PC ability to Dig down for zombies. WHY
- Thread starter lizzyroo
- Start date
pApA^LeGBa
Well-known member
They could actually provide different challenges for once, i don´t know, maybe challenging survial elements for example? Like mentioned in "The Survival Horde Crafting game" subtitle?
Generally more options than killing for an acceptable speed of leveling (Yes there is other ways for XP, but super duper slow). This shouldn´t be a pure FPS. It´s more and more becoming one tough.
Where do all those Z´s in the middle of nowhere come from btw? It´s like there is invisble villages somewhere, when i look how many Z´s are basically everywhere in the wild, no matter if there is a POI near or not. Cheap way to solve the problem that there are no other challenges in the game.
Z´s shouldn´t be the only challenge in this game that was announced as a genremix. FPS isn´t even in the title unless the others who seem to be unloved by TFP...
Last edited by a moderator:
SlicksGirl
New member
yeah.. lucky my mom is 3k miles away and my brother lives in england.. i purposely dotn let anyone else i'm related to know where i live.. because of this..neighbors... hah...
i have siblings and other family members who fit the bill perfect... so busy snooping into everyone elses business that they cant even run their own when a problem arises... oh the irony of that
but yea.. our neighbors.. they dont like lawns, plants, gardens, or pets.. and think possums are actually rats.. and regularly turn us in for living on our property (managing, doing things, gardening, having pets, etc.. the city and the police are beyond annoyed with their reports)
pApA^LeGBa
Well-known member
On a sidenote: Safe underground bases won´t loose you any players or new customers.
Removing them will cost you players and new customers, but no one didn´t buy this game just because it´s possible to play safe.
Again, i am not saying i want to be completly safe underground, but it´s a fact. No one ever said about a SP/Coop focused game: "Others can play safe, i don´t buy this because of that option, even if i don´t have to use it."
There will be people that don´t buy, because there is no safe or at least safer way to play tough.
Removing them will cost you players and new customers, but no one didn´t buy this game just because it´s possible to play safe.
Again, i am not saying i want to be completly safe underground, but it´s a fact. No one ever said about a SP/Coop focused game: "Others can play safe, i don´t buy this because of that option, even if i don´t have to use it."
There will be people that don´t buy, because there is no safe or at least safer way to play tough.
Last edited by a moderator:
RestInPieces
New member
It certainly is not a fact. My comrades stopped playing the game in the latest alphas for this reason and some people who checked the game asked me this question: "what kind of survival is this, if we have to make self-imposed rules to make an effort to survive?"
Any game is a set of rules that are enforced on the player. People actually expect for these rules to exist. Same with being gated and pretty much everything else - e.g. there are rules to tune our progression. With that logic of "choice", why not also make it a choice to progress at our own pace and have everything available at level 1? Why not have infinite health so that we can choose our mortality rate with some self-imposed rules and die at our own pace, etc. This is not catering to everyone, this is adhering to an abstract/sandbox design that many people don't like. These choices belong outside of the game, in menus. If that logic was legitimate, there wouldn't be any reason for devs to fix any exploits that invalidate game mechanics, because "choice". Would that repel customers? Of course it would.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bubbahotetp
New member
Game rules are arbitrary. Enjoyment is personal. Who is then to say what's right or wrong. I know what you mean by the premise of being "pushed" by rules to do a certain thing. It certainly gives an incentive to try harder. However...
Does everybody want that all the time? No.
Does everybody HAVE TO play it like that if there is a choice? No.
Honestly, if there is a sandbox game or open world game with lots of options and you have to be forced down a narrow path in order to enjoy the game, then I'm more tempted to think that the problem lies in your bad discipline and lack of impulse control rather than in the open game being set up wrong. If there were no laws for a day, would you immediately go out and punch people in the face? Do you ONLY eat at MCD as long as you have the money for it? You are making restricting choices every day, all the time (I at least hope so for your sake) yet you and some others here get incredibly irritated and keep pushing and pushing over the fact that some people want to do that in a game. 99.9999% of all games out there already send you down a one way street. Why do 100% of all games have to be exactly like that? Can't you just play Dead Island instead? Last Light? No, for some reason it has to be exactly this game! It's like a 3 year old kid who is throwing a tantrum because he can't have the last cookie.
