meganoth

Make it at least a 1 liter jar, then it doesn't count as a Mikrotransaction !!

I think a current PC with enough RAM would probably be enough, at least I would hesitate to make a verdict without an actual trial. But the consoles do not have enough RAM. And on PC split screen would not be that useful for most players since you can't operate two independant mice on it but most PC players are used to keyboard and mice.

And already in the game for 2-3 alphas. As I said I am not happy with the difficulty slider myself. we'll see if TFP does anything about it eventually. TFP is a small team, they only have a handful of programmers and they have their hands full with tasks already. Non-programmers always underestimate the time needed for changes and features. Just saying.

So you didn't notice that a percentage (10% might even be right) of all zombies already attack random parts of the base instead of following some weakest link point? So what you offer as the solution is already implemented and surprise, it doesn't magically make the game unpredictable. 😉 You should replay A16 if you think the strategy the zombies used then was any less predictable than it is now. In A16 the zombies (when not running in circles) just ran straight at you. Which is in general as predictable as what most zombies do now and there are very easy strategies to defend against it, the only positive thing was that players had a bit more agency on the horde night as their position determined the exact point where zombies were attacking. But the drawback was that horde base building was boring and traps almost useless (except when you simply placed a field of spike traps all around the base). I had no fun at all building horde bases in A16. It was a brainless task as there was no reason for elaborate designs, the best design was just a block with all sides equal.

I don't get what you are trying to say here. I don't need to brag to friends that I made it to day 100 without dying because a) I am looong past the bragging age b) I generally die at least once in the first 20 days because I am far from a perfect player. A game where I would reach 100 days without dying would be a game set so easy it would bore me to death. Consequently I don't have any problem installing a mod when it helps me having more fun in the game. We can protest that the game should do that in vanilla, but I am 80% certain that version 1.0, which is getting released in a few months, won't be such a version. I will have to fix the trader myself or live with games that have me perfectly equipped in less than 40 days. I already made the suggestion to the developers that the difficulty setting would need to reduce loot and trader rewards at higher difficulties as well. They seem to disagree. But we are digressing from your initial pitch which was about making the zombies dumber. And I don't see what hell divers 2 brings to THAT argument 😉.

Depends on the definition. Many consider the horse armor skin of Oblivion the first example of a microtransaction (including Wikipedia which says that MOST examples of microtransactions are conducted in in-game shops). If TFP were selling a single horse armor skin as DLC I would have a hard time explaining what the practical difference would be. But eventually, as a DLC grows in size there has to be an end to calling it "micro" and it just becomes a small addon that you could buy or not. Real microtransactions are made for the purpose to lure especially small kids into paying x times of what they payed for the game through **many** small transactions, a single or even a handful of DLCs simply can't do that.

I don't think anybody will contest this. You buy anything that could be dangerous and it is the responsibility of the user to not endanger himself or anyone else through his actions. "Broken" may be too strong in this case, and mostly means something different than "Unsafe". And I would call 7days unsafe by design aka having a design flaw in the UI. If you roll out something that could "endanger" parts of your customers simply by them not taking any actions except turning it on, then part of the blame is on you. You should not sell guns with the ammunition already in the chamber and the safety off. You should not sell home routers with a preset WLAN password everyone knows. You should not sell routers that open a management interface into the internet that the user has to turn off if he doesn't want it. You should not sell machines with movable parts with the power switch on so they would immediately start if you plugged them in.

Maybe check the FAQ of the store you want to buy the 2pack from.

If you do, don#t go on their forum, very toxic moderators there 😉

Exactly. I don't think this would ever be vanilla default because co-op players want to select what they read. But an option or a mod could enable this.

Human nature. People often do not decide at all (aka decide to do nothing) when they have to make a decision. And therefore that should be the safe case. They do nothing when they are overwhelmed by choices, do not understand, get distracted, don't care, are 9 years old or 99 years old, are in a hurry. In other words most of the time. Do you really expect a typical kid with a steam account to already make the right informed decisions about its games when you practically know that most kids have just enough sense to klick on any button that says "start"? And even half of all grown ups operate the same way? (Disclaimer: There are actually very old people who would understand, but they are in the minority)

You are getting "disk full" errors

Lots of software developers including Microsoft needed to learn that lesson the hard way and I have the feeling the games industry is largely still in the pre-learning phase: The default setting has to be secure or you will hurt your customers badly and have to pay the price later with a bad reputation. It is exactly the least knowledable users who need the most secure setup and are also the users least able to set up the correct options

The character data is stored on the server! It would need a lot of effort to make that possible. * Either move that data permanently to clients (like Enshrouded does it) which would be a big redesign and make it easier for cheaters to manipulate on online servers. * Or add code to dynamically move player data to clients and back to other servers once logged in (lots of additional programming work and almost the same problem as 1). * Or make it possible between linked servers on the same machine (which would make it a very limited feature only a handful of servers could use). The last option may be possible even today if you don't need both servers to run at the same time. Just let two savegames share the player data.

I assume the biggest problem in making this game make better use of more threads is that 10 years ago this game started with a much smaller scope and nobody programming the main loops had any idea that nowadays the workload would need to be distributed well to multiple threads AND that the minimum specs would increase as well (in 2014 minimum specs talked about 1 or 2 cores max). Today they have probably "matured", inflexible code, and only a complete rewrite/refactoring of the main loop and some of the subsystems would be needed for a an optimal distribution of workload. But for that they don't have the time anymore.