PC Death Penalty Poll

[Roland]

You probably wouldn't be getting so much flack about numbers if you didn't post in this thread about how the only ones that really count as disliking the death penalty are the ones willing to uninstall the game because of it. Really shows your true colors on the opinion poll.
~46% of voters think it should be 15 minutes or less or none at all.

Misquoting me to push your continuing agenda shows yours. I never said that the ones who really count as disliking the death penalty are the ones willing to uninstall the game because of it.

I said that the most important group to TFP are going to be those who will avoid A17 altogether either by uninstalling it or reverting back to a previous version. Those are the most extremely unhappy customers and thankfully that pool in this particular sample is very small. From the poll it appears that the 30 minute compromise is acceptable to most people. Those who voted for 15 minutes or less said the penalty is fine but they would prefer it to be shorter. I would guess that if TFP makes the 30 minute timer official in stable, that most of the people who feel the penalty is fine but would like it to be shorter will be able to live with 30 minutes especially as they adapt and die less often. Some of those who decide they can't will probably mod it lower rather than uninstall or revert to a different version. With modlets, being able to change the timer will be almost as easy as changing an option in a menu. It's kind of like the onscreen hunger and thirst bars. TFP doesn't want them but tons of people don't like that but they play anyway and many mod it back in.

Again I'm not saying that the only people unhappy with the penalty are those who would uninstall. That's you putting words in my mouth probably mistakenly.

 

[Exxodous]

No. It's a problem that you are unwilling to spend 10 minutes understanding.
People kill people in the game. They compete over resources. They steal each other's stuff. When you kill one player, it stands to reason that the one who died wants to get their stuff back and continue the fight. With the death penalty in place, you are gimped and the aggressor is buffed. It's a terrible mechanic to have embedded and it will be terribly unfair.

I don't care if you want to keep it in for PVE deaths. I don't like it, but I understand that others want to have more teeth to dying. I would prefer it be amended to negate player inflicted kills and included as a global server parameter like LCB multiplier, or claim size so that everyone can just write a number of minutes they want it to apply for. But MOST importantly. It can not apply to player kills with the current penalties it inflicts.

There are still solutions to your problem. Get better at PVP and win the first time. Or patiently plan your revenge and extract it later. I for one pretty much suck at PVP so MY solution is to not play that way.

Have you tried playing COD instead? No consequences whatsoever for dying. You get to spawn right back in, with all your gear and continue the fight unimpeded. It's a fun game and sounds like what you're looking for.

 

[Roland]

Pretty thin.

wat?

It's the simple truth. Just have to read Richard's words in the experimental thread. He says that they are happy to get feedback but what they REALLY want are bug reports.

 

[Reth]

Well, not "EVERYONE". I continue playing the game
The way I see it, if I die in the game then I made a mistake, or didn't calculate the danger correctly. I'll take my lumps and learn from it hoping to improve next time. Just like in life, actions have consequences and instead of standing around complaining, blaming others and crying "it's not fair", I put on my big boy pants and continue on.

As I tell my son, "Can't" never got the job done. Think about the problem, adjust your approach and overcome the obstacle. Can't is for quitters.

This uproar over the death penalty is not a game problem, it's a societal problem.

Grandstanding much?

Contrary to what Gazz thinks, there was already a significant death penalty in this game. For a lot of us, myself included, it was a good enough reason not to die at all. Even stronger reason was that if you didn't die, you'd get stronger hordes == better loot.

I understand that in shorter nomadic games wellness may not have mattered much, but it sure as hell mattered in the latter stages of long games during horde nights when you got sprayed by multiple cops while trying to bash some dogs.

 

[Poojam]

wat?
It's the simple truth. Just have to read Richard's words in the experimental thread. He says that they are happy to get feedback but what they REALLY want are bug reports.

Yea. It's clear after seeing all the deflecting and arguing that he wasn't being genuine. Just tell us you like it and we'll fix the bugs. wink wink.

 

[ktr]

20 min days, ouch. I may be in the minority here, but I don't consider the penalty as a drag, rather as something of a natural consequence and I still can fully enjoy playing while having it. Not to mention that those buff scrolls are pretty imbalanced and almost trivialize it.

Same argument was used for the progression rate - surely you don't believe that in that case, the rate should be balanced around the people who have the smallest amount of free time to play?

What I am trying to say is that gratification should come from general gameplay itself in such games (that is the case for me already), else all casuls like us, would be doomed to playing candy crash saga, just to watch those sweets(?) disappear into points during our brief playsession.

