PC Hard-core survival description on Steam store

[Roland]

"the game is too hard-core and unfair for survival." WHAT.THE..... 7dtd too hardcore sounds like the best joke ever. Maybe years ago when people were much younger that now. But because they had lower skills. 

All that this signifies is that you have an inability to understand things from someone else's perspective. You act like the world is full of slightly different versions of you when, in fact, the world is filled with people completely unlike you. Terms like "hardcore" are in the eyes of the beholder. Some look at our hunger and thirst mechanics and call it too hardcore because you have manage them constantly and they would rather not have to deal with it. Back when weather survival was better, some didn't like having to change clothes to enter a new biome. They felt like that mechanic was too hardcore survival. 

We are always getting feedback from people about the survival elements being too much. Some complain that it is just too hard while others say that it is too focused on realism instead of fun (ie--sim like or hardcore) 

This forum is not a good guage for that as most people here want things to be even more hardcore than they already are and cringe at the streamlining and abstraction of survival elements. Any time the game edges away from sim-like towards arcade-like people here get uncomfortable. But that isn't everyone who plays or who wants to play this game by a longshot.

There are plenty who see this game as very hardcore and even too hardcore in its present state for their liking. We even have mods that change the game to be less hardcore like we have mods that push it further towards more. One that comes to mind is the one that makes all the animals friendly and all of the zombies neutral unless attacked first. Some people see that as the perfect amount of hardcoreness that they desire for the game. Someone else posted awhile back that the game shouldn't allow us to die but should just make us have to eat more by having damage hit our hunger gauge instead of having hitpoints and that we never should have to look at the player stats page and see number of deaths. That was too hardcore for comfort for them.

 

[Matt115]

Apart from this, it seems we .. agree? I just won't go into guessing TFP's motives for the simplifications as some were apparently performance things and some were more of consequences of tech changes.

Yes but some thing could be "sacrifaced" instead like big POI's

All that this signifies is that you have an inability to understand things from someone else's perspective. You act like the world is full of slightly different versions of you when, in fact, the world is filled with people completely unlike you. Terms like "hardcore" are in the eyes of the beholder. Some look at our hunger and thirst mechanics and call it too hardcore because you have manage them constantly and they would rather not have to deal with it. Back when weather survival was better, some didn't like having to change clothes to enter a new biome. They felt like that mechanic was too hardcore survival. 

We are always getting feedback from people about the survival elements being too much. Some complain that it is just too hard while others say that it is too focused on realism instead of fun (ie--sim like or hardcore) 

This forum is not a good guage for that as most people here want things to be even more hardcore than they already are and cringe at the streamlining and abstraction of survival elements. Any time the game edges away from sim-like towards arcade-like people here get uncomfortable. But that isn't everyone who plays or who wants to play this game by a longshot.

There are plenty who see this game as very hardcore and even too hardcore in its present state for their liking. We even have mods that change the game to be less hardcore like we have mods that push it further towards more. One that comes to mind is the one that makes all the animals friendly and all of the zombies neutral unless attacked first. Some people see that as the perfect amount of hardcoreness that they desire for the game. Someone else posted awhile back that the game shouldn't allow us to die but should just make us have to eat more by having damage hit our hunger gauge instead of having hitpoints and that we never should have to look at the player stats page and see number of deaths. That was too hardcore for comfort for them.

In minecraft you have hunger mechanics too - but could you call MC hardcore? For Some of people yes. But for most players? no. So okay let's say that 7DTD is hardcore game - so how to describte project zomboid? Ultra hardcore?

You can focus in realism - and you will get something even better that "fun" - satisfaction. That's why factorio or project zomboid are so popular.

"But that isn't everyone who plays or who wants to play this game by a longshot." it's true. Not everyone like this. But if you check begining of this develeopment - if you create 1-10 scale where MC is 1 and project zomboid is 10 - 7DTD was 7/8 while now it's 2-3.

"One that comes to mind is the one that makes all the animals friendly and all of the zombies neutral unless attacked first. Some people see that as the perfect amount of hardcoreness that they desire for the game. Someone else posted awhile back that the game shouldn't allow us to die but should just make us have to eat more by having damage hit our hunger gauge instead of having hitpoints and that we never should have to look at the player stats page and see number of deaths. That was too hardcore for comfort for them." 

Well i don't undestand such mods. This is zombie games - if you check most non parody games one thing is common - you die a lot --> resident evil, l4d2 on expert, cryostasis, NZA, no more room in hell, contagion, cod, dead island , dead rising or dying light. so i don't get it why people buying game about well... dying and then complain about that.

We have tons of casual sandboxes like - raft, summer , grounded.

