adam the Waster]

something huge is coming

looks like me when i eat canned cheese burgers 

 

[Damocles]

I hope she will end up better than that UMA version,

any chance you can keep in the old Trader Jen model? I really like that artdesign.

 

[MechanicalLens]

deleted

 

[unholyjoe]

doesnt matter now as zeds are getting or has gotten a makeover... new gibs are on the table so to speak.

 

[DaVegaNL]

Im not a programmer and I dont know how it correlates but for me the graphics in A18 are great, good enough such that id rather focus on adding more zombies and entities on screen rather than further improved graphics/lighting, assuming both would hurt frame rates and require general optimizations across the game.  

Better lighting vs a few on screen zeds?  Id take the zeds.  Better zombie textures vs a few more on screen?  Again id take higher numbers.  
 

Even as a first impression of the game, i think zed numbers could bring feeling of aww to the player more so than improved lighting. 
 

Again this is all assuming Improved graphics/textures/lighting directly reduce ability to add zeds and vice versa

Dude. No pervy comment? No joke? No.. rock-waving?

Should I call the doctor?

Yea she looking pretty sexy.  As q123 said, Something Big is Coming

Ah wait, never mind

 

[Ranzera]

We decided ages ago that the wasteland would and should have the best loot because it is the most dangerous. Bombs dropped killing most instantly. The wasteland you see is "outskirts" where there was still physical destruction but not complete rubble. The radiation is what mostly killed everyone in these areas that is why the loot is good, the survivors there didn't live long enough to use up the supplies, most died instantly the remaining died of radiation poisoning or were killed by zombies. Seeing that it was ripe for the picking, bandits seize the opportunity and set up camps there and shoot on sight anyone caught looting their claim.

Except for all those bandits you guys are trying to convince us would love to live there. Lets forget the part where bandits have a tendency to loot everything that isn't nailed down.

I think it would turn newbies off quite a bit but if someone wanted to add this idea themselves, then you could [banned word] the game to do that.

Having the forest as the easier biome is better in terms of game design imo because it caters to newbies and veterans. People who want it easier can build and live in forest but those seeking extra challenge can try burnt or wasteland living. It adds progression, slowly going to better areas for better loot as your character levels up which is good also.

I believe the go to code phrase for censored words is "Backstreet Boys Reunion Tour."

All of this only makes sense through the lens of having played too many games that make the same leap of logic in the name of "Game Balance." That's kinda what started me down this analysis of how this game is structured. People used to mostly go to 2 biomes (until TFP hilariously killed off one of them because it was "useless" outside of the fact that players loved it). Now they are making hamfisted attempts at justifying the remaining biomes that few people like.

You say that but you can't see how the following isn't progression?

Starting in a barren wasteland, everyone you know is dead. The only things around you are the shambling barely zombie viable corpses of the people you used to know and feral/infected dogs. You struggle to find scraps of food from the ruins around you and eventually have enough tools to try to push into the neighboring areas. There you find the occasional bandits but mostly the fast moving fresh zombies who've more recently turned from the local inhabitants. The tools are better here since it's not a destroyed wasteland but it's a lot more dangerous than where you were. At least crops will actually grow here, if not very well. You look to the greener areas in the distance. You long to be there, it's beautiful and fecund but it's heavily guarded by the bandits who've taken over and they don't like you. Maybe some day you'll be able to take a piece of their territory and claim it as your own.

I find it amusing that so many people bend over backwards trying to make this make sense when it really doesn't. Look at American history. What did the people with guns do to the people without guns? They took their great land, shoved the have nots into marginal/barren land and practically genocided them. That is what people do. Saying otherwise is just showcasing that people have been playing video games too long and their view of reality is warped in the name of "game balance."

I'm not calling for any changes here, I'm just saying that this makes very little sense.

 

[mr.devolver]

we've played the game for 7 years.

7 Years to Die.

 

[Ianua]

Two words: Neutron Bomb.  The idea behind it was to minimize the blast/explosive yield while enhancing the radiation to leave buildings intact but to blast everything living with highly damaging neutron radiation.  The large neutrons (as compared to alpha, beta or gamma) are highly damaging to living tissue.  The other types of particles are damaging as well but are blocked by various substances, such as a piece of paper in the case of alpha particles.  Alpha particles are very dangerous when ingested, but are typically stopped by clothing.

So.... are we still learning by doing and using farming plots????

 

[Roland]

I find it amusing that so many people bend over backwards trying to make this make sense when it really doesn't.

When you're convinced that everyone else is going by some crazy kind of logic it is time to start questioning your own...