It's absolutely not okay in my book to be telling people how they are supposed to play a game; as long as it's not against you, it's none of your business what other players do during their game time. That *you* have a problem with other people's choices is your (meaning all you who are so upset about this) personal problem, and it's a crap attitude that wants you to have things changed so those who like a different play style can't enjoy themselves any more. It's like your play style is better and more correct than theirs plus a huge portion of superiority that makes you think you can impose your rules on a bunch of other people. That's not okay!
Fine if the game ends up being a certain way I don't like - what ever! I'm gonna do something else, but how ever that goes in the end, nothing, nothing, nothing makes it okay to be telling anybody what they are supposed to do as long as they are not bothering or hurting anybody else with it!
pApA^LeGBa
Well-known member
Partly agree. Having to restrict yourself is not a good way. But it´s literally just don´t dig a hole and start building/fortyfing on the surface in this case. A very short moment to overcome the urge to use the easy way, knowing it will reward you with the challenge you need. If you have such low selfcontrol that you can´t even resist the easy way when kowing the other way will reward you with the challnge you want, i honestly pity you.
Last edited by a moderator:
RestInPieces
New member
Game rules are anything but arbitrary (only in pure sandbox games) and 7DTD imposes a ton of rules to the player, ranging from every single statistic your character or the enemies have, like health, physics, speed, hunger or damage values, to every mechanic, like the horde night, the gamestages system, all forms of gating and progression, loot etc.
Choosing most of the ruleset is done by options outside of gameplay, xml editing or modding. You don't decide for example whether a blood moon horde will come to you, whether to take that perk that requires a higher level, the game's general difficulty in gameplay, whether you character can fly by himself, or whether to get satiated without following the rule that demands you to eat to get satiated. These rules make this game what it is:
Playstyle freedom and choices are a completely different thing. Freedom of choice is the game allowing you to choose multiple paths to achieve various things, while under these rules. None rooted for the opposite of that. The underground should definitely be a playstyle choice, it's the underground invincibility that should not, because it invalidates the very purpose of any rules related to a large part of the game which are the survival/TD genres.
As mentioned above, according to the official game's description, the game is not a pure sandbox. I would agree if it was but it just isn't. It's not me or others with the same opinion who are trying to make the game something it really is not.
Asking me to play a game which has nothing to do with anything 7DTD is (except zombies) makes zero sense. It's like me asking you to go play Minecraft and even MC has more common elements with 7DTD than those games. I enjoy 7DTD for its survival, TD, RPG, building, voxel elements - everything the game was advertised for.
Personally, I support an option for a sandbox mode, something between creative and survival, which will allow players to enjoy their game completely at their own discretion, not bound by these rules.
However I must ask you to respect the changes being done to survival mode and realize that playing pretend and using self-imposed rules in order to be able to enjoy the game, is essentially the same with not playing a game at all. With that same logic, it wouldn't matter what game I played - just my imagination. I could play RPGs as survival games, action games as tower defense games and so on. It's actually terribly asinine to be asking someone to do that. There is a reason game genres exist and as I described earlier it's their ruleset which makes them what they are.
Of course it's not ok telling other people how they are supposed to play a game - good thing none here did that. It may come as a shock but the reason people talk about this is purely selfish and none really cares about how an anonymous person over the internet plays. I clearly stated the reasons in my previous post and it had absolutely nothing to do with how other people play so please stop chasing ghosts or seeing sociopaths everywhere. That alone warrants concern.
That's very nice of you, but besides that, what you described is the definition of an exploit. Have you ever wondered why developers fix exploits or just think they do it only to protect a few poor players with low self-control?
Last edited by a moderator:
Bubbahotetp
New member
Game rules are up the whim of the developer, different devs can make up completely different game rules within the context of making a game -> arbitrary. Nothing set in stone about how a game has to be designed.
"Should not"? So it "should be" just as valid if I come to you and say "But you have to play it only by using turrets and manpower, no base! Because reasons!". That's classic tower defence.
