[Alpha 21 Dev Diary]

2 hours ago, vergilsparda said:

 

Emphasis mine, is there a more in-depth explanation of this? Would it be like, finding farm-item (seeds, food, etc) magazines in shamways and guns/weapons/traps in shotgun messiahs and savage country's or is it something different?

Exactly. But it should also be remembered that often the “treasure room” of a random POI can sometimes have a shotgun messiah crate or a sham way crate so you will still be able to randomly get those themes of magazines by exploring some of the generic houses  

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

11 hours ago, RipClaw said:

Can't I have both?

 

yep

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

53 minutes ago, RipClaw said:

I use melee weapons even in the late game. Not to save ammo but because they are much more fun than guns.

A gun is just point and click. When I use a melee weapon I have to move around, make sure I don't get hit too much by the zombies, don't get pushed into a corner, and so on.

 

 

This from the guy who prefers horde bases where the traps destroy the whole horde so he doesn't have to get involved himself...?

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

7 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

But making it harder for people who don´t cheese, in order to prevent cheesing is the wrong way imo.

 

And this is all I was essentially saying as well but in regards to quests and building. TFP can make it harder for everyone in order to prevent those who rush questing and building or they can leave it alone and allow everyone to play as they will. Those who want more of a struggle can limit themselves much as people currently limit themselves on the type of base they design and choose not to build something they would deem "cheesy".

 

That being said, I am perfectly fine with TFP adding rules that limit any of this stuff that people do to stretch and warp the game into unnatural ways just to "win" a bit faster than anyone else they've read about online. I'm also fine with them adding top menu options that can give a spectrum of how stringent or lax those limitations might be.

 

I just think it is funny that some who lectured me that "Just don't do it" isn't a valid argument on one issue are using that exact sentiment about other issues...lol.

 

It's all the same thing. 7 Days to Die is a hybrid between game and sandbox and everyone has their pet features that are supported by one type or the other. If TFP changes things towards the game end of the spectrum by restricting and making rules then favorite sanboxish features will fade away and people will be angry. If TFP keeps or even moves things more towards the sandbox end of the spectrum which allows for people to choose their own objectives and restrictions, there will be people who want survival game rules enforced who will be disappointed that TFP has abandoned the survival genre.

[Alpha 21 Discussion Overflow]

7 hours ago, Laran Mithras said:

Zombies hiding under bunk beds. I'm tellin ya...

 

ah...my childhood! Often led to getting to the top bunk in the-floor-is-lava style!

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

4 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

 

As the game is designed it is made for more than just one playtrough. And i am sure TFP did aim for that aswell.

 

So what are we supposed to do? Play bad on purpose? Even if you don´t min/max and rush there is not really a struggle. Even for people who are new but played other survival games there is a lack of struggle after the first playtrough.

 

There is a reason that pretty much every overhaul mod makes the game harder.

 

You always get out that argument that people rush. In a sandbox game where you have the option to do different playtroughs. Do you really expect people to play like it´s their first time every time they restart?

 

This game doesn´t live from people who play it for the first time. It would be dead regarding the playernumbers if that was the case. And people don´t buy a game that no one plays.

 

I expect people to play in a way that is fun for them and brings them enjoyment. The game design allows people to rush and many do and are perfectly happy doing it and I have no problem with that. I'm glad they can rush and I'm glad they enjoy the game playing in a way that entertains them.

 

Other people rush but then hate that gameplay loop but they still do it. They want the game changed to suit them which is fine for them to ask but until the game is changed for them (or if it never is changed for them) their options are to 1) Put the game away 2) keep playing in a way that is unfun 3) mod the game to their liking 4) Change how they play.

 

I really don't care whether someone rushes or not as long as they are happy. If they are unhappy and complaining then, yes, I'm going to bring out the argument that rushing is ruining their experience and that they should stop doing it until the game design changes to prevent rushing or they should find a mod that helps them.

 

So do I expect people to play like its their first time every time? Of course not. That is definitely not what I have been saying. Even though I impose limits on myself I definitely don't play like its my first time. 