By hardcore not focused on PVP? Well greenhell and project zomboid. So there is tons of tons of tons casual games while more hardcore ones? almost nothing. 7DTD was like " a little bit easier 3D project zomboid" now - "minecraft with  more realistic graphic"

 

[theFlu]

Yes but some thing could be "sacrifaced" instead like big POI's

But I like big POIs and I cannot lie. Or however that thing went. Removing big POIs wouldn't really do anything to improve performance of the hot mess that was the corpse decay timer. Sure, I absolutely think the tech would've been a solvable problem, with some simplifications for the timers. But if you're making me choose between "corpse clearing" (even with actual good mechanics and gameplay) and "skyscraper clearing", I'll choose the skyscrapers any day.

 

[Matt115]

But I like big POIs and I cannot lie. Or however that thing went. Removing big POIs wouldn't really do anything to improve performance of the hot mess that was the corpse decay timer. Sure, I absolutely think the tech would've been a solvable problem, with some simplifications for the timers. But if you're making me choose between "corpse clearing" (even with actual good mechanics and gameplay) and "skyscraper clearing", I'll choose the skyscrapers any day.

Well - because skyscrapers is more "things " happens right? - well corpse clearing was pain but... that's was a point. we had blood moon. next day we just "cleaned" a little bit are but it was a mistake - because we didn't clean big " hole" where were a lot of zombie corpses we get a lot of zombies until we clean a mess. And it was so good to figured out how something small like this can be mortal - this was a little bit like SCP - endless Ikea or typical WD situation when they miss small hole and zombie came inside and kill a lot of survivors. 

 

[theFlu]

Well - because skyscrapers is more "things " happens right?

Sure, they're heavy to run; but for the corpse timers, they're not nearly as heavy as a horde night.

well corpse clearing was pain but... that's was a point.

Yup, it can be a great mechanic if done right; having corpses be a source of all kinds of problems, infection, slippery, maybe have a chance to randomly re-activate, just all around ugly and stressing for "mental health issues" etc etc. The way they actually were though, whether as ugly terrain diamonds or lootable torsos, I can't say I really miss em.

 

[Matt115]

Sure, they're heavy to run; but for the corpse timers, they're not nearly as heavy as a horde night.

Yup, it can be a great mechanic if done right; having corpses be a source of all kinds of problems, infection, slippery, maybe have a chance to randomly re-activate, just all around ugly and stressing for "mental health issues" etc etc. The way they actually were though, whether as ugly terrain diamonds or lootable torsos, I can't say I really miss em.

Well... just uses wooden frames to go on top.  Well i don't undestand skyscrappers idea - i mean looks cool but... from logical point of view except coins... skyscappers could even much worst POI that typical house - much less resources much more zombie. I know this is a game and skyscrappers are usually important in games - but that's why i love "hospital" in zombie movies and tv shows ---> usully hospital is last place where survivors want to go because there is tons of zombie so pharmacy is better option.

I wish this mechanic could be "revieved" somehow

 

[pApA^LeGBa]

All that this signifies is that you have an inability to understand things from someone else's perspective. You act like the world is full of slightly different versions of you when, in fact, the world is filled with people completely unlike you. Terms like "hardcore" are in the eyes of the beholder. Some look at our hunger and thirst mechanics and call it too hardcore because you have manage them constantly and they would rather not have to deal with it. Back when weather survival was better, some didn't like having to change clothes to enter a new biome. They felt like that mechanic was too hardcore survival. 

We are always getting feedback from people about the survival elements being too much. Some complain that it is just too hard while others say that it is too focused on realism instead of fun (ie--sim like or hardcore) 

This forum is not a good guage for that as most people here want things to be even more hardcore than they already are and cringe at the streamlining and abstraction of survival elements. Any time the game edges away from sim-like towards arcade-like people here get uncomfortable. But that isn't everyone who plays or who wants to play this game by a longshot.

There are plenty who see this game as very hardcore and even too hardcore in its present state for their liking. We even have mods that change the game to be less hardcore like we have mods that push it further towards more. One that comes to mind is the one that makes all the animals friendly and all of the zombies neutral unless attacked first. Some people see that as the perfect amount of hardcoreness that they desire for the game. Someone else posted awhile back that the game shouldn't allow us to die but should just make us have to eat more by having damage hit our hunger gauge instead of having hitpoints and that we never should have to look at the player stats page and see number of deaths. That was too hardcore for comfort for them.

I can agree with that. Just don´t call it hardcore survival when there is games that actually deserve using that superlative way more. Compared to many other games the survival elements aren´t hardcore. Not at all. Just because people think it´s hardcore doesn´t mean that´s true. How should the real hardcore survival games be called then so that the customer can tell the difference? uber super duper hardcore survival? Calling this game a hardcore survival experience is misleading. That´s the whole point. No one in this thread is asking to make it hardcore (many of us wish for it to be harder, that´s true, but that is not the point in this thread). Just pointing out that the description about the survival part is wrong. 