There were many invincibilities in a16, all of them with no risk, resulting in survival, no xp gain, no loot gain:
- Swimming in the middle of a medium+ sized body of water
- Making a tower high enough to avoid detection
- Building an enclosed box in a tree
- Building a suspended enclosed box with spread out legs
- Logging off during horde night
- Building a deep bunker
- Hiding on the roof of a high building
- Driving during horde night
- Staying inside of RIP's fortress while he's getting the job done
What if someone helps you during horde night but they didn't spend all week on getting ammo stocked up and they only kill 2 zombies. Do you kick them out because they're lazy and exploiting your hospitality?
Bunker builders and those who survive horde night passively, stay safe, but as a trade off they don't gain anything either - ever thought of that?? That should be fair enough as a trade off. They don't risk anything, but they don't gain anything either! Ironic that in a17 you horde nighters don't gain anything either except XP. Which makes it even harder for you to argue your mute point!
Why I personally like bunkers: because I got a little sick and tired of spending all week repairing fortresses while everybody else was out frolicking about, looting and having fun, then next horde night, the same. And that's entirely my problem, because I chose to maintain everybody's fort, for years. And get this: if I build a bunker it's *also entirely my problem*! Fortress building was fun in the beginning until it turned into a tedium. I have nearly 4000 frigging hours in the game. How many millions of tons of material do I have to create and use for repair before I have your and every other whiners holy permission to be tired of it, before I can retire to a frigging bunker? I want to have more time to explore the land, not just to have to repair for nearly all week every single week (and if in a response you tell me to just go play a different game then, I'm going to come and slap the stupidity out of you! I'm having perfect fun doing what I'm doing, thank you very much and I don't need your permission nor advice!). I have a bunker so I can enjoy the rest of "the rules" more if that makes you happy! 7DTD is not JUST and ONLY a horde night game for crying out loud! Why the hell do the devs bother with all the POI's if the game is ONLY about building a fort and defending it every 7 days. All it would need for that would be a 300 square feet map, a trader, some loot crates and a quarry. BS!
I don't have to respect anything like that as long as I don't bother anybody! And I can do something about it if I don't like it. I don't have to respect that at all! Why do you think you can tell me that? I can play with what ever self imposed rules I want, thank you very much! Why don't you respect my right to chose to play as I want in stead and respect a16 but are in stead all griped up about what rules were in place then? Why don't you just "respect" those rules?? Make your mind up! Must ask me...?! Darn then I must ask you to... uhm... let's say... at least kill 400 zombies every horde night or I'm gonna get my knickers in a twist... and I'm going to be *all concerned* about you! I have news for you: you can't ask me squat. I can play the game any way I want, just like everybody else, that includes you!
How is imposing your own rules the same than not playing at all? Total BS! I imposed a rule on myself saying that I would stick to staying on a one square mile island and living off the land and only harvest random spawns. Should I have asked for your permission first? Should I have checked with the game rule police? I had a blast doing that, I would do it again if it was possible. Those were self imposed rules and they lead to an awesome challenge which was super fun to play!
Terribly asinine? How is making your own choices in a game terribly asinine? Every single player is making their own decisions when playing a game all the time. Nobody comes to check if everybody is okay with what ever they are doing. Are you asking others if it's okay you build your little fort in a certain place? No. And you wouldn't expect having to do that either. Do you go about on game maps seeking out people who have built bunkers just to berate them? Or maybe they didn't build their fort up to spec, maybe you better start checking up on *everybody* to see if they conform to your personal standards? How can you sleep at night? THAT is terribly asinine - because it's none of your f* business how other people play! Most of the time you wouldn't even know about it!
There is only ONE SINGLE THING I think you have the right to obsess about that was a problem in a16: someone staying in the middle of a large body of water, outside of spawn distance, during horde night. Because that would *break* horde night, for EVERYBODY currently playing. There you have a say about what they are doing, but in absolutely no other type of instance!
You and a few select others are upset about some other players' freedoms to play as they wish, cute but now you're being a plaster saint. That's exactly what you're doing and I'm calling you out on it!
LOL. Warrants concern. Thanks. Please, don't ever contact me, I'm not interested in your sincerest concern. That was pretty lame, so lame in fact I had to use it earlier in my response.
No I'm not chasing ghosts, I'm chasing opinions that want to impose their own playstyle onto players by objecting to their freedoms of choice!