I think this death penalty is better than the wellness hits. Wellness was, IMO, too easily boosted to be much of a consequence. This death penalty makes me be much more cautious which I expect in a survival game. My only issue with it is that it does effect crafting as well. I'd rather see it make crafting take longer than affect what I can craft. And I can see where having play time limited to less than an hour would make that even more frustrating.

If the death penalty keeps a player from the general gameplay they find most gratifying, (such as being unable to craft the things you need to use in the build you really want to do) then it's hard to find satisfaction.

I'm pretty happy with the 30 minutes. That gives me a stern reminder to not get too cocky (like a recent time with a bear....), but doesn't hamper my gameplay for a period that enters into the 'eugh is the over yet' time.

 

[RestInPieces]

Grandstanding much?
Contrary to what Gazz thinks, there was already a significant death penalty in this game. For a lot of us, myself included, it was a good enough reason not to die at all. Even stronger reason was that if you didn't die, you'd get stronger hordes == better loot.

I understand that in shorter nomadic games wellness may not have mattered much, but it sure as hell mattered in the latter stages of long games during horde nights when you got sprayed by multiple cops while trying to bash some dogs.

It's not something subjective, it is as objective as math. Besides the inventory loss which was very circumstantial, there wasn't really a penalty.

-The purpose of wellness was making you harder to die (stamina was never a problem), but death itself was actually beneficial resetting your status from negative debuffs.

-If you wanted to stay alive (with which wellness did help) and cared about wellness to get stronger hordes for better loot, you have to ask yourself what is the point of better loot? Is it not to make your survival easier AKA avoid death?

-Losing wellness made it a little harder to avoid death, a beneficial thing.

I hope you can see that the system did not compute.

 

[Limdood]

I voted that no penalty is best but I'll still play...BUT that's not really totally true...I won't play...I'll console command remove that POS debuff every time it appears.

I already have to run back to EXACTLY WHAT KILLED ME, and now do it without gear, which would already strain credibility if the zombies didn't tend to wander off and let me grab it most of the time, To make me do that (which with the travel time issues takes several in game hours already) with a debuff AND no gear...F that.

Also, liking the vulnerability after death that the debuff gives? being naked and gearless is pretty darned vulnerable.

 

[OldManBrian]

Those filthy casuls! (I am one of them nowadays )


20 min days, ouch. I may be in the minority here, but I don't consider the penalty as a drag, rather as something of a natural consequence and I still can fully enjoy playing while having it. Not to mention that those buff scrolls are pretty imbalanced and almost trivialize it.

Same argument was used for the progression rate - surely you don't believe that in that case, the rate should be balanced around the people who have the smallest amount of free time to play?

What I am trying to say is that gratification should come from general gameplay itself in such games (that is the case for me already), else all casuls like us, would be doomed to playing candy crash saga, just to watch those sweets(?) disappear into points during our brief playsession.

I just think the death penalty should be tied to a setting due to different playstyles, just like all the other settings are for when you start a game. But honestly I don't really care *too* much since it is so easy for me to mod it, and 30 min is already much better than 60, but I'll personally be changing it to 20 for myself as that's a full game day for me.

 

[LuckyStar]

Well, not "EVERYONE". I continue playing the game
The way I see it, if I die in the game then I made a mistake, or didn't calculate the danger correctly. I'll take my lumps and learn from it hoping to improve next time. Just like in life, actions have consequences and instead of standing around complaining, blaming others and crying "it's not fair", I put on my big boy pants and continue on.

As I tell my son, "Can't" never got the job done. Think about the problem, adjust your approach and overcome the obstacle. Can't is for quitters.

This uproar over the death penalty is not a game problem, it's a societal problem.

I agree.

One of the problems with technology is that people forget how to use Critical thinking.

Ask some Millennials and they won't even be able to tell you what that means.

It's one thing to struggle solving a problem, it's a much bigger thing to not even know how to go about asking the right questions.

Now we see people upset because they can't just google their way out of a tough situation.

Sorry if that upsets people but... too bad.

I think the Death penalty SUCKS but that's what makes me like it.

Now I'm scared of dying so I'm playing a more tactical game.

Guess that doesn't work with day fly attention span run-and-gunners.

Grandstanding much?
Contrary to what Gazz thinks, there was already a significant death penalty in this game. For a lot of us, myself included, it was a good enough reason not to die at all. Even stronger reason was that if you didn't die, you'd get stronger hordes == better loot.

I understand that in shorter nomadic games wellness may not have mattered much, but it sure as hell mattered in the latter stages of long games during horde nights when you got sprayed by multiple cops while trying to bash some dogs.

What a load of bullcrap!

People died on purpose to get rid of sickness or fast travel because there was no penalty.