Nobody is bending over backwards. The way it is makes sense. Your scenario could make sense if it was written that way. Bandits do tend to raid stuff-- so how could there possibly be anything left in the wasteland? Because they also tend to hoard and stockpile stuff-- just like we do. If you would stop bending backwards to try and justify the logic you are trying pass off as the only one that makes any sense you would be able to see other perspectives as well.

 

[mdf25]

I believe the go to code phrase for censored words is "Backstreet Boys Reunion Tour."

All of this only makes sense through the lens of having played too many games that make the same leap of logic in the name of "Game Balance." That's kinda what started me down this analysis of how this game is structured. People used to mostly go to 2 biomes (until TFP hilariously killed off one of them because it was "useless" outside of the fact that players loved it). Now they are making hamfisted attempts at justifying the remaining biomes that few people like.

You say that but you can't see how the following isn't progression?

Starting in a barren wasteland, everyone you know is dead. The only things around you are the shambling barely zombie viable corpses of the people you used to know and feral/infected dogs. You struggle to find scraps of food from the ruins around you and eventually have enough tools to try to push into the neighboring areas. There you find the occasional bandits but mostly the fast moving fresh zombies who've more recently turned from the local inhabitants. The tools are better here since it's not a destroyed wasteland but it's a lot more dangerous than where you were. At least crops will actually grow here, if not very well. You look to the greener areas in the distance. You long to be there, it's beautiful and fecund but it's heavily guarded by the bandits who've taken over and they don't like you. Maybe some day you'll be able to take a piece of their territory and claim it as your own.

I find it amusing that so many people bend over backwards trying to make this make sense when it really doesn't. Look at American history. What did the people with guns do to the people without guns? They took their great land, shoved the have nots into marginal/barren land and practically genocided them. That is what people do. Saying otherwise is just showcasing that people have been playing video games too long and their view of reality is warped in the name of "game balance."

I'm not calling for any changes here, I'm just saying that this makes very little sense.

Technically 5 biomes are axed, since caves, hub cities, water and other forest variant were also biomes too  I miss the plains though and hub cities.

My take on your progression is that whilst I can see that as very much closer to a realistic way of survival, (in fact I like that it could even be made into a Backstreet Boys Reunion Tour) I could see that the early dogs and ferals could be a turn off for those just trying to learn the ropes unless they are nerfed in early days on HP and damage.

The problem with having bandits in forested areas and assuming bandits have looted everything there already, if there is no loot in green areas then there would be less player incentive to visit since your only real reward is a green patch of land with high risk and low loot, unless bandit loot tables would be buffed a lot so you could get decked out after a couple of forts destroyed. You'd be better off in the biome you came from.

I agree with you though this would be far more realistic and perhaps hardcore fans and experienced FPS players would really like this. But in order to cater to newer entries I think at the start there should be some guarantee that in first few days enemies in your starter waste biome can't spawn something in that you aren't prepped for, ie ranged bandit spawns 2 hours after you spawn in on day 1 and proceeds to maul you in 2 shots or a dog comes out of nowhere and mauls you as you try killing it with a crappy club only to die in 3 or 4 bites etc.

Maybe gamestaged biome spawns could be a way to handle this so that only after a certain level the baddies get tougher but you are more than likely to have a weapon capable of handling them if used correctly. 

 

[Khalagar]

How has this discussion gone on so long? Realism is a moot point in a zombie survival game with automated turrets, junk drones, flying gyrocopters taped together, people digging to bedrock etc. Like what the heck, who gets hung up on loot placement? And why are the Biomes the hanging point, and not the fact that apparently everyone pre-war had guns in their toilets and trashcans??

I think biomes still need a bit of re-work in general anyway, but not for realism reasons. Burnt Biome and Wasteland are just miserable to explore, and on every poll I've seen (on reddit at least) has had had those two be by far the least popular biomes, with all the comments mentioning how bad / unfun / ugly they are.

There's literally no reason to ever go to them, they are just vast expanses of nothing. No good distinct resources, ugly scenery, very few PoI since everything is destroyed etc. Winter, Forest, and Desert all are viable places to live and spend most of your time, but the only reason you'd ever go to a Burnt or Wasteland biome is for a challenge or change of pace.

 

[Gazz]

How has this discussion gone on so long?

Nerds gunna nerd...

 

[TetraD20]

I've been lurking in this thread for a few days and have almost read the entire mess, i forget where you said to put suggestions, but me and my wife are new players we started a few weeks ago and are over 100 hours at this point, thought you'd like to know that it took us 100 hours to figure out that you can share quests. don't know whether that's helpful.