And that has nothing to do with skill or hours played. Those games like Green Hell etc, are harder in their survival part. No matter if you are experienced or not, no matter if you are a god tier gamer or generally suck at games.

It also doesn´t matter that this game might be a hardcore experience for some people. In the big picture the game still isn´t a hardcore survival game. It´s only hardcore for the person playing it. That´s not a reason to use a false description.

 

[Matt115]

I can agree with that. Just don´t call it hardcore survival when there is games that actually deserve using that superlative way more. Compared to many other games the survival elements aren´t hardcore. Not at all. Just because people think it´s hardcore doesn´t mean that´s true. How should the real hardcore survival games be called then so that the customer can tell the difference? uber super duper hardcore survival? Calling this game a hardcore survival experience is misleading. That´s the whole point. No one in this thread is asking to make it even more hardcore (many of us wish for it to be harder, that´s true, but that is not the point in this thread). Just pointing out that the description about the survival part is wrong. 

And that has nothing to do with skill or hours played. Those games like Green Hell etc, are harder in their survival part. No matter if you are experienced or not, no matter if you are a god tier gamer or generally suck at games.

So that's why describtion on steam should be changed because... well this too late to change this game into true hardcore game

 

[Maharin]

well this too late to change this game into true hardcore game

That seems like a fairly obtuse view considering previous statements made in this thread and the simple fact that the game is heavily modable.

 

[SnowDog1942]

Hardcore is the best, when it comes to pron.

 

[Vaeliorin]

Back when weather survival was better, some didn't like having to change clothes to enter a new biome. They felt like that mechanic was too hardcore survival.

I...really don't know that I'd call that system better.  Tedious and annoying are what come to mind.  It wasn't hard, it wasn't a challenge, it was just tiresome.  Having to spend 20 seconds hitting "W" on a few inventory items isn't what I would consider better.  It also wasn't just when changing biomes.  You could go from freezing to sweltering in a matter of a few real life minutes while staying in the forest biome.

I'm honestly not sure how weather could really be better without it killing the whole "we're forcing you to go out an explore" thing TFP seem focused on at this point.  I don't think most people would be real happy about having to stop and build a fire/set up a tent every few minutes, then wait a few minutes to "recover" before you can go out and explore further.

 

[Maharin]

I'm honestly not sure how weather could really be better without it killing the whole "we're forcing you to go out an explore" thing TFP seem focused on at this point.  I don't think most people would be real happy about having to stop and build a fire/set up a tent every few minutes, then wait a few minutes to "recover" before you can go out and explore further.

The solution, of course, is dual wielding torches.

 

[Roland]

I...really don't know that I'd call that system better.  Tedious and annoying are what come to mind.  It wasn't hard, it wasn't a challenge, it was just tiresome.  Having to spend 20 seconds hitting "W" on a few inventory items isn't what I would consider better.  It also wasn't just when changing biomes.  You could go from freezing to sweltering in a matter of a few real life minutes while staying in the forest biome.

I'm honestly not sure how weather could really be better without it killing the whole "we're forcing you to go out an explore" thing TFP seem focused on at this point.  I don't think most people would be real happy about having to stop and build a fire/set up a tent every few minutes, then wait a few minutes to "recover" before you can go out and explore further.

I agree-- but then I'm not necessarily hoping for hardcore weather survival either. That's the thing about going more hardcore into anything. People who are hardcore into it love it but everyone else sees it as tedious. We get people saying we need food spoilage and then a bunch of others pipe in and say that food spoilage ruins games because it is so tedious and isn't a challenge anyway-- it just is no fun. But the people who want hardcore survival will say that the food spoilage is fun and without it 7 Days really can't be considered a real survival game. I'm sure that there are people excited to have to change clothing and gear up for different climates and don't see it as a chore to have to dress for the weather and they hate it right now that weather is so....casual.

I can agree with that. Just don´t call it hardcore survival when there is games that actually deserve using that superlative way more. Compared to many other games the survival elements aren´t hardcore. Not at all. Just because people think it´s hardcore doesn´t mean that´s true. How should the real hardcore survival games be called then so that the customer can tell the difference? uber super duper hardcore survival? Calling this game a hardcore survival experience is misleading. That´s the whole point. No one in this thread is asking to make it hardcore (many of us wish for it to be harder, that´s true, but that is not the point in this thread). Just pointing out that the description about the survival part is wrong. 

And that has nothing to do with skill or hours played. Those games like Green Hell etc, are harder in their survival part. No matter if you are experienced or not, no matter if you are a god tier gamer or generally suck at games.