 

[RestInPieces]

I think this death penalty is better than the wellness hits. Wellness was, IMO, too easily boosted to be much of a consequence. This death penalty makes me be much more cautious which I expect in a survival game. My only issue with it is that it does effect crafting as well. I'd rather see it make crafting take longer than affect what I can craft. And I can see where having play time limited to less than an hour would make that even more frustrating.
If the death penalty keeps a player from the general gameplay they find most gratifying, (such as being unable to craft the things you need to use in the build you really want to do) then it's hard to find satisfaction.

I'm pretty happy with the 30 minutes. That gives me a stern reminder to not get too cocky (like a recent time with a bear....), but doesn't hamper my gameplay for a period that enters into the 'eugh is the over yet' time.

Yep, that's a valid reason of why one may not like the death penalty - crafting. However the penalty must be something that deeply affects the player. Haven't thought of a better way to achieve that than this one. But then again there are also equipment and buff scrolls which help you raise your attributes.

I voted that no penalty is best but I'll still play...BUT that's not really totally true...I won't play...I'll console command remove that POS debuff every time it appears.
I already have to run back to EXACTLY WHAT KILLED ME, and now do it without gear, which would already strain credibility if the zombies didn't tend to wander off and let me grab it most of the time, To make me do that (which with the travel time issues takes several in game hours already) with a debuff AND no gear...F that.

Also, liking the vulnerability after death that the debuff gives? being naked and gearless is pretty darned vulnerable.

I am usually playing with "delete inventory" - I just see to that I always have spare equipment. And that is the only case death stings a little with this setting - when you suddenly die exploring while having stuff you want to store in your base. In any other case, like dying when defending, it's not much of a penalty.

 

[Exxodous]

Grandstanding much?

Nope, just my way of looking at things in game and life in a positive manner. Looking for solutions I can control seems much more productive than complaining and hoping someone else will solve my problems.

Stronger hordes didn't bring "better loot" IMO, just more of the same loot. I like the new way better.

There are some things in A17 I would have done differently if I was designing it. I'll either mod it or find a modlet that fixes it more to my liking. Or I could spend days on end complaining (to no avail most likely) wasting my time as well as others.

There are plenty of people who have given constructive feedback about things they don't like, which is great. But they do not go on and on and on complaining. Some people (Jax and Guppy come to mind) find interesting solutions to solve, what in their mind is a game shortcoming, and on top of that share it with all of us in case we feel the same way. Those are the type of people whom I respect even when I don't agree with their particular opinion on game issues because they are doing something positive to effect change.

edit: Not to exclude the many great modders on the forums, there are alot of people doing great things for the game btw. I chose Jax and Guppy because they often share their critical thoughts without beating a dead horse (level loot notwithstanding, lol) and then do something about it.

 

[RestInPieces]

I just think the death penalty should be tied to a setting due to different playstyles, just like all the other settings are for when you start a game. But honestly I don't really care *too* much since it is so easy for me to mod it, and 30 min is already much better than 60, but I'll personally be changing it to 20 for myself as that's a full game day for me.

I wouldn't like that because, personally, while I enjoy the full penalty, I don't enjoy bullet sponge zombies on the highest difficulty :/ But I could just edit the XML too.

 

[LuckyStar]

I'm actually hoping to see an option to play "dead is dead."

You die, your save it deleted.

Now that is a harsh penalty.

It's fun though.

Scary as heck to try anything outside especially setting zombies to always run.

[Though that was A16. I think A17 you'd pretty much die in the first three days every time.]

 

[Ricowan]

I voted for 15 minutes instead of 30, however if the penalty was applied to only one of the attributes (at random) instead of all of them, I would keep it at 30. If we can't control how the penalty is applied... it's incredibly easy to change the XML, so the default time isn't a big deal overall.

 

[Krougal]

People are picking on the moderators for having opinions. Dunno why.

You been here longer than I have, you already know EVERYTHING is Roland's fault, always!

Seriously though, because people consider mods to be devs and thus everything they say must be 100% accurate and reflect the devs views 100% at all times and they should be perfect people who never make mistakes or are allowed to change their mind or have bad days like the rest of us...

 

[RestInPieces]

I'm actually hoping to see an option to play "dead is dead."
You die, your save it deleted.

Now that is a harsh penalty.

It's fun though.

Scary as heck to try anything outside especially setting zombies to always run.

[Though that was A16. I think A17 you'd pretty much die in the first three days every time.]

I would enjoy that a lot on my SP playthroughs.

 

[Cadamier]

Hello! I voted for the 15 minute timer cause one out of 9 wants it longer and the rest of us (8) would like it much shorter for many reasons. A few of us had multiple deaths and that penalty seems to way harsh as it is but way too long. Maybe from 15 min for the initial death and effecting one stat and then after another the length stacks and another attribute is penalized? Might be a bit better...