 

Fact: If you limit yourself to one quest a day and use only wood for the first two horde nights and then cobblestone for the next two and then finally move to concrete, you are going to experience more of a survival struggle gameplay loop than you will by spamming multiple quests a day and rushing to concrete by Day 7. 

 

Do what you want and keep spamming quests and rushing concrete bases and whatever else people do to become 10x more powerful than the game's difficulty progression as quickly as possible and if the result is fun then fantastic. If it isn't and you feel like the survival struggle is gone and you wish it was there then either mod the game or limit yourself until/if the devs change the rules to prevent people from outpacing the game.

 

 

 

 

[Alpha 21 Discussion Overflow]

7 hours ago, schwanz9000 said:

The Drone is being worked on and improved all the time. There are a lot of edge cases that have to be worked out, but he'll see what he can do.

 

Thanks Shape Guy!

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

9 hours ago, Sal said:

The fact that you seriously don't see the issue AND contradiction within your statement here is mind-boggling.

 

First,  you say the game the game "offers a struggle to everyone", but then go on to say that your an experienced player and that YOU yourself limit yourself to certain guidelines.  More than once in this thread.

 

What's funny here is that you bolded my entire statement but then parsed only the first half and then claimed I made a contradiction. So here is my full statement:

"7 Days to Die does offer a struggle to everyone who hasn't optimized it out of their game by rushing"

 

The qualifier in my statement is that the struggle is present for those that don't erase it by choice. I never stated that the game offers a struggle to everyone period. That was simply you creating a strategic cutoff in the middle of my sentence. I'm pretty sure what you did is obvious to anyone following the conversation...

 

My further statements about limiting myself by choice are perfectly in line with this full statement.

 

9 hours ago, Sal said:

That alone is a problem.

 

Sure, the game itself offers a lot of different paths but it only promotes the player to take a few of them.

 

I agree it is a problem for survival game play and as I've said a set of rules to enforce survival gameplay would not bother me. Until those rules are in place officially I will continue to self-limit so that I can have a survival game experience. It works. I'm having fun and playing. I guess just doing the same things that bring misery over and over and coming here to complain about it is another choice but not one I subscribe to. I like to do what works.

 

9 hours ago, Sal said:

@meganoth You should tell this to Roland.  Because he runs arounds here like the gatekeeper himself whenever anyone says ANYTHING remotely negative about the game.

 

I just offer a different perspective. I'm not gatekeeping your gameplay. By all means keep playing the game in a manner that destroys your fun factor. It's your choice. I've already said I'm all for a change personally. But I also think it needs to be known for full disclosure that changes to the game that add specific rules, by their nature, reduce the sandboxiness of the game. The proof in that pudding is the recent announcement about crafting magazines. How you learn to craft will be defined by a new set of rules in A21 which will change how players can play the game and force looting to a higher degree than now. Those who feel that the rule crimps their sandbox freedom are worried and upset about the change. 

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

2 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

But games, ESPECIALLY creative and survival games NEED boundries! They are essential.

100% agree and I have no problem adding rules and boundaries to make this more of a game than a sandbox. 
 

But trust me that there will be many others screaming bloody murder the moment an aspect of their sandbox is switched to game mode. 
 

3 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I think my aspect of 7d2d is horror survival, while yours seems to be roleplay sandbox.

 

It’s more like I’m willing to use the sandbox nature of the game to self limit myself so that I can role play horror survival. That way I don’t step on anyone else’s toes by demanding a whole swath of the sandbox get formalized into a game with hard and fast rules. 
 

At the least, limiting myself is a solution for ongoing enjoyment until the devs add rules that limit the game for me. Either way it’s a win. Instead of hating the game because it’s boring since I had my concrete base since day five so there is no threat and no survival, I role play limits and don’t rush to concrete and it’s fun and I’m struggling to survive. 
 

3 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

This is where our differences lie. I want a challanging game that gives me challenges to overcome, you want to play the game your way and have fun that way.

