1.0 (A22) Dev Diary Overflow

[bdubyah]

1 hour ago, Jost Amman said:

In my opinion the real problem is that some supported features are geared towards low-end, 10 years old computers, and are impacting everyone.

Example: why don't they allow a greater number of concurrent zombies in the game, as an option? No, they limit it to 64 whatever system you have.

 

Same goes for view distance and map size.

Those limitations should be removed, and left to the individual player to try on their system.

As for the "legal reasons", they could just add a short disclaimer about that. Done. Everybody happy.

 

That just isn't the case. Go into a world and enter dm mode. Hit F6 and check the Spawn 25 box. Spawn 75+ zombies and watch your game go to crap. And that's with the zombies doing basically nothing. Go to a POI with a complex path through it and spawn them again. Your game will be almost unplayable and the AI will slow to a halt. The best PC you can buy today will have those same struggles.

[Cr0wst0rm]

42 minutes ago, bdubyah said:

That just isn't the case. Go into a world and enter dm mode. Hit F6 and check the Spawn 25 box. Spawn 75+ zombies and watch your game go to crap. And that's with the zombies doing basically nothing. Go to a POI with a complex path through it and spawn them again. Your game will be almost unplayable and the AI will slow to a halt. The best PC you can buy today will have those same struggles.

And that is the point, if you have time complexity of O^2, no system will handle such workload effectively. That is why threading should be used more. Because there are cases where you just cannot optimize the game because of the impact on the outcome, so you should offload it to other threads which
are not required to come in time with game thread.

-Will the pathfinding be done later? That is fine, now i have to render, so give me the data after you finish the pathfinding process and I will do my part.

We are no longer in 1998 where systems had just 1 core for processing. Argument that you should buy better HW is just invalid. Every game uses threads. (UEBS 2 is one nice example)

And I agree, while Unity is very constrained when it comes to threading (various different safety checks), it still allows data manipulation. The concepts are same. You should access data only once at a time. For example in Unreal you cannot update transformation from non game threads as this is for rendering security. The general concept is that you "manipulate the data" on thread, then you "consume" it from gamethread.

Edited April 11 by Cr0wst0rm (see edit history)

[Jost Amman]

2 hours ago, bdubyah said:

That just isn't the case. Go into a world and enter dm mode. Hit F6 and check the Spawn 25 box. Spawn 75+ zombies and watch your game go to crap. And that's with the zombies doing basically nothing. Go to a POI with a complex path through it and spawn them again. Your game will be almost unplayable and the AI will slow to a halt. The best PC you can buy today will have those same struggles.

Is this recent? ... Because I clearly remember people modding their game to play with up to 128 zombies (not sure if active at one time, probably not).

In any case there are other limits that are imposed with no setting available to overcome them, so my point stands.

 

We need more freedom!! 

[SylenThunder]

2 hours ago, Cr0wst0rm said:

We are no longer in 1998 where systems had just 1 core for processing. Argument that you should buy better HW is just invalid. Every game uses threads. (UEBS 2 is one nice example)

And yet even now, I can count on one hand the number of games that actually support multithreading. Never mind that the tech has existed for nearly 15 years. Same with IPv6, but that is even worse.

[Fanatical_Meat]

1 hour ago, SylenThunder said:

And yet even now, I can count on one hand the number of games that actually support multithreading. Never mind that the tech has existed for nearly 15 years. Same with IPv6, but that is even worse.

Agreed and I thinks it’s a game engine thing. Nobody is patching Unity to have multi thread support.

Unity allows a lot of fun things, it’s just getting old.

[Riamus]

10 hours ago, Cr0wst0rm said:

I think it is fair to post it here since it is related to the development of the game, and I prefer stronger exposure. 

I would point out that right at the beginning of this topic, they ask that discussions are about the specific items listed for A22, so I think that removes your "fair" option since this isn't related to those specific items.  But that is up to the mods to move it to the overflow.  Besides, this is far less actual exposure than other places because things get hidden in the Dev threads almost immediately. 

 

Anyhow, as others have says, much of what you are wanting done with multithreading is not really available with Unity, so the suggestions aren't going to go anywhere.

[meganoth]

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.

 

[Riamus]

48 minutes ago, vom said:

Acquire and wear the complete set for a bonus

 

This is bad game mechanics - you shouldn't be penalized because you don't like to wear a straw hat or blue coveralls.

