Hard-core survival description on Steam store

[Matt115]

2 minutes ago, theFlu said:

Sure, they're heavy to run; but for the corpse timers, they're not nearly as heavy as a horde night.

 

Yup, it can be a great mechanic if done right; having corpses be a source of all kinds of problems, infection, slippery, maybe have a chance to randomly re-activate, just all around ugly and stressing for "mental health issues" etc etc. The way they actually were though, whether as ugly terrain diamonds or lootable torsos, I can't say I really miss em.

Well... just uses wooden frames to go on top.  Well i don't undestand skyscrappers idea - i mean looks cool but... from logical point of view except coins... skyscappers could even much worst POI that typical house - much less resources much more zombie. I know this is a game and skyscrappers are usually important in games - but that's why i love "hospital" in zombie movies and tv shows ---> usully hospital is last place where survivors want to go because there is tons of zombie so pharmacy is better option.

 

I wish this mechanic could be "revieved" somehow

[pApA^LeGBa]

2 hours ago, Roland said:

 

All that this signifies is that you have an inability to understand things from someone else's perspective. You act like the world is full of slightly different versions of you when, in fact, the world is filled with people completely unlike you. Terms like "hardcore" are in the eyes of the beholder. Some look at our hunger and thirst mechanics and call it too hardcore because you have manage them constantly and they would rather not have to deal with it. Back when weather survival was better, some didn't like having to change clothes to enter a new biome. They felt like that mechanic was too hardcore survival. 

 

We are always getting feedback from people about the survival elements being too much. Some complain that it is just too hard while others say that it is too focused on realism instead of fun (ie--sim like or hardcore) 

 

This forum is not a good guage for that as most people here want things to be even more hardcore than they already are and cringe at the streamlining and abstraction of survival elements. Any time the game edges away from sim-like towards arcade-like people here get uncomfortable. But that isn't everyone who plays or who wants to play this game by a longshot.

 

There are plenty who see this game as very hardcore and even too hardcore in its present state for their liking. We even have mods that change the game to be less hardcore like we have mods that push it further towards more. One that comes to mind is the one that makes all the animals friendly and all of the zombies neutral unless attacked first. Some people see that as the perfect amount of hardcoreness that they desire for the game. Someone else posted awhile back that the game shouldn't allow us to die but should just make us have to eat more by having damage hit our hunger gauge instead of having hitpoints and that we never should have to look at the player stats page and see number of deaths. That was too hardcore for comfort for them.

 

I can agree with that. Just don´t call it hardcore survival when there is games that actually deserve using that superlative way more. Compared to many other games the survival elements aren´t hardcore. Not at all. Just because people think it´s hardcore doesn´t mean that´s true. How should the real hardcore survival games be called then so that the customer can tell the difference? uber super duper hardcore survival? Calling this game a hardcore survival experience is misleading. That´s the whole point. No one in this thread is asking to make it hardcore (many of us wish for it to be harder, that´s true, but that is not the point in this thread). Just pointing out that the description about the survival part is wrong. 

 

And that has nothing to do with skill or hours played. Those games like Green Hell etc, are harder in their survival part. No matter if you are experienced or not, no matter if you are a god tier gamer or generally suck at games.

 

It also doesn´t matter that this game might be a hardcore experience for some people. In the big picture the game still isn´t a hardcore survival game. It´s only hardcore for the person playing it. That´s not a reason to use a false description.

Edited August 31, 2022 by pApA^LeGBa (see edit history)

[Matt115]

11 minutes ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

 

I can agree with that. Just don´t call it hardcore survival when there is games that actually deserve using that superlative way more. Compared to many other games the survival elements aren´t hardcore. Not at all. Just because people think it´s hardcore doesn´t mean that´s true. How should the real hardcore survival games be called then so that the customer can tell the difference? uber super duper hardcore survival? Calling this game a hardcore survival experience is misleading. That´s the whole point. No one in this thread is asking to make it even more hardcore (many of us wish for it to be harder, that´s true, but that is not the point in this thread). Just pointing out that the description about the survival part is wrong. 

 

And that has nothing to do with skill or hours played. Those games like Green Hell etc, are harder in their survival part. No matter if you are experienced or not, no matter if you are a god tier gamer or generally suck at games.

