I gave storms a chance but im glad they are being changed

[Roland]

The worst thing is the constant groaning.

Yes and the blood splatter on the edges of the screen. I don't like that effect being the catch-all visual effect for taking damage.

Don't tell me that realism suddenly matters.

Selective realism is a thing and it's designed to be arcade where you want it sim and sim where you want it arcade.

 

[Rotor]

Do you really need to rip quotes out of context and piece them together?

yes, notice smiley? I guess I need to add 5 to show comedic post?

 

[4sheetzngeegles]

Some of the thoughts regarding storm displacement are interesting. They made me visualize
this.

If storms were/are generated by the same spawners that generate the particle emissions,
then labeled 1 - 100 for intensity or associated with sub biomes, or If storms used the same
mechanic that governs wind. I say wind because it constantly changes in pitch sound and intensity.

Personally I like the 24/7 storm idea, this way it could equally and variably debuff
constantly, only damaging the player when between 80 and 100% intensity, but
reduces armor integrity, lowers visibility, and hyper excites the ai. It could
also be used as an occlusion culling technique to reduce the distant LOD, objects
pois and entities Tris, while simultaneously allowing more entities on the screen,
reducing rendering overhead. Faatal initiated it with the fog. Storms are mostly intensified
fog with physical effects. But, of course something like this would need to be optional if
added.

If fog of war on the map did not get removed upon exploration, and only the player placed
icons showed it would be a helluva battle not seeing your destination until you are there,
and would inspire the desire for a vehicle. Then getting from the eye of the storm, back to
neutral ground would be a second battle. Within the storms if they were static and not variable
then small plots of land or oasis within the storms could provide temporary respite, before
cracking on.

Post automatically merged: Saturday at 5:42 PM

Regarding groaning My character, switches sexes during some of the groans.

 

[Mister Forgash]

Personally I like the 24/7 storm idea, this way it could equally and variably debuff
constantly, only damaging the player when between 80 and 100% intensity, but
reduces armor integrity, lowers visibility, and hyper excites the ai.

While variable intensity storms sounds more thorough than I've come to expect, all this sounds amazing.
Wouldn't it be nice if the reason you don't want to travel during a storm wasn't so much the fact that you have to have a stash of medkits to burn, but rather an intense feeling of vulnerability.. You still feel like you're gonna die out there- but just for different reasons.

 

[4sheetzngeegles]

Yep. For me personal vulnerability is what makes any game more intense. Not seeing,
not knowing, builds apprehension, and tension. Then when it's all over I feel like I have
accomplished something, or earned it. What I posted above was inspired by the different
posts and the mod Jwoodle showed.

 

[Adam the Waster]

After looking at the insulation mod This is exactly what I need in my life LET ME CRAFT IT ■■■■ IT

 

[Kyoji]

I don't mind punishing storms, but I think simple damage ticks are the wrong way to go about it for a few reasons.

#1) It encourages players to stay in cover which isn't a bad decision in itself but when that decision is fairly consistent due to poor risk/reward then you miss out on the detailed storms while inside.

#2) It's not challenging. Either you stay inside or skip through time gaps. It's more annoying than challenging I would argue.

Instead I would prefer things that can lead to death while not causing it outright such as an increase of zombie spawns and making them feral with reduced visibility. Each biome could also offer their own unique challenges to the storm.

 

[Double G]

If storms are going to remain primarily the way they are now, the best solution is keeping the option to shut them off.
I tried playing for a while with storms on. I then lowered their frequency and then inevitably shut them off.

If the player doesn't have the ability to counter the storm, outside of simply waiting it out, then it results in a shallow, boring and ultimately frustrating experience for me (and as we can see) many other players.

If this game was an apocalypse sim, then maybe storms like these would be good, but it is an action game. These storms are antithetical to the overall pacing. Even if you're not out fighting zombies and are building something outdoors, the storms stop you or greatly reduce what you can do.

The bottom line is, for too many players, they are not fun. They are not challenging. They are not interesting.

Give the player the ability to keep the storms from damaging them with craftable wearables. Have the storms continue to restrict the player's movement, effectiveness, etc. That way the players that are happy waiting it out in shelter can continue to do so, and those that don't like that concept can continue to play. Or, as I said, keep the option to shut them off.

 

[grz__]

I don't mind punishing storms, but I think simple damage ticks are the wrong way to go

ok that's your opinion

#1) It encourages players to stay in cover which isn't a bad decision in itself but when that decision is fairly consistent due to poor risk/reward then you miss out on the detailed storms while inside.