This is common game mechanics, even if you don't like them.  Heh.  Full set bonus in have have been around at least a couple of decades.  I don't remember which game was the first to have them, but it has been a long time.  You will still get a variety of bonuses for each item from the looks of it.  You just won't get the full set bonus if you don't wear the full set.  That is a choice that you can make.  If the bonus is that important to you, then wear the full set.  You rarely see yourself anyhow except when driving.  If you care more about how you look, ignore the bonus. 

 

That being said, I have suggested that they consider a cosmetic option for armor that lets you display different pieces of armor/clothes than what you are wearing.  Many games give you that option and it would give players the choice to look the way they want while getting the bonuses they need or want.  After all, if you play with light armor, you won't get to experience the heavy armor styles, and vice versa. 

Edited April 17 by Riamus (see edit history)

[vom]

1 minute ago, Riamus said:

This is common have mechanics, even if you don't like them. 

It's a bad mechanic, even if you think it's common.

 

2 minutes ago, Riamus said:

You just won't get the full set bonus if you don't wear the full set. 

 

That's just dumb mechanics. No reason wearing cowboy boots and a hat should make you a better shot.

[Riamus]

14 minutes ago, vom said:

It's a bad mechanic, even if you think it's common.

 

 

That's just dumb mechanics. No reason wearing cowboy boots and a hat should make you a better shot.

Something isn't bad just because you don't personally like it.  There are going to be many people who do like set bonuses.  You aren't any more right than them, or vice versa.

 

A cigar shouldn't make you better at buying and selling.  You shouldn't be able to carry thousands of ore or wood, or a vehicle, or tons of weapons and armor.  You shouldn't be able to gain health by using a bandage.  There are all kinds of unrealistic gameplay mechanics in this game and in most games.  Choices are made for gameplay reasons even if they aren't realistic.  This isn't a sim.  Gameplay mechanics aren't bad or dumb just because they are unrealistic or because you don't like them.

[vom]

10 minutes ago, Riamus said:

Something isn't bad just because you don't personally like it.

Thanks for the philosophy essay.

I don't think this is a bad mechanic, merely because I don't like it.
I don't like it, because it is a bad mechanic.

Since you are obviously very intelligent and creative, I can't imagine why you didn't figure that out for yourself.
Regardless, I hope this clarifies things for you.

 

10 minutes ago, Riamus said:

A cigar shouldn't make you better at buying and selling. 

 

That's right, that's a bad mechanic. There's no 'fun' in changing your clothes to gain some stupid bonus. Changing your outfit to gain passive bonuses is not meaningful 'gameplay'. This mechanic should be removed, as it serves no purpose and does not improve the game.
 

Edited April 17 by vom (see edit history)

[BFT2020]

1 hour ago, vom said:

This mechanic should be removed, as it serves no purpose and does not improve the game.

 

Then just mod it out if you don't want it in the game.  🤷‍♂️

[vom]

2 minutes ago, BFT2020 said:

Then just mod it out if you don't want it in the game. 

 

Do you feel like an obsessive need to respond to everyone?

[BFT2020]

34 minutes ago, vom said:

 

Do you feel like an obsessive need to respond to everyone?

Nope, just when I have a thought to share

[vom]

4 minutes ago, BFT2020 said:

Nope, just when I have a thought to share

 

Cool story bro.

[FramFramson]

5 minutes ago, vom said:

 

Cool story bro.

 

You must be a boatload of fun at parties.

 

I don't know what the point of all your whining is, but it's not going to get the game changed when you don't even know the difference between subjective and objective, let alone bothering to support your tautological opinions-claimed-as-facts with literally any meaningful information.

 

Do you just want to be angry?

 

Maybe there's a better place for that than the spoiler thread for a zombie survival video game?

 

 

Edited April 17 by FramFramson (see edit history)

[vom]

I'm not the one spewing salt, but enjoy crying because someone thinks one of the game mechanics is flawed. If anyone else wants to come gnash their teeth, feel free to sperg at me some more.

 

6 minutes ago, FramFramson said:

you don't even know the difference between subjective and objective, let alone bothering to support your tautological opinion

 

I think your own words fit well here.

 

6 minutes ago, FramFramson said:

You must be a boatload of fun at parties.

 

 

[FramFramson]

56 minutes ago, vom said:

I'm not the one spewing salt, but enjoy crying because someone thinks one of the game mechanics is flawed. If anyone else wants to come gnash their teeth, feel free to sperg at me some more.

 

I think your own words fit well here.