 

The way I see it is you rush the progression because you are allowed to and as an experienced player you know how to and so you feel no challenge. From Day one you are far beyond the threats the game can deliver. I refuse to rush and just do some of everything as my mood or necessity dictates and so I am often behind or right with the threat level of the game and so I actually do experience a struggle to survive. We both want that struggle to survive. You just choose to move beyond it asap. 
 

3 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

And it does not matter if I am experienced or not. A good survival/horror game finds ways to challenge even the experienced of players (except speedrunners that use exploits and plan their routes beforehand :D)

 

I have to disagree. It is because you are an experienced player that you intuitively know your routes ahead of time. You aren’t the type to use exploits per se but still your experience and knwledge give you an edge over a new player. Most new players flounder about and have a tough time preparing for the very first blood moon while you probably already have at least some of your base built with concrete. Experience in the game is huge for being able to rocket beyond the threats that equal survival gameplay. 

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

So lets remove quests?
NO. That was never the argument.
A great system, like quests or LBD needs to be tweaked until the kinks are gone.

 

That's not my argument either. Besides, I already know that quests are being expanded again in A21.

 

Let's be clear about what you mean when you say quests need to be tweaked. You are saying that they need to be limited somehow. That's fine by me. I would rather 7 Days to Die be more of a game than a sandbox anyway. But, just so you understand, by limiting quests in order to bring them to heel so that they no longer overwhelm the gameplay loop like they currently do, the devs would literally be forcing a particular gameplay style. You are asking the devs to LITERALLY force us to play a particular way even as you are complaining that they FIGURATIVELY force us to play a particular way now simply because the option to do unlimited quests exists.

 

I just want the people to know I'm happy self-limiting how I play quests and how I use the trader but if the devs decide to impose limits and force us to a more limited questing game that isn't going to bother me either....but it might bother some of you. Just saying...

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I'm not saying you can't have fun without a challenge.
But its not a survival game, if you don't have to struggle to survive.

 

 

7 Days to Die does offer a struggle to everyone who hasn't optimized it out of their game by rushing. "Survival" gameplay is created by the threats to your life. I am saying that as an experienced player, by limiting myself and not playing the game with a focus on always taking the optimal path and always using my time to rush the progression in grindy unnatural ways, I do not outpace the threats and therefore I do experience survival gameplay. 

 

As an experienced player, you know all the ins and outs of the game and can optimize your play in such a way that any and all threats the game has can be outpaced and left in the dust which means you are not experiencing survival gameplay at all.

 

Brand new players don't know these strategies and so they do the best they can and are almost always in survival mode.

 

I am happy to have the game remain as it is so that people can choose to experience survival gameplay by not outpacing the threats or to rush and play the game as a god of the apocalypse and never feel danger from any threats because of what they chose to do.

 

You want the game changed in a way to prevent you from rushing because you recognize that you don't like the state of the game once you've rushed but you also can't help yourself and will rush every time even knowing that you are erasing the survival gameplay as you do. The problem is that will destroy the gameplay of those who rush and like the result of rushing.

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

Okay, now for the rest....

 

10 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

Same as before. And while easy normal mode might work like this... why would you even want the skills if they don't give you an advantage?
This is a death or die situation.
Either they are useless so you can use whatever, or they give you an advantage which means using other weapons is less effective, which, as said above, locks them from being "the most efficient route" and is at best a backup weapon.

 

I maintain that every weapon in the game is good enough to kill zombies. Some work better than others and some work differently than others. If you perk into a weapon then it is going to be the best at killing zombies but that doesn't mean you couldn't do it with an unperked weapon. 

 

Having different weapons with different strengths and weaknesses makes the game play differently each time you play. Making all the guns equal would make the gameplay feel samey no matter what weapon you picked up. It wouldn't matter if it was a spear or a club or a shotgun or an AK47 if they all killed equally well.

 

For that reason I am glad the weapons are different and some lead to more challenging playthroughs. For someone who will only play with the best, that means the rest are just backup weapons. For someone who is willing to play with a different kit each time, that means having fun and working through different challenges several times over. The only difference is in the perspective of the player.