So that's why describtion on steam should be changed because... well this too late to change this game into true hardcore game

[Maharin]

2 hours ago, Matt115 said:

well this too late to change this game into true hardcore game

 

That seems like a fairly obtuse view considering previous statements made in this thread and the simple fact that the game is heavily modable.

[SnowDog1942]

Hardcore is the best, when it comes to pron.

[Vaeliorin]

6 hours ago, Roland said:

Back when weather survival was better, some didn't like having to change clothes to enter a new biome. They felt like that mechanic was too hardcore survival.

I...really don't know that I'd call that system better.  Tedious and annoying are what come to mind.  It wasn't hard, it wasn't a challenge, it was just tiresome.  Having to spend 20 seconds hitting "W" on a few inventory items isn't what I would consider better.  It also wasn't just when changing biomes.  You could go from freezing to sweltering in a matter of a few real life minutes while staying in the forest biome.

 

I'm honestly not sure how weather could really be better without it killing the whole "we're forcing you to go out an explore" thing TFP seem focused on at this point.  I don't think most people would be real happy about having to stop and build a fire/set up a tent every few minutes, then wait a few minutes to "recover" before you can go out and explore further.

[Maharin]

16 minutes ago, Vaeliorin said:

I'm honestly not sure how weather could really be better without it killing the whole "we're forcing you to go out an explore" thing TFP seem focused on at this point.  I don't think most people would be real happy about having to stop and build a fire/set up a tent every few minutes, then wait a few minutes to "recover" before you can go out and explore further.

 

The solution, of course, is dual wielding torches.

[Roland]

29 minutes ago, Vaeliorin said:

I...really don't know that I'd call that system better.  Tedious and annoying are what come to mind.  It wasn't hard, it wasn't a challenge, it was just tiresome.  Having to spend 20 seconds hitting "W" on a few inventory items isn't what I would consider better.  It also wasn't just when changing biomes.  You could go from freezing to sweltering in a matter of a few real life minutes while staying in the forest biome.

 

I'm honestly not sure how weather could really be better without it killing the whole "we're forcing you to go out an explore" thing TFP seem focused on at this point.  I don't think most people would be real happy about having to stop and build a fire/set up a tent every few minutes, then wait a few minutes to "recover" before you can go out and explore further.

 

I agree-- but then I'm not necessarily hoping for hardcore weather survival either. That's the thing about going more hardcore into anything. People who are hardcore into it love it but everyone else sees it as tedious. We get people saying we need food spoilage and then a bunch of others pipe in and say that food spoilage ruins games because it is so tedious and isn't a challenge anyway-- it just is no fun. But the people who want hardcore survival will say that the food spoilage is fun and without it 7 Days really can't be considered a real survival game. I'm sure that there are people excited to have to change clothing and gear up for different climates and don't see it as a chore to have to dress for the weather and they hate it right now that weather is so....casual.

 

4 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

 

I can agree with that. Just don´t call it hardcore survival when there is games that actually deserve using that superlative way more. Compared to many other games the survival elements aren´t hardcore. Not at all. Just because people think it´s hardcore doesn´t mean that´s true. How should the real hardcore survival games be called then so that the customer can tell the difference? uber super duper hardcore survival? Calling this game a hardcore survival experience is misleading. That´s the whole point. No one in this thread is asking to make it hardcore (many of us wish for it to be harder, that´s true, but that is not the point in this thread). Just pointing out that the description about the survival part is wrong. 

 

And that has nothing to do with skill or hours played. Those games like Green Hell etc, are harder in their survival part. No matter if you are experienced or not, no matter if you are a god tier gamer or generally suck at games.

 

It also doesn´t matter that this game might be a hardcore experience for some people. In the big picture the game still isn´t a hardcore survival game. It´s only hardcore for the person playing it. That´s not a reason to use a false description.

 

Its perfectly acceptable to use superlatives when advertising your game. Every product on earth describes itself in self aggrandizing terms. Like I said, MANY people will buy the game and play and go "whoa this game is way more hardcore than I thought it would be" and others will snicker at the label and wonder what TFP was smoking when they tried to pass off their game as hardcore survival. It doesn't really matter what the objective truth is when the perception is going to be so broad. If it was universally accepted that 7 Days to Die wasn't a hardcore survival game then we would probably feel the pressure to remove it but there is enough of a perception spectrum about it that the truth is nebulous and so when some people complain that the game isn't hardcore we are more likely to think those people are just super duper hardcore elites rather than agree that the game itself is more on the casual side of things.