Do you know what a sociopath is? If you were one you'd already bombarding me with PMs that contain incredibly horrible insults and trying to intimidate and scare me, just because I dared question your complete and unquestionable authority on how to play this game and telling me that I'm the scum of the earth and that you look forward to the day I die. No, this is about players who think they can dictate how other players should play their game. It's not sociopathic, it's just immature and egotistic.
Let's dive into the ways we can meaningfully define the word exploit:
Exploit might mean that you are using or benefiting from a rule or situation: You build a wall around your base and are exploiting the effect it has, by it giving you and your belongings protection. Is that what you mean by exploit? Then every surface dweller is doing that.
But let's stick to "video game exploits" and I'll go to our friend Wikipedia for some inspiration:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_exploit
The only relevant one that comes close is the "safe zone" exploit. By that definition again: you all who complain are the ones using it! Because you create a safe zone from which to kill zombies, reducing the risk of being attacked! Bunker builders are actually LESS exploitative as they are completely defensive and passive, they don't partake in the horde night at all, gaining NOTHING. Absolutely nothing. You on the other hand have devised various exploitative ways to protect yourself from attack and are gaining XP and loot while staying in disproportionate safety. Weird how things turned on their head, right?
Actually I have come up with pillbox designs in the past that are real exploits because I can shoot and club zombies from them without them reaching me at all OR them being able to do damage to the structure. If you saw one you wouldn't be able to tell and you wouldn't' know the difference and you wouldn't say a word... What probably irritates you and a select few others I bet is that you are guys who are always trying to stay in the top spot in the player list, because I see no purpose to being opposed to this other than some weird obsessed ego trip about how many deaths a player has on their spread sheet! So what are you going to do about horde night loggers? They are not even making the effort to build a bunker. You have to learn to accept that there will always be a way to avoid horde night. The problem is yours, not anybody else's!
Thanks for playing. If that was your best try, then all it did was expose yet again how mute the point is of bunkering being exploitative.
H4kkepeter
New member
Best comment I´ve read here for a long time.
Maybe the Pimps should remove all blocks and force everyone to just use POIs without the ability to fortify it in any way, because they´re all trying to break the dev´s rules by avoiding the horde face2face.
Oh, that´s not how it works? Too bad, you can´t have it YOUR way, guys ;-)
Aldranon
New member
Simply put, an exploit is a zero risk event/action that also has some degree of reward.
So hiding safe underground and making no sound/action would not be exploitive. If you make any noise or do any action then... Horde Night is on for you.
The completed version of my "Cheater Fort" is the only truly exploitive thing in the game I know of, as its then zero risk some reward (Whatever I craft or forge).
So hiding safe underground and making no sound/action would not be exploitive. If you make any noise or do any action then... Horde Night is on for you.
The completed version of my "Cheater Fort" is the only truly exploitive thing in the game I know of, as its then zero risk some reward (Whatever I craft or forge).
RestInPieces
New member
What different developers do is irrelevant since I think it is clear enough that I am talking about the rules that exist in a game - not about some kind of "rules that apply for all games". There is obviously no such thing.
Each game is a structure of synergizing rules that are anything but arbitrary. Here are some example phrases with "arbitrary". The rules of a game are based on a plan/system/structure and synergize with other rules/mechanics -> not arbitrary. In the most basic level of the game for example, the damage value range of an item is analogous with hit point values, item quality etc. The value range is not an arbitrary number that is picked without considering other parts of the system.
It is not valid, because in the same way this game is not a pure sandbox, it is also not a pure tower defense either. Doesn't take much effort to realize what are the "shoulds" and "shouldn'ts" in a game with many genres, only some common sense. In your above example, what you describe invalidates a large part of the game which is building, like an invincibility zone invalidates a large part of the game which is tower defense. It's that simple.
There were also many more ways for "invincibility" throughout the game's development including duping exploits and so on. And you wouldn't guess what the developers are doing - they keep fixing them. The new AI is a testament of that - still not perfect but it's getting there. The game after all is still in development.
Do you even get what this discussion is about?
What's there to gain except for surviving? Everything in the game is literaly a means to that end. Zombies shouldn't be a grind goal but an obstacle. The only reason you see this as a "fair trade-off" is because you view zombies as the former one. Even in that case, I don't see how being in a bunker prevented you from gaining xp by other means and in general playing normally. But that's not the point - the point is that, again, a god mode safe zone on demand invalidates a large part of the game.