What do you mean by risk-reward? So if you are building on your base, a storm should not start because you are not going to make a profit?

#2) It's not challenging. Either you stay inside or skip through time gaps. It's more annoying than challenging I would argue.

why isn't it challenging, if people say it's too hard and die from the storm? I don't miss the storm because I don't stay inside waiting.

Instead I would prefer things that can lead to death while not causing it outright such as an increase of zombie spawns and making them feral with reduced visibility. Each biome could also offer their own unique challenges to the storm.

I play with spawn mods, and feral sense, how is that going to be different for me? In addition to being avoidable by simply climbing onto the roof of a building, is that more challenging? Also the danger has to be the storm, not the zombies That's what horde nights are for and the rest of the game, what you suggest is another mini horde with a debuff, the same as always, nothing innovative.

 

[Kyoji]

ok that's your opinion

As is the same for everyone else. Not sure I understand your point. I didn't say I spoke for everyone.

What do you mean by risk-reward? So if you are building on your base, a storm should not start because you are not going to make a profit?

Risk/Reward is a guiding principle for a lot of people in the game. At night you can continue questing but at the risk of running into feral zombies. So you have to calculate how important it is you push forward versus just staying home. In the context of storms one would evaluate the duration and magnitude of the storms and determine whether it would be a good idea to go outside. With how storms deal damage to players you either skip through cover in the storm or wait it out.

I play with spawn mods, and feral sense, how is that going to be different for me? In addition to being avoidable by simply climbing onto the roof of a building, is that more challenging? Also the danger has to be the storm, not the zombies That's what horde nights are for and the rest of the game, what you suggest is another mini horde with a debuff, the same as always, nothing innovative.

You are playing modded. Many others cannot. I play vanilla so my feedback can be core to the game. The developers can't make changes based on mod performance.

As far as the zombie multiplier thing that was an example. Storms would have more to them then just that I would hope. I stated they should have their own unique challenges for each biome where the ice, smoke, radiation, etc., all play a part to hinder the player venturing outside.

Again this isn't to say that the current storms system is terrible, but rather I would prefer something more dynamic than a large flat damage hit every x seconds.

 

[grz__]

If storms are going to remain primarily the way they are now, the best solution is keeping the option to shut them off.
I tried playing for a while with storms on. I then lowered their frequency and then inevitably shut them off.

If the player doesn't have the ability to counter the storm, outside of simply waiting it out, then it results in a shallow, boring and ultimately frustrating experience for me (and as we can see) many other players.

I sincerely believe that the best option, as I've said a million times, is to adjust the storm in the menu,
Waiting is optional; you can go out and face the storm, assuming the risk.

If this game was an apocalypse sim, then maybe storms like these would be good, but it is an action game. These storms are antithetical to the overall pacing. Even if you're not out fighting zombies and are building something outdoors, the storms stop you or greatly reduce what you can do.

The bottom line is, for too many players, they are not fun. They are not challenging. They are not interesting.

Sim? There is no simulation in these storms. It is normal for the storm to interrupt you and make you stop what you are doing. That change of plans is what can make them interesting, so the night of hordes also interrupts you, as do the screamers.


Because they don't like the idea of the storm itself; what they want is a normal storm, but it's supposed to be a kind of hurricane storm with dangerous winds, radiation, burning embers, not something you can remedy with an umbrella. Others do like the concept, although it can always be improved, of course.

Give the player the ability to keep the storms from damaging them with craftable wearables. Have the storms continue to restrict the player's movement, effectiveness, etc. That way the players that are happy waiting it out in shelter can continue to do so, and those that don't like that concept can continue to play. Or, as I said, keep the option to shut them off.

If you're referring to armor,
I would agree that it would slightly reduce damage and replace medkits, but how do you balance that without it being easily exploited by combining armor and bandages?

I don't wait for the storm to pass, I go out and try not to get killed. Eventually, you can take shelter for a few seconds to recover.

 

[grz__]

Risk/Reward is a guiding principle for a lot of people in the game. At night you can continue questing but at the risk of running into feral zombies. So you have to calculate how important it is you push forward versus just staying home. In the context of storms one would evaluate the duration and magnitude of the storms and determine whether it would be a good idea to go outside. With how storms deal damage to players you either skip through cover in the storm or wait it out.

I understand the risk-reward ratio, but if you're outside and a storm hits, you have to accept it. You can't think, “Oh, this isn't convenient for me right now because of X reason.” It's a storm, although it would be nice to be able to predict the possibility a little bit—dynamic clouds, for example.