 

There is no way to develop for players who are chronically obsessed with the one most efficient route. No matter what changes or balancing is done there will always be one way that is perceived as the new best path and those players will quickly get bored of the one and only way they choose to play (they call it forced lol) and then are back to chiding the developers for a re-balance. In addition, if developers listen to those players and attempt to do it then all the paths become equal and it doesn't matter which one you take and so for everyone else the game feels samey and loses its replay value.

 

Best option for developers is to ignore hardcore min/maxers completely. Make the game that they envision people playing if they aren't trying to speed run and either:

A) Put restrictions and rules in place that block min/maxers from rushing the game or

B) Allow gamers to do as they wish and people will choose to either play naturally or rush.

 

I'm all for a limit on daily quests and a daily cap on xp earned from the same activity. Make it so you can only do 1 quest a day per trader and xp from doing a particular activity diminishes throughout the day until it finally reaches zero and doesn't regen until the next day. That would slow people the hell down for sure....but also take freedom away. I'm happy to continue to self limit how many quests I do since it also allows someone else to spam quests all they want. In my game quests are not broken. They are perfect because I don't abuse them.

 

So here are our types of gamers

 

1) Controls self from abusing quests and is pleased with how the game plays.

2) Spams quests and is pleased with how the game plays.

3) Spams quests and is not pleased because it dominates their game but they can't limit themselves.

 

It is only the third group who isn't happy and if they get what they want it won't really affect the first group since they self limit already but the second group will get screwed by actually being forced by the game to not be able to play as they wish. Should the group who has impulse control problems and weak self-discipline and claims to be "forced" when there is no actual mechanism in place forcing be the ones to dictate that the second group is actually going to start getting forced by actual rules and mechanics that prevent them from playing the way they like?

 

As a member of the first group it wouldn't bother me but you guys in the third group could also read a few self-help books and save the rest of us a lot of trouble....

 

11 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

The demolisher is STPIDLY OP because he does not have a weakness. Said this since his introduction. Still not fixed:
large healthpool, insane damage, a lot of armor, traps activate his bomb and shooting the ticker STILL does massive blockdamage.

 

I don't think you've played in awhile...

 

11 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

Against the SURVIVAL GAME.
Sure on easy it is easy to survive. But whatever difficulty you chose, it should be challenging to you, or it is no longer a survival game.

 

I agree that the survival game should be challenging and in limiting myself I make it more challenging. Obsessively choosing the optimal path makes the game less challenging. If you race to concrete blocks before the first bloodmoon then you have basically destroyed the challenge of surviving the horde because it won't ever be strong enough to overcome what you have done by rushing. 

 

I want the challenge of survival so I don't rush. I play each day trying to mirror what I think I would do in the actual situation (to a degree, of course). I don't try and farm xp using whatever best activity has been determined to be the current flavor for grinding all so I can  be level 20 by day 3 and have my concrete base by day 7. I know that concrete isn't even close to necessary until at least the 3rd or 4th hordenight so work with wood and cobblestone for the first few weeks and that has proven to be sufficient for survival. It also makes for some extremely fun hordenights which would have been a lot more ho hum if I had concrete from the very beginning.

 

I like clearing towns because that feels more thematic and realistic to what I would do rather than just going to the same few quest locations over and over and over. So I take one job a day and spend time exploring and clearing out other POIs without a quest. Does this cause me to fail at survival? No way. I'm definitely keeping up with the progression the game follows to kill me.

 

So you reach level 100 on day 40 and I reach level 100 on day 90 and we both survive and get to the point where we feel we won. Who cares that you did it 50 days faster than I did? There is no prize for than other than in your own mind.

 

I play on Warrior difficulty and feel that my more casual and more natural progress through the development path is more than equal to the task of the challenge of survival. If I upped the difficulty another level I might need to be a bit more efficient but I can't believe it would be by much more and certainly not to the levels people here describe when they come to complain about where their own choices landed them. 

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

56 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:

There is no other way to get levels, money AND loot this quickly. There simply isn't.