I honestly do get it. As I said above I am all for a sandbox mode in which you can skip any tedious actions and play in whichever way you want, exploring whenever you feel like etc.
However I don't get how other people who express their piece of mind piss you off that much. I don't know what emotional baggage you carry, but this is not the place to vent. And I don't see how you doing anything would make me happy or the opposite. This is a game forum and people discuss about game-related issues. Me saying that underground invincibility invalidates some of the game's core mechanics is not some kind of "personal attack", it's discussing about the way I believe the game should be designed - and I don't think I should be restricted from doing that in a game forum.
As I said before, the game is a mix of many genres. BM hordes don't invalidate exploration or building (although the latest block damage changes seem problematic for building). Invincibility on demand however does invalidate the survival/TD parts of the game.
Hm, isn't that exactly what you told me in your previous post?
No worries, I wouldn't stoop to that.You don't want anyone to ask you to respect "squat", but yet you keep characterizing people and asking others to respect your playstyle and stop "trying to tell you what to do" - which 1) does not happen in the first place and 2) I don't see how it could affect you over the internet even if it did happen. You also say that you can't ask others to do anything but, not only did you ask me to play pretend and create self-imposed rules in order to enjoy my game a while ago, but you also asked me to play a different game! A little self-reflection wouldn't hurt.
- - - Updated - - -
You don't seem to have a problem suggesting that I should make self-imposed rules in order to enjoy the game. If that is what you like to do, good for you - what makes you think that others enjoy doing that? I don't really care how you play - as I said above I care about not having to create self-imposed rules in a game which lacks the rules that make it what it is.
For example, let's say that one day I feel like playing a survival game. In order to play a survival game, I'll go to Steam, search games by tag and so on. I wouldn't get a, say, crpg and turn it into a survival game with various self-imposed rules - e.g. creating a self-imposed rule that suggested having to eat food in that crpg in order to survive etc. That may not be the case with you. Imagination is a wonderful thing and I consider you lucky that you can use it in order to create your own game rule framework - in the end you don't even need video games if your self-imposed rules are enough to achieve your goal.
I am not the one with the "holier than thou" attitude, neither am I in the habit of characterizing other people. And obviously not the one who is "upset" here. When someone gives feedback about something in a game or speaks his mind in a discussion, that feedback is certain to "oppose" the playstyle of at least one person. As I explained above, it's not about what other people do.
Implying - no openly saying, that me or others who are of the same opinion are essentially sociopaths bent on trying to impose their playstyle upon you, not only warrants concern ("warrants" only means that "it is grounds for" not that I am concerned or anything it is not my business anyway), it also warrants taking offence, which in this case I don't, but is still quite a rude assumption and behavior from your part.
Sociopathy, like other mental diseases or deviations, has a spectrum, not the exact profile of that criminal you may have watched on CSI last week. Someone who would try to enforce their ways upon some other anonymous person over the internet without any particular reason definitely falls into the antisocial personality disorder spectrum. It is an irregular, extreme behavior as well.
Last edited by a moderator:
RestInPieces
New member
What is weird is how you discredit your own argument by linking to a wikipedia entry, but I won't complain. Let's see:
1) The first point alone is enough for you to realize whether you can call it an exploit or not. As clearly stated by the developers in the past, it is not intended to be invincible on demand without any cost/consequence/risk.
2) It also falls in the "game mechanics" category as it exploits the game's voxels and the inability of AI (at least in A16) to attack you.
3) And it is subject to the "cheesing" category because, as in the Street Fighter game example, in which the only mechanic is to attack, in 7DTD, by staying underground, you can use most of its mechanics that enable you to progress in the game (mining, crafting, getting experience, building etc) without being subject to any threats, risk or cost whatsoever.
You said it yourself earlier, that you build underground to "avoid the tedium of repairing". Don't try to present it as if you somehow willingly "gimp" yourself by going underground. Zombies shouldn't be loot pinatas in the first place and A17 has already taken care of that, so your point is not even valid anymore. Again, surviving is apparently the "goal" and all of the game's perks/items are only a means to that end.