 

I really can't see ANY company billing their product as a mediocre version of what it does. That just is not done. That comes through in reviews and videos for people who want to research outside of what the company is presenting itself as. But TFP is not going to say, "Take Green Mile and soften it up about 1000% and that's OUR game!!!" Instead, they are going to be like "Take Minecraft and ratchet up the fear, survival, and blood 1000% and that's OUR game!!!" Its a brag. Its the picture of the Big Mac on the billboard...not the actual Big Mac in your hands....

 

Edited September 1, 2022 by Roland (see edit history)

[Matt115]

10 hours ago, Maharin said:

 

That seems like a fairly obtuse view considering previous statements made in this thread and the simple fact that the game is heavily modable.

Modable but TFP coudn't change this in something like "project zomboid in 3D" because this would lead to mass criticisim

[SnowDog1942]

11 hours ago, Roland said:

.not the actual Big Mac in your hands....

 

 

What if its not a Big Mac thats in my hands, though big.. for sure 

Edited September 1, 2022 by SnowDog1942 (see edit history)

[Pernicious]

20 hours ago, Vaeliorin said:

I...really don't know that I'd call that system better.  Tedious and annoying are what come to mind.  It wasn't hard, it wasn't a challenge, it was just tiresome.  Having to spend 20 seconds hitting "W" on a few inventory items isn't what I would consider better.  It also wasn't just when changing biomes.  You could go from freezing to sweltering in a matter of a few real life minutes while staying in the forest biome.

 

I think the current system as is would be tedious. It could be simplified through a "load out" based system for example. You create an "outfit" you can save, and switch with a couple clicks. Might even attract more players interested in the fashion! Next would be make up and grooming, which could affect how party girl treats you, or... wait, no off topic.

 

For me, I don't want it to be tedious either, just, impactful. Keep me out of the snow biome until I find enough gear. Make going into the desert a risk because I can't really wear enough armour. 

 

The problem even with that though, is that some people will still play it another way and call it tedious. They'll insist on wearing armour into the desert and complain their stamina is always close to zero, and they need to drink every 2 minutes, and point out ultra marathoners do 84km runs in the desert (conveniently ignoring it's in special sweat wicking clothing, not carrying anything heavier than a garmin watch, and have been training for years for it).

 

It's a no win situation. I feel like in this case, I'm not behind the dev'a decision, but so many things are the way I like it, so that's just life? Still love the game overall.

 

Edit: just one more thought. A lot of games, by the end game, the player becomes a super hero in everything. Skyrim was a classic example - a class less progression system where you took points in skills you wanted to hone, but if you did all the side quesfs, by mid game, you were basically maxed out in everything.

 

By making it more difficult to have a single build that's good at everything, it can make the game more challenging. You usually gear up in full steel and go toe to toe with a baseball bat to save ammo? Try that with no armour. Like sniping and avoiding combat? Be challenged in heavy snow where every footstep makes an audible crunch and you can't see more than 10m.

 

Much of this can be implemented by just changing values rather than whole rewrites of the game. But again, not everyone wants that. Some people play wanting to feel like they are heroes, not weaklings.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Pernicious (see edit history)

[Rotor]

I have the answer:

 

 

[Maharin]

Human poop potatoes.  I wonder if those taste any different than rotting flesh potatoes?

[pApA^LeGBa]

@Roland Sure. I know that. If you see it from a black and white perspective it´s flatout lying to the customer though. Just because that is meanwhile business as usual doesn´t mean it´s ok or that we have to like it.

 

And tbh i am mostly playing indie games or games from new developers because i am sick of business as usual. It´s also not like the game needs to shine in the survival part only as it is just one part of the game.

Edited September 2, 2022 by pApA^LeGBa (see edit history)

[meganoth]

4 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

@Roland Sure. I know that. If you see it from a black and white perspective it´s flatout lying to the customer though. Just because that is meanwhile business as usual doesn´t mean it´s ok or that we have to like it.

 

And tbh i am mostly playing indie games or games from new developers because i am sick of business as usual. It´s also not like the game needs to shine in the survival part only as it is just one part of the game.

 

I agree. A description doesn't need to lie to put a positive spin on anything. What would be mediocre about saying it has "survival" included instead of "hard-core survival" included? Especially since at least as many players would be detered by the "hard-core" label as would be attracted.