 

Prove to me that it must be done quickly. I don't do it quickly and survive just fine. That's on warrior difficulty which is where I prefer the game and is default +2.  I'm betting that even at highest difficulty you don't have to spam quest to stay ahead of the difficulty curve. You just choose to do so. Its like the very first horde night on day 7 could easily be survived with a wood base because it is such a cakewalk. But how many people push to have concrete in place before their first hordenight? That is far far far more efficiency than is needed to survive and nothing forces you to go that far even if it is allowed as a possibility.

 

1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

Give me a group of 3 that don't use the quests, against me with quests, on any day I outscale them so hard that they'd wish to have never started this 3v1.

 

I already said that if you are playing competitively then of course you must keep up and try to surpass those you are against. But in most cases people aren't talking about PvP. Is that what you have been talking about all along? PvP gameplay? I've been talking from the perspective of single player and cooperative where it doesn't matter whether you are the highest level character or not.

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I love quests. It is not the quests themselve that we hate, but how it changed the rest of the gameplay loop.

Im glad you finally see how an LBD model harms gameplay. I purposely limit myself on quests for the sake of preserving my own fun much in the way I used to limit myself on spamming crafting or specific skill activities. 
 

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

A survival game forces you to find the most lucrative/savest options. Otherwise it is a creative builder.

No. I’m living proof that this statement isn’t a universal truth. I’m not the only one. I know that there are many who play differently and focus on other goals than rushing the progression in ways that are unnatural just because it’s possible to do so. Only in a PvP competitive environment is anyone forced to find the most lucrative and efficient progression paths. 

 

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

"Just don't use it" is not an argument.

Sure it is. Not only that but it is a viable practical philosophy I utilize whenever I play. The first time I utilized it was when I decided to play Ironman and deleted my own game and started over after I died. It’s called “free will” and I don’t just argue for it, I live by it as well. 
 

You can tell me all day long that the game forces us to spam quest after quest after quest but since I don’t do that AND I successfully survive I just don’t believe you. 
 

I’ll have to address the rest of your post later….

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

25 minutes ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

Horde night can't compete with a full-concrete horde base and tier 5-6 weapons on day 28. Tier 5 POIs become cake-walks that you can blitz your way through without ever receiving significant risk to your life. Zombies melt in front of your m60 with max skills, and even the toughest challenges the game has to offer are essentially meaningless. I think the only times I've died in the last 4-5 years are before lvl 30, when you're still in survival mode. After that, you become an untouchable god, and the only possible way that you'll die is by acting reckless.

 

I don't think you represent the typical player. I am no where near where you seem to be in the progression by day 28. That's still just the 4th blood moon event. I would have to agree that this void you are experience probably is due to your skills and the speed at which you can progress. As you say, you would have to consciously limit yourself in what you do to not skyrocket past the game's difficulty progression.

 

The pimps could enact limits but if they do people will be incensed for being artificially slowed down. They could increase difficulty in a number of ways but that is usually just a temporary fix as within days to weeks a new min/max meta will emerge and players will be racing up the progression tree in no time. Options would be best admittedly. An option to limit how many quests a day you can do per trader. An option to increase the cost of perks would allow people to choose to be slowed. An option to increase the gamestage rate of growth but slow the lootstage rate of growth. 

 

Of course, as players we can always make choices that emphasize story and living through each day rather than choices that emphasize character growth. Only do one quest a day and take your time about doing it. Stick to wood blocks during the first couple of weeks and then cobblestone blocks the next couple of weeks and then concrete blocks after that.

 

Hopefully there will be cool options to set the rules of the world to settings that keep you from getting to endgame by Day 28 instead of you having to self limit.

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

32 minutes ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

I was just trying to point out that if we (the players) are trying to tell them something, they should probably listen to it.

 

They do listen but they don't always heed--especially at this stage of development where they are wrapping things up. At the end of the day this is their game and their vision. With thousands of players they are going to get thousands of likes and dislikes and very few people say, "I recognize the design that TFP went with is a good design even though I personally don't care for it." Most people call the game garbage and accuse the devs of not being able to develop their way out of a paper bag if the game is not to their own personal liking.

 

LBD may seem like the most sensible natural and wtf-not ideas to you and many others. However, there are plenty of players who don't like the gameplay that it creates. So who should TFP heed? 