You are playing modded. Many others cannot. I play vanilla so my feedback can be core to the game. The developers can't make changes based on mod performance.

As far as the zombie multiplier thing that was an example. Storms would have more to them then just that I would hope. I stated they should have their own unique challenges for each biome where the ice, smoke, radiation, etc., all play a part to hinder the player venturing outside.

Again this isn't to say that the current storms system is terrible, but rather I would prefer something more dynamic than a large flat damage hit every x seconds.

It's just a spawn mod, the rest is vanilla. Besides, the number of vanilla zombies is too low, and I'm not the only one who thinks so. As for the dynamism of the storms, it would be nice to see different things depending on the biome and other factors, such as storm phases and visual changes, as suggested in this thread in previous comments, but I'm realistic about the chances of seeing something like that.

As for damage, that's what makes the storm dangerous. A combination of damage_debuff would be ideal.

 

[Double G]

Sim? There is no simulation in these storms. It is normal for the storm to interrupt you and make you stop what you are doing. That change of plans is what can make them interesting, so the night of hordes also interrupts you, as do the screamers.

Sim as in if the whole game was an apocalypse sim, meaning a more or less realistic representation of a world during a zombie apocalypse.

Screamers and night zombies are not a good comparison because you can still combat them. They don't necessarily have to be avoided. You can't combat the storms. Also, screamers and night zombies are only a real threat early game. Storms are a static threat from beginning to end.

Also, I don't see any change-of-plans options that can be considered interesting when avoiding the storms. And I'm certainly not alone in that.

Like I said, make the storms challenging enough for those that don't mind waiting it out, but not so stifling for those that are willing to risk being outside during them.

 

[grz__]

Screamers and night zombies are not a good comparison because you can still combat them. They don't necessarily have to be avoided. You can't combat the storms. Also, screamers and night zombies are only a real threat early game. Storms are a static threat from beginning to end.

The storm is not an enemy you can kill; you fight it by seeking shelter or healing yoursel

Storms are a static threat from beginning to end.

So is it a challenge or not?

Also, I don't see any change-of-plans options that can be considered interesting when avoiding the storms. And I'm certainly not alone in that.

Like I said, make the storms challenging enough for those that don't mind waiting it out, but not so stifling for those that are willing to risk being outside during them.

Changing plans could mean doing other things you haven't planned for.

They're already challenging, reducing the damage too much is what will make them stop being so, and the new changes are supposed to address the balance so that it's not so hard to stay outside. Until we see it, we don't know how it will be, but what I can say is that the storm based solely on debuffs would be horrible.

 

[Ralathar44]

I'm end game now on our current playthrough. We moved into the snow biome before the second blood moon even so we were dealing with 50% frequency storms (biome progression off) since very early on when we barely even had bicycles.

Honestly, it might actually need to be changed. But not because of what is being said, but because player psychology. People's severe risk aversion causing them to make boneheaded decisions.

I quickly adapted to the storms, figured out roughly how far I could roam in how much time with each vehicle, and stayed actively moving about and looting during storms. I only very rarely waited one out. My 2 friends would see a storm and hide until it was over, insisting that it was not safe to go out. Or that it was already too late to leave because they hesitated, or etc. I kept directly proving them wrong by coming back and then leaving AFTER they said they couldn't and being perfectly safe. But it never changed their minds. Their decisions and words were in direct conflict with objective proven reality.

We were about 40 seconds minibike ride from the forest biome. You have like 70 seconds after the warning shows up. But even after getting the motorcycle which is so much faster they would refuse to leave during storms.

Ironically I think this is one of those cases where players are being stupid. Objectively. BUT you still need to change the mechanic because the players are not going to change no matter how wrong they are. Because its a psychological issue. This is just how it is to be a game dev sometimes. You can be absolutely right, the playerbase be absolutely wrong, and the right move might still be to make a change to deal with that player psychology.

 

[grz__]

I'm end game now on our current playthrough. We moved into the snow biome before the second blood moon even so we were dealing with 50% frequency storms (biome progression off) since very early on when we barely even had bicycles.

Honestly, it might actually need to be changed. But not because of what is being said, but because player psychology. People's severe risk aversion causing them to make boneheaded decisions.