 

 

[Matt115]

12 minutes ago, meganoth said:

 

I agree. A description doesn't need to lie to put a positive spin on anything. What would be mediocre about saying it has "survival" included instead of "hard-core survival" included? Especially since at least as many players would be detered by the "hard-core" label as would be attracted.

 

 

I think even "hardcore survival" can be negative describtion for some people so.... i think  it just should be just "survival" because this is the most true option

[Roland]

6 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

@Roland Sure. I know that. If you see it from a black and white perspective it´s flatout lying to the customer though.

 

2 hours ago, meganoth said:

I agree. A description doesn't need to lie to put a positive spin on anything.

 

Just want to point out that I don't believe that "hardcore survival" is a lie and that's why I don't feel any motivation to tell Rick that it should be changed. It may not be as hardcore as other games but it is more hardcore than other games. I think the description is fine and apt. Some of you will believe with your whole soul that the description doesn't fit because of your own definition of what hardcore should entail. That's a valid opinion but it doesn't make the advertising description an outright lie.

 

If the description only said survival instead of hardcore survival I also wouldn't feel an overwhelming moral responsibility to get the word hardcore added. I don't disagree with a player's perspective that for them the game is not hardcore survival. It is always interesting to hear other perspectives and I, myself, would be happy to see a few more tweaks towards more hardcore survival. But that doesn't mean TFP has an obligation to change that description. I disagree that it is false advertising.

[Jost Amman]

Though, to be honest, using "hardcore survival" in the description, will then entitle players to rant on the forums whenever anything doesn't fit a survival simulation. By using the hardcore word, you're also implying that the game is heavily shifted toward the survival simulation, more than the casual survival experience.

 

Cold weather doesn't freeze you to death? -> Not a hardcore survival game!

Don't get the flu when I stay out in the rain all day? -> Not a hardcore survival game!

Magic candies that let you jump off a building with no harm? -> Not a hardcore survival game!

 

IMO the issue is not much about "false advertisement", but more about player expectations based on the description.

 

Edited September 2, 2022 by Jost Amman (see edit history)

[Roland]

This is how I would rank 7 Days to Die on several elements on a casual to hardcore spectrum. Happy to discuss my reasoning with anyone who disagrees and would move the sliders.

 

Edited September 2, 2022 by Roland (see edit history)

[Jost Amman]

11 minutes ago, Roland said:

This is how I would rank 7 Days to Die on several elements on a casual to hardcore spectrum. Happy to discuss my reasoning with anyone who disagrees and would move the sliders.

 

The problem with your survival rating, currently, is that IMO some parts could probably fit in the hardcore rating, but some other parts have been completely nerfed. So, as long as TFP are going, for example, to fix the effect of temperature, humidity and add illnesses along with that, then the hardcore rating would be deserved.

 

However, if all survival mechanics will stay as they are now until release, then the hardcore survival description IMO should be considered inaccurate.

 

Edited September 2, 2022 by Jost Amman (see edit history)

[pApA^LeGBa]

38 minutes ago, Roland said:

 

 

Just want to point out that I don't believe that "hardcore survival" is a lie and that's why I don't feel any motivation to tell Rick that it should be changed. It may not be as hardcore as other games but it is more hardcore than other games. I think the description is fine and apt. Some of you will believe with your whole soul that the description doesn't fit because of your own definition of what hardcore should entail. That's a valid opinion but it doesn't make the advertising description an outright lie.

 

If the description only said survival instead of hardcore survival I also wouldn't feel an overwhelming moral responsibility to get the word hardcore added. I don't disagree with a player's perspective that for them the game is not hardcore survival. It is always interesting to hear other perspectives and I, myself, would be happy to see a few more tweaks towards more hardcore survival. But that doesn't mean TFP has an obligation to change that description. I disagree that it is false advertising.

 

 

Hardcore basically means top of the line here. And that´s simply not true. Not even close. And it doesn´t matter what someone thinks when playing 7 days for the first time. If they go and play a game with a harder survival part  after playing 7 days they will realize that the description of 7 days was wrong even though they thought it was hardcore when playing it for the first time.

 

If a game is more than hardcore concerning the survival part it would be a dying simulator where you just experience different kinds of dying all the time.

 

How would you define the survival part of games harder than 7 days? If 7 days is a hardcore survival experience what is the definition that describes the survival experience of The Long Dark or Green Hell then?