It also doesn´t matter that this game might be a hardcore experience for some people. In the big picture the game still isn´t a hardcore survival game. It´s only hardcore for the person playing it. That´s not a reason to use a false description.

Its perfectly acceptable to use superlatives when advertising your game. Every product on earth describes itself in self aggrandizing terms. Like I said, MANY people will buy the game and play and go "whoa this game is way more hardcore than I thought it would be" and others will snicker at the label and wonder what TFP was smoking when they tried to pass off their game as hardcore survival. It doesn't really matter what the objective truth is when the perception is going to be so broad. If it was universally accepted that 7 Days to Die wasn't a hardcore survival game then we would probably feel the pressure to remove it but there is enough of a perception spectrum about it that the truth is nebulous and so when some people complain that the game isn't hardcore we are more likely to think those people are just super duper hardcore elites rather than agree that the game itself is more on the casual side of things.

I really can't see ANY company billing their product as a mediocre version of what it does. That just is not done. That comes through in reviews and videos for people who want to research outside of what the company is presenting itself as. But TFP is not going to say, "Take Green Mile and soften it up about 1000% and that's OUR game!!!" Instead, they are going to be like "Take Minecraft and ratchet up the fear, survival, and blood 1000% and that's OUR game!!!" Its a brag. Its the picture of the Big Mac on the billboard...not the actual Big Mac in your hands....

 

[Matt115]

That seems like a fairly obtuse view considering previous statements made in this thread and the simple fact that the game is heavily modable.

Modable but TFP coudn't change this in something like "project zomboid in 3D" because this would lead to mass criticisim

 

[SnowDog1942]

.not the actual Big Mac in your hands....

What if its not a Big Mac thats in my hands, though big.. for sure 

 

[Pernicious]

I...really don't know that I'd call that system better.  Tedious and annoying are what come to mind.  It wasn't hard, it wasn't a challenge, it was just tiresome.  Having to spend 20 seconds hitting "W" on a few inventory items isn't what I would consider better.  It also wasn't just when changing biomes.  You could go from freezing to sweltering in a matter of a few real life minutes while staying in the forest biome.

I think the current system as is would be tedious. It could be simplified through a "load out" based system for example. You create an "outfit" you can save, and switch with a couple clicks. Might even attract more players interested in the fashion! Next would be make up and grooming, which could affect how party girl treats you, or... wait, no off topic.

For me, I don't want it to be tedious either, just, impactful. Keep me out of the snow biome until I find enough gear. Make going into the desert a risk because I can't really wear enough armour. 

The problem even with that though, is that some people will still play it another way and call it tedious. They'll insist on wearing armour into the desert and complain their stamina is always close to zero, and they need to drink every 2 minutes, and point out ultra marathoners do 84km runs in the desert (conveniently ignoring it's in special sweat wicking clothing, not carrying anything heavier than a garmin watch, and have been training for years for it).

It's a no win situation. I feel like in this case, I'm not behind the dev'a decision, but so many things are the way I like it, so that's just life? Still love the game overall.

Edit: just one more thought. A lot of games, by the end game, the player becomes a super hero in everything. Skyrim was a classic example - a class less progression system where you took points in skills you wanted to hone, but if you did all the side quesfs, by mid game, you were basically maxed out in everything.

By making it more difficult to have a single build that's good at everything, it can make the game more challenging. You usually gear up in full steel and go toe to toe with a baseball bat to save ammo? Try that with no armour. Like sniping and avoiding combat? Be challenged in heavy snow where every footstep makes an audible crunch and you can't see more than 10m.

Much of this can be implemented by just changing values rather than whole rewrites of the game. But again, not everyone wants that. Some people play wanting to feel like they are heroes, not weaklings.

 

[Rotor]

I have the answer:

 

[Maharin]

Human poop potatoes.  I wonder if those taste any different than rotting flesh potatoes?

 

[pApA^LeGBa]

@Roland Sure. I know that. If you see it from a black and white perspective it´s flatout lying to the customer though. Just because that is meanwhile business as usual doesn´t mean it´s ok or that we have to like it.

And tbh i am mostly playing indie games or games from new developers because i am sick of business as usual. It´s also not like the game needs to shine in the survival part only as it is just one part of the game.

 

[meganoth]

@Roland Sure. I know that. If you see it from a black and white perspective it´s flatout lying to the customer though. Just because that is meanwhile business as usual doesn´t mean it´s ok or that we have to like it.

And tbh i am mostly playing indie games or games from new developers because i am sick of business as usual. It´s also not like the game needs to shine in the survival part only as it is just one part of the game.

I agree. A description doesn't need to lie to put a positive spin on anything. What would be mediocre about saying it has "survival" included instead of "hard-core survival" included? Especially since at least as many players would be detered by the "hard-core" label as would be attracted.