 

Do you display movie in high def? Because that's some real nice projection.

2 minutes ago, faatal said:

More RWG changes coming to A22:

 

Improved player spawn locations.

Added rwgmixer <prefab_spawn_adjust> biomeTags which limits to one or more biomes (requires partial_name).
Added trader types are each in their own biome (with a min of 2).

Improved town planning quality.
Adjusted township counts and sizes.
Added biome township count logging and trader logging.
Balanced lakes, rivers, craters, canyons, township and wilderness settings.
 

Added POI spawning limits based on surrounding density in world.
Improved POI spawning fallback to use a smaller size but ignore name restriction.

Added preview coloring for districts (3 brightness levels each) and traders.
Improved preview POI descriptions and added score.

 

This is the current default 8k map:

 

Now this on the other hand is dead sexy.

 

When you said added trader types for a second I thought you meant we'd finally get some new traders, till I re-read what you said.

 

(but maybe 1-2 more traders in future... mayyyybeeee????)

[BFT2020]

13 hours ago, vom said:

That's right, that's a bad mechanic. There's no 'fun' in changing your clothes to gain some stupid bonus. Changing your outfit to gain passive bonuses is not meaningful 'gameplay'. This mechanic should be removed, as it serves no purpose and does not improve the game.

 

The thing is, the game is littered with items that you gain bonuses for.  Clothing has mods to improve carrying capacity.  Certain clothing items give you bonuses.  Armor has mods that give you a wide range of bonuses.  Tools and weapons have mods that give you a wide range of bonuses.  Vehicles have mods that give you bonuses.  Food, drinks, candies, and drugs are in the game to give you bonuses.

 

Based on the wide variety of items that give you bonuses in the game, one can easily come to the conclusion that these mechanics are what the developers want in this game.

 

Fortunately for you, you can easily mod these bonuses out of the game if you truly desire.  Or you can simply wear the outfit / armor items you want and completely ignore any passives bonuses you are not getting / getting.   All those mod items you find in loot you can simply throw away and not mod your gear to gain any passive bonuses from them.

[vom]

5 hours ago, BFT2020 said:

 

The thing is, the game is littered with items that you gain bonuses for. 

Thanks Captain Obvious.

[Syphon583]

18 hours ago, vom said:

Thanks Captain Obvious.

It seems like you're incapable of having a mature conversation with people who are bringing up valid points. You aren't the only player who thinks the whole-set bonus isn't the best implementation, but instead of providing constructive feedback or counter arguments, all you do is insult other players. You'd be taken more seriously if you provided convincing reasons as to why you think it's a bad mechanic and/or what a better implementation might be.

 

On 4/16/2024 at 6:41 PM, vom said:

I don't think this is a bad mechanic, merely because I don't like it.
I don't like it, because it is a bad mechanic.

Tomato, Tomoto. This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I get what you are saying, however, merely stating "it is a bad mechanic" doesn't make it true especially since you provide no evidence as to why you think that is.

 

Lastly, one of the lead developers replied to your initial "feedback" with a professional response that contained a valid solution. Hopefully, that solution is implemented along with A22 or shortly after. The least you could do is reply back letting them know if that will resolve your concerns and, if not, provide further constructive feedback.

[Maharin]

I, for one, like tomatoes.  Not big chunks of stewed tomatoes, though.  I'd rather eat toes than those.

[Roland]

Changed the title of this thread to show it is the 1.0 overflow thread. I don't want anyone to think their very important posts about tomatoes and such are residing in some Alpha trash thread.

[Pernicious]

On 4/17/2024 at 10:39 AM, Riamus said:

A cigar shouldn't make you better at buying and selling.  

Not universally true. How you dress can have an impact on how people negotiate with you. Maybe a cigar in specific wouldn't have an effect in this society,  but perhaps a combination of tough guy image and a post apocalyptic luxury (who prioritises tobacco after civilisation has ended) kinda has the same effect.

 

Sample of one and all those disclaimers. But the bike shop near my work has some really high end carbon fibre bikes in the window. Most the time I need something, go in standard IT corporate wear - polo and jeans. I check out those bikes just out of curiosity. One time I go in after an executive briefing,  so in full suit and tie. Within seconds, I had the sales guy asking me what kind of riding I'm into, what my budget is, and he's all over me telling me he can do a package deal for me. Coincidence? No idea. But I suspect since cycling/triathlons was the new golf back then, quite possibly not.