Edited September 2, 2022 by pApA^LeGBa (see edit history)

[Roland]

2 minutes ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

 

 

Hardcore basically means top of the line here. And that´s simply not true. Not even close. And it doesn´t matter what someone thinks when playing 7 days for the first time. If they go and play a game with a harder survival part  after playing 7 days they will realize that the description of 7 days was wrong even though they thought it was hardcore when playing it for the first time.

 

How would you define the survival part of games harder than 7 days? If 7 days is a hardcore survival experience what is the definition that describes the survival experience of The Long Dark or Green Hell then?

 

So only one game at a time can ever claim itself to be hardcore? I don't think so. "hardcore" isn't the heavyweight championship belt which only ever belongs to one person at a time. "hardcore" is the heavyweight category of which many belong and strive to be the champion. If the description said "king of all hardcore survival games" I would agree that it is a lie but just because there are other games more hardcore doesn't mean every single game below the most hardcore can't also claim to be hardcore. I disagree with this way of defining who gets call themselves hardcore.

7 minutes ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

How would you define the survival part of games harder than 7 days? If 7 days is a hardcore survival experience what is the definition that describes the survival experience of The Long Dark or Green Hell then?

 

They can also say they are hardcore. And if they wanted to give us a mention in their own description by saying "Even more hardcore than 7 Days to Die!" I would be delighted.

[pApA^LeGBa]

Nope there is several games that can claim they are hardcore survival and 7 days is not one of them. It´s not about a championship or who has the most hardcore game at all.

 

It´s only about how customers perceive it when looking at the description.

Edited September 2, 2022 by pApA^LeGBa (see edit history)

[Matt115]

3 minutes ago, Roland said:

This is how I would rank 7 Days to Die on several elements on a casual to hardcore spectrum. Happy to discuss my reasoning with anyone who disagrees and would move the sliders.

 

 

Suvival -  if "radical" right is project zomboid, then a little bit could be the forest 3 should be hm.... well idk how to write because title of this game is considered as "rude word". Then you have factorio after that Medieval dynasty and after that 7DTD and 'radical" left MC -

1 MEAN 7dtd

010 0 000

Building - radical right - Metal gear suvive, then valheim , then don't starve then 7dtd etc

000 1 000

Exploting 010 0 000

Farming 100  0  000

mining   010 0 000

combat 010 0 000

base defence 000 1 000

Crafting 000 1 000

char 010 0 000

RP - Depend on players - almost every sandbox can be RP

sandbox 010 0 000 

 

So @pApA^LeGBa is right

3 minutes ago, Roland said:

 

So only one game at a time can ever claim itself to be hardcore? I don't think so. "hardcore" isn't the heavyweight championship belt which only ever belongs to one person at a time. "hardcore" is the heavyweight category of which many belong and strive to be the champion. If the description said "king of all hardcore survival games" I would agree that it is a lie but just because there are other games more hardcore doesn't mean every single game below the most hardcore can't also claim to be hardcore. I disagree with this way of defining who gets call themselves hardcore.

Well it's heavyweight championship - if project zomboid is hardcore -  then everything have to be similiar to project zomboid to be hardcore - like green hell. And Project zomboid is from this same years as 7dtd so  7dtd is "casual" vs project zomboid - yes there are game you can call less hardcore but still hardcore like MG survive but 7dtd is almost MC tier

 

1 minute ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

Nope there is several games that can claim that and 7 days is not one of them. It´s not about a championship or who has the most hardcore game at all.

 

It´s only about how customers perceive it when looking at the description.

Well project zomboid show what mean "hardcore game"

[Roland]

4 minutes ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

It´s only about how customers perceive it when looking at the description.

 

Great. Then 7 Days to Die qualifies for all the customers who perceive it that way and I am confident that enough people do that the description does not warrant editing.

6 minutes ago, Matt115 said:

Well it's heavyweight championship - if project zomboid is hardcore -  then everything have to be similiar to project zomboid to be hardcore - like green hell. And Project zomboid is from this same years as 7dtd so  7dtd is "casual" vs project zomboid - yes there are game you can call less hardcore but still hardcore like MG survive but 7dtd is almost MC tier

 

I appreciate your opinion. I agree that 7 Days is not the most hardcore. I don't believe that makes it casual. I think it is far beyond Minecraft though. But minecraft I would put far beyond 7 Days for mining.