[Why does the tactical assault rifle look so hideous?]

The tape doesn't bother me so much as the jackstand/buttstock. You know there's supposed to be a buffer tube and recoil spring in there, right? You know that gun would never ever cycle, right? I'm sure this is when someone is going to pop in and say "zombies aren't real" because whenever logical inconsistencies are pointed out that's their get out of jail free card. So long as there are zombies in the game nothing has to make any sense. 

[The proposal for the game after A21, I hope someone (developers) is interested]

I think a simple solution (in theory, not sure about coding) would be to allow for a chance to damage the item if you try to repair it without the proper knowledge. It may work or you may have a chance to lose a tier level or durability or something. Blue auto shotty is almost broken. Do you try to fix it and risk turning it into a green or orange shotty? Once you read enough and have the proper repair level this is no longer an issue. 

[Alpha 21 Dev Diary]

On 7/4/2023 at 6:20 PM, zztong said:

 

I don't know, that sounds a lot like a Buell Blast I once rode.

 

They didn't call them the B Last for nothing.

[Alpha 21 Dev Diary]

8 minutes ago, Moldy Bread said:

Lol, sorry, Dew collectors now create heat? What is the dripping sound too much!?

 

Very stupid change, modders! We need another fix.

 

Why do you think the player is unable to sleep through the night? It's the sound of all that damned condensing water! 

[What was the point of the water change?]

On 6/24/2023 at 1:14 AM, Roland said:

 

I'm talking about the actual containers of consumables as they are represented in the game and yes, they are factually all consistent with each other now. Are the gathering methods of consumables all exactly the same? No. Is the history of what substance was loot only and what substance was harvestable or craftable the same? No. But I never claimed they were. I agree that for veterans who can't let go of the past, the history of how things used to be is probably a very important piece of this. I also agree that for someone who wants the method of extraction of different resources to be consistent then that piece is very important.

 

All I am telling the OP who asked the question was why TFP got rid of the physical representation of a container for a consumable and that is because it was the only one in the game and they wanted such empty containers to be consistent across the board. As to how water vs shale is collected or the historical differences in the game between water and acid, those things weren't the concern. But getting rid of jars was which is why I didn't want the OP to have false hope that jars would be reinstated by the developers in case the OP thought that getting rid of jars was simply collateral damage for the water change. It was, in fact, the impetus for the water changes. It's fine by me if you disagree with that design goal or think the game was better before. I'm just giving information about why the change occurred and why it is unlikely to be reversed.

 

 

Not everyone thinks every aspect of a game is fun. Fun for 100% isn't a realistic goal. The developers and the team found it fun and have continued to find it fun for about a year (The water change was implemented about a year ago internally). They are developing the kind of game they like to play. There are other features that have been implemented and then removed before they ever were experienced by the public because the devs decided that they didn't like them once they got to play with them. It's not like they would have left it in after playing with it for a year if they didn't think it was fun. So there are some (pretty important) people you waved at. It's only been a couple of weeks with the public so we will see if there are others. So far there have been a lot of positive comments about the water changes on many social media platforms including here. Since you're waving at them maybe they'll say "Hi".

 

 

First off Roland I just want to say that I understand your point, I really do. It's just the fact that someone said "Let's put lakes and rivers in the maps!" And then someone else said "Yeah and let's make water hard to get!"

When I try to hold those 2 dissonant thoughts in my head at the same time it makes me want to eat broken glass. 

I don't care where the bottles come from. I don't care where they go. But if you want to make water hard to get then maybe don't put entire rivers of it everywhere. 

So while I have adapted my playstyle to a21 mechanics I'm not one of those people who never think about it again. I do. Frequently. Every time I scoop a bottle of water out of a toilet I wonder why I can't do that down at the river. It hurts my soul, man. I die a little inside, over an approximate 7 day timeframe. 

[What was the point of the water change?]

6 hours ago, Roland said:

The jars are now more consistent with how every single other consumable container is treated.

 

 

I would say this is true IF there were lakes and rivers of unaccessible gasoline and acid in the world but there are not. Shale can, in fact be brought back to your base for processing. Acid has always been loot only. The problem isn't mysterious jars it's internal logistical consistency. So far the only reasoning is "because we needed to make water arbitrarily harder." 

 

I guess there are people out there who find the hydration gameplay loop fun. Not me, but people. Somewhere. Out there. *waves hand* 

[Glass Jars Question, A21]

You can sit there and say that the hydration mechanic isn't meant to be realistic but is it meant to be absurd? Because that's where we're at right now. I can go out into the desert with a shovel and a pick and dig up oil shale, bring it back to my base, run it through a redneck refinery, and have gasoline pure enough to run a truck or motorcycle. What I can't figure out how to do is walk out the door and down to the lake to fill up a bottle. If the water is from a toilet? No problem. Maybe I just need to make the lake into a giant toilet.