 

The answer is neither. They should make the game according to their own vision and give lots of freedom to modders and make sure there are lots of options available in the final version. Ideas are a dime a dozen and every idea you come up with there will be another person who paid hard-earned money who hates your idea and would be angry if TFP listened to you and implemented your ideas.

 

TFP listens and considers but then ultimately does what their team judges to be best and whatever that is there will be haters who accuse them of not listening to the community and ruining their game, there will be fans who are convinced they posted all the ideas that TFP went with first and feel good that TFP listened and heeded them, and there will be lots of brand new players who never followed development at all and who pick up the game for the first time ever without any history to draw upon and will either enjoy or dislike the game.

 

I can tell you this with my insider knowledge: I would be absolutely shocked if LBD came back to this game for skill progression in any degree. I would also be shocked if they aren't considering it for one of their future games. There are no plans whatsoever to bring back LBD for this game. They have made that very clear.

 

That being said, the current quest system does follow an LBD model. You can do quests without limit and doing them increases your ability to quest incrementally until you reach tier 5 quests. There is no way to get better at questing other than by doing quests.  I, personally, like to look at how the current quest system overwhelms and dominates any other gameplay choices as a reminder for why an LBD model isn't always a good choice for games like this. I notice how loathe people are to start the whole questing process again from the beginning when they get a new trader as a reminder of how LBD can kill replay value in a game such as this. Quests could be greatly improved by making them less LBD-like.  Something to think about.

[Alpha 21 Discussion Overflow]

11 hours ago, danielspoa said:

A player that would have enjoyed 3k hours before may enjoy 1k now and have no idea on what he is missing.

We can explore the multiverse of what ifs forever but what it comes down to is results. This game still inspires people to devote a thousand hours to playing it. You’re saying that they might have enjoyed 3k hours vs the 1k they are getting now. Most games studios are thrilled if they can keep the attention of a player for 20-40 hours on their game. I’d love to see a negative review where someone complains that they could only eke out 1k hours of entertainment. 

[Alpha 21 Dev Diary]

16 hours ago, Morloc said:

 

If I can build a gyrocopter in my base, I should be able to build a printing press!

Take THAT balance!

 

👻

 

-Arch Necromancer Morloc 💀

You won’t be able to build that gyrocopter until you read enough of the right magazine.
 

You will also be able to craft a printing press if you can find and read enough of that magazine. Good Luck!

[Alpha 21 Dev Diary]

Just now, Syphon583 said:

Gotta say, I think I'm a little too excited about the water overhaul (whenever it comes). What will really be the bees knees, though, (yeah, I used "bees knees", deal with it) is whether or not the game adds in water-related equipment like fins and O2 tanks (especially if we get water-themed POIs).

 

I'm not adding new information. I'm just reiterating what I already said....

 

The main goals are that it 1) spawns correctly in rwg, 2) behaves well around other blocks, and 3) doesn't hurt performance.

 

Those of you imagining all sorts of new features associated with a "water update" should lower your expectations. It is a water update to fix the current state of water and not to bring Subnautica into the mix. There are lots of water associated features that people really want TFP to add to the game and pretty much all of these are probably beyond the scope of what they are doing for A21. The current impact of water in the game is likely to remain mostly the same but water blocks are broken in a number of ways and they are set on fixing them. 

 

Sorry to be a downer. If you expect water to mostly stay the same as far as gameplay but be fixed and no longer act buggy or wonky like it currently does then you will have reasonable expectations and IF TFP does something extra or adds a water related feature or two then it will be a happy surprise.

[Alpha 21 Dev Diary]

49 minutes ago, DarlingCows said:

I have a couple questions regarding the learn by looting mainly is it still balanced for the player that loots vs the player that stays in base and crafts. Also when looting will the magazines be in the book related loot-able or in more places and will the drop chance of any magazine be guaranteed? In A20 when I am looting and I get to a room of book shelfs and such it is super frustrating to only get paper and stuff I’ve already found while knowing there’s still 50 or more schematics or books that I have not found. 