 

[Poojam]

Well, that's just life. I mean TFP is already softening the game down and making it less brutal than it was. That means that all the people who liked it more brutal are going Ugh because all the people who wanted it easier are getting their way. There will always be one segment ughing due to another segment being happy with changes.
Well you have to be careful here because a penalty isn't a penalty if people like it. I WANT the penalty in the game because it makes death more meaningful and I recognize the importance of that. But I'm not whooping in delight when I die and get to spend the next 30 minutes playing as a more vulnerable character.

The telling stat is not who likes or dislikes the penalty it is who would not play A17 at all because of it either by reverting to a previous version or uninstalling the game altogether. Everyone else can stomach it and continue to play and by hating it they will try all the more to be careful when death is on the line. So far only 2.3% say they dislike it so much they'll stop playing. Modders don't count because they're willing to change the game however they wish and they will continue to play A17 modded.

Even if this forum doesn't accurately reflect the community, 2.3% isn't going to change that much. If you know more people who will quit over this feature then get them on to vote.

Misquoting me to push your continuing agenda shows yours. I never said that the ones who really count as disliking the death penalty are the ones willing to uninstall the game because of it.
I said that the most important group to TFP are going to be those who will avoid A17 altogether either by uninstalling it or reverting back to a previous version. Those are the most extremely unhappy customers and thankfully that pool in this particular sample is very small. From the poll it appears that the 30 minute compromise is acceptable to most people. Those who voted for 15 minutes or less said the penalty is fine but they would prefer it to be shorter. I would guess that if TFP makes the 30 minute timer official in stable, that most of the people who feel the penalty is fine but would like it to be shorter will be able to live with 30 minutes especially as they adapt and die less often. Some of those who decide they can't will probably mod it lower rather than uninstall or revert to a different version. With modlets, being able to change the timer will be almost as easy as changing an option in a menu. It's kind of like the onscreen hunger and thirst bars. TFP doesn't want them but tons of people don't like that but they play anyway and many mod it back in.

Again I'm not saying that the only people unhappy with the penalty are those who would uninstall. That's you putting words in my mouth probably mistakenly.

I've re-read your earlier statement. Pasted it above in green.

I stand by my accusation. What you were interested in was determining who hates it enough to quit. Not simply what the playerbase thinks the value should be.

When you say that the 30 minute compromise is acceptable to MOST people, you are putting your own spin on this poll. The next poll option down states no longer than 15 minutes. Not 15 minutes is best. So that response category should be counted as is inclusive of the categories below 15 minutes, which are setup in such a way to gage the level of dissatisfaction. You kinda beefed the way you setup these options to support your statement.

It is accurate to say 46% of players think it should be 15 minutes or less. (~ half of all voters)

It is accurate to say 67% of players think it should be something other 30 minutes. (~2/3rds of all voters)

It is fair to say only 12% of players think it should be more than 30 minutes, which is the what was originally released. (one in 8 players)

It is fair to say 9% of players want a different set of rules. (~ one in 10 players)

It is not accurate to say that 30 minutes is acceptable to most players. Only 1 in 3 players advocates for 30 minute death timer.

I thought you were a math whiz?

 

[LuckyStar]

I've re-read your earlier statement. Pasted it above in green.
I stand by my accusation.

When you say that the 30 minute compromise is acceptable to MOST people, you are putting your own spin on this poll. The next poll option down states no longer than 15 minutes. Not 15 minutes is best. So that response category should be counted as is inclusive of the categories below 15 minutes, which are setup in such a way to gage the level of dissatisfaction. You kinda beefed the way you setup these options to support your statement.

It is accurate to say 46% of players think it should be 15 minutes or less. (~ half of all voters)

It is accurate to say 67% of players think it should be something other 30 minutes. (~2/3rds of all voters)

It is fair to say only 12% of players think it should be more than 30 minutes, which is the what was originally released. (one in 8 players)

It is fair to say 9% of players want a different set of rules. (~ one in 10 players)

It is not accurate to say that 30 minutes is acceptable to most players. Only 1 in 3 players advocates for 30 minute death timer.

I thought you were a math whiz?

Those statistics don't necessarily represent the truth.

Right now we're seeing a knee-jerk reaction to something new.

I think a far bigger mistake would be for TFP to over compensate and end up with another A16 where it was just too easy.

I'm not going to dispute what you posted. Those numbers are indeed.... numbers and percentages of things and stuff.

I'll give you that.

How about some incremental changes.... see what people think... then we go from there?

Does that sound reasonable to you?