You seem to like making assumptions of what I would supposedly know or say, it's almost like listening to a monologue. This was also something that trivialized/invalidated the core principles of survival/TD and that is why the developers tried to rectify this and other flaws by implementing a better AI on enemies that will now actually target foundations instead of running in circles. It's also what they did with the digging zombies (which are surely still not perfect, it's an experimental after all). Has it crossed your mind that they may have done it because it is also a way to exploit and trivialize the game's core mechanics?
I wonder who is in a "weird obsessed ego trip", as you say. One who speaks his mind about game mechanics, or one who thinks the world revolves around him, everyone is out to get him and anonymous people try to violate his rights over the internet?
Yes, you have done a good job in exposing the conspiracy, here's a cake!
That is simply not the case. It was not in A16 and it is not the case in A17 if you dig deeper. Spent 3 weeks with an auger underground and, disappointingly, nothing came for me.
Last edited by a moderator:
meandog1000
New member
Personally I prefer a mix. I want weak zombies in the hundreds chasing me with a couple harder specials sprinkled in. Nothing like the rush of being chased by hundreds of zombies. Also your "there's other games for that" assumption is wrong. Please name me one title that meets these criteria: Voxel, Tons of zombies, has parkour, has specials, and gives zombies the ability to tear down stuff stopping them from getting to you.
meandog1000
New member
I thought it was a bacterial infection?
Nilbin Kaar
New member
Seriously, it's a zombie game. Punching through a wall is unrealistic but zombies are?? Guess no more underground bases now. Time to play like big boys/girls now.
Captivating
New member
I'm just curious if everyone thinks that people only use underground bunkers to hide from the hordes?
Personally, the underground bunker was my go-to base but not to hide from the hordes. I preferred to funnel them in for more xp and loot. I built a base that worked great for my play style that complimented my strengths and made up for my weaknesses, fighting the zeds on my own terms. How is that any different than someone using a "stilt" base, or a "blade trap" base? As I excavated my main defense - the pit itself - I gathered materials needed to build the base and gained valuable experience. I didn't have to worry quite so much about structural integrity. It served as more than my base of operations, but also as my mine and if I lined one floor of the pit with iron bars rather than concrete, it also served as an underground farm.
I've yet to understand why players that used underground bases catch so much grief.
I admit, allowing zombies to dig again really throws a kink in things. I think it was a necessary addition and that underground bunkers should have some kind of threat to them but I'm waiting for the zombie otherworldly detection levels to adjust and also for more testing on their improved pathing and AI before I completely rule out the chances of a fall pit. a17 yanked me right out of my comfort zone and that's ok even though it was definitely a shock. I was getting complacent in my security.
It's still disappointing that rather than supporting each other with helpful and friendly advice on how to overcome or adjust to the new hurdles, I see more of players just bashing each other over their differences. I've seen comments such as "console in the items you want" or "turn off the zombies" or "mod the game". I guess there are always those options but it shouldn't be so black or white.
Just saying.
Personally, the underground bunker was my go-to base but not to hide from the hordes. I preferred to funnel them in for more xp and loot. I built a base that worked great for my play style that complimented my strengths and made up for my weaknesses, fighting the zeds on my own terms. How is that any different than someone using a "stilt" base, or a "blade trap" base? As I excavated my main defense - the pit itself - I gathered materials needed to build the base and gained valuable experience. I didn't have to worry quite so much about structural integrity. It served as more than my base of operations, but also as my mine and if I lined one floor of the pit with iron bars rather than concrete, it also served as an underground farm.
I've yet to understand why players that used underground bases catch so much grief.
I admit, allowing zombies to dig again really throws a kink in things. I think it was a necessary addition and that underground bunkers should have some kind of threat to them but I'm waiting for the zombie otherworldly detection levels to adjust and also for more testing on their improved pathing and AI before I completely rule out the chances of a fall pit. a17 yanked me right out of my comfort zone and that's ok even though it was definitely a shock. I was getting complacent in my security.
It's still disappointing that rather than supporting each other with helpful and friendly advice on how to overcome or adjust to the new hurdles, I see more of players just bashing each other over their differences. I've seen comments such as "console in the items you want" or "turn off the zombies" or "mod the game". I guess there are always those options but it shouldn't be so black or white.
Just saying.