I quickly adapted to the storms, figured out roughly how far I could roam in how much time with each vehicle, and stayed actively moving about and looting during storms. I only very rarely waited one out. My 2 friends would see a storm and hide until it was over, insisting that it was not safe to go out. Or that it was already too late to leave because they hesitated, or etc. I kept directly proving them wrong by coming back and then leaving AFTER they said they couldn't and being perfectly safe. But it never changed their minds. Their decisions and words were in direct conflict with objective proven reality.

We were about 40 seconds minibike ride from the forest biome. You have like 70 seconds after the warning shows up. But even after getting the motorcycle which is so much faster they would refuse to leave during storms.

Ironically I think this is one of those cases where players are being stupid. Objectively. BUT you still need to change the mechanic because the players are not going to change no matter how wrong they are. Because its a psychological issue. This is just how it is to be a game dev sometimes. You can be absolutely right, the playerbase be absolutely wrong, and the right move might still be to make a change to deal with that player psychology.

When version 2.0 came out and discussions about storms began, I posted a video on the forum, forcing myself to go outside as much as possible, when the main argument at the time was, “storms force you to be AFK inside.”


Even so, some people still think you have to wait around doing nothing.

I'm not saying this because of the discussion in this thread; there are different arguments and different opinions here about how storms should be.


But I've seen it in different places.


Of course, everyone is different and every situation can differ. If, for example, you enter the Burnt Forest on day 1 and get caught in a storm with no buildings around, it's almost certain that you'll have to wait in a hole in the ground or something. This was never my case. I always prepared myself, being aware that the storm could catch me (think ahead, prepare yourself), etc. And from 2.0 until now, I've died zero times because of a storm, and I've had to wait for it to end without being able to do much a couple of times. However, the times it has given me dangerous, adrenaline-filled, fun situations are many more.

 

[Double G]

The storm is not an enemy you can kill; you fight it by seeking shelter or healing yoursel


So is it a challenge or not?

Changing plans could mean doing other things you haven't planned for.

They're already challenging, reducing the damage too much is what will make them stop being so, and the new changes are supposed to address the balance so that it's not so hard to stay outside. Until we see it, we don't know how it will be, but what I can say is that the storm based solely on debuffs would be horrible.

Bottomline is they're boring and annoying. They're as challenging and fun as having to clean a toilet. If you consider simply avoiding something a challenge then I don't know what to tell you. And the fact that you think it's bad to allow the player to wear things to stop the storm from killing them is odd to me. I mean, if you're considering the storms challenging the way they are now, then debuffs will very likely be more than enough to keep you from leaving shelter.

 

[grz__]

Bottomline is they're boring and annoying. They're as challenging and fun as having to clean a toilet.

That's purely your opinion;

If you consider simply avoiding something a challenge then I don't know what to tell you. And the fact that you think it's bad to allow the player to wear things to stop the storm from killing them is odd to me.

How many times do I have to say that I'm not going to wait for the storm to pass? You can go outside as much as you want and take risks.

When did I say I'm against wearing something to stop the storm from killing you? I'm against armor or magical items that simply make the danger disappear when you wear them, but not against mitigating it, which is what bandages do. There's a big difference here. Do you really think that wearing an item that completely eliminates the danger with a simple click of the mouse is good design?

. I mean, if you're considering the storms challenging the way they are now, then debuffs will very likely be more than enough to keep you from leaving shelter.

I do think it's challenging because it can kill you if you're not careful. If, for you, the storm means staying inside no matter what, I don't know what to say. The stamina and speed debuffs would just be tedious, and the only danger would be the zombies, not the storm itself. In other words, more of the same, nothing different or innovative.


I remind you that it's not a normal storm with rain, but strong winds with burning embers, clouds of toxic radiation, etc.

 

[bdubyah]

Was playing my vanilla-ish run yesterday and was on my way to Jen's for the first time. Dealt with her and was about to leave her place when the storm warning kicked in. Hopped on my minibike and took off thinking I could get back to the forest before it set in. Realized I wasn't gonna make it and I was one mushroom short of another serum so I knew if I stayed outside I would likely die when the biome hazard kicked in on top of the storm, so I ducked into a house I didn't recognize to get out of the storm. Stayed in there and cleared the basement area which was where the loot ended up being. By the time I did that and organized my stuff, the storm was pretty much over.

I really don't get the outrage. People just don't wanna have to adapt.

 

[ZehMatt]

Also am I the only one who doesn't like the storm warning? One of the core principles in game design is "Show, not tell", I really hate this kind of handholding, it would be nice to have the storm visible in the distance that is approaching, but that would require some effort to do. I guess it could be still signaled to the player via loud thunders at least, it's just killing the immersion when you are basically a walking weather radar.