 

If you go out and loot you will find magazines. If you stay at the base you won't. That's how it's balanced. You can still perk into tools and weapons of choice and become very proficient at using them but you won't be able to craft your own without doing something to acquire magazines and build your knowledge.

Magazines are more likely to be found in places that match up thematically with their topic. So you will find more mechanical themed magazines at gas stations and cooking magazines in kitchens than vice versa. But you also find a random mix of everything everywhere.

There is no guarantee of getting the magazine you have perked into but there is a boost to the probability of getting it so you will often find the books you need mixed in with others randomly. But it is subtle so you definitely don't feel like you are only getting the mags that match your specialties.

As of now there are tons of magazines everywhere. Getting a bookshelf or filing cabinet or mailbox that is just paper is pretty rare now. Whether that will get nerfed or not will depend on continued play.

[Alpha 21 Dev Diary]

6 minutes ago, Victor.19 said:

@RolandAre there plans to add Poi to the water when she's ready?

 

Not. another. drop. of. information.

[Alpha 21 Dev Diary]

8 hours ago, hotpoon said:

Just saw this tweet: 

 

From all the talk of new 'decorative' vehicles, I imagine this is just a prop, but people who aren't reading stuff on the forum (most people) won't know. Going on the wording of that tweet, they will think they can hitch a plow to it and ride over zombies (which would be cool). I foresee wailing and gnashing of teeth when they find out that was fake news.

 

 

Yeah! And what about the promise of gambling away my farm? If A21 doesn't let me put all my potatoes and corn on the line at the zombie dog races I will be livid! LI-VID!!

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

6 hours ago, RipClaw said:

Are building and mining also core features of the game or just activities that you can do when you feel like it? I only ask because in this game you can get along just fine without these two activities, but not without looting.

Building and mining are definitely important core parts of the game but like you said, you don’t have to engage in those activities. So maybe exploring and scavenging are the most core. 😂 

[It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.]

9 hours ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

I think it's the developers that hate it. Which really doesn't make sense to me, because it was one of the features that was present when the game started to get really popular. That should tell them they were on to something, yet they seem to want to keep switching things around anyways. And then we keep hearing how they're annoyed at fans for suggesting it should come back. It all just seems odd to me 🤨

 

I don't see this change as complete overhaul or "once again switching everything around". The A20 system is still intact for A21 with the exception that learning crafting recipes for most things have been shifted from perks and books over to magazines. You still progress your skills of using the weapons and tools exactly the same way. All they did was decouple the crafting of recipes from the attributes (which I might add) was something people were asking for.

 

In other words the A21 perk and crafting system have undergone a development iteration that splits off crafting from the attributes and the use skills and at the same time encourages players to explore and scavenge-- which are core features of the gameplay. 

 

This change doesn't have anything to do with Learn By Doing. The devs don't hate it, btw. They just don't consider it any longer. It was dropped from development 4-5 years ago from their perspective and they long ago moved on. Its only certain fans that won't let go and bring it up again and again and again...futilely, I might add. As for being annoyed about it being brought up over and over and over, they've learned to live with such things thanks to all the console gamers.

 

 

[Alpha 21 Discussion Overflow]

4 hours ago, Beelzebubs Ghost said:

 

If it isn't too much trouble, kindly leave that determination to me. 

 

I think I'm better qualified to give my reasons than you or anyone else.

If it makes you feel better just read my “you” as being a generalized “you” for anyone who could be called a veteran player. It’s pretty reasonable to expect any such person to not get as many hours of further enjoyment from updates that are meant to bolster the basic version of the game. 
 

It doesn’t take a leap of logic to see why a typical veteran of the game is going to want new and exciting content that pthey’ve never experienced rather than adjustments to existing features, graphical updates of existing decorations, animation improvements of existing models, and updates of existing POIs. 
 

I mean…not you of course…just other veterans who make the same exact complaints that you do and want the same sort of content updates that you want and get bored of each new alpha update a little faster than the one before exactly as you described.

 

And the fact that new players without so much time sunk into the game are extremely pleased with the gameplay and are happily putting 1000’s of hours into A20 belies the claim that the game is actually empty. 
 

What’s wrong with that assessment for the general population of veteran players?