Thoughts on a different design path

[bloom_meister]

I wanted to start by talking about dynamic player driven gameplay experiences and should probably define what I mean by that as i will be referring back to it a few times. With dynamic gameplay the world around you reacts to the players actions, I will use online MMO's as an example which I am sure many of you will have played, something like WoW, just so you get the concept.

 

Now with MMO's, generally speaking, you can wander where you want in the world but this freedom comes at a price. In the starter areas the enemies are lower level, the loot is low quality and the danger is generally of your own making, the developers tend not to suprise you with dangerous encounters and everything is about learning the game.

Of course you can wander out of those starter areas into the low to mid levels areas of the world and this is where the risk v reward aspects really start to kick in. Most games have some form of system where you can assess how tough the enemies are by either visual clues, sound or specifically noting their levels/toughness. If you and your friends want to take on something much tougher than you then the risk of defeat is high, but, so is the reward, because these enemies will have equipment/rewards that are of a better quality than you could find in those easy starter areas.

 

This type of progression is well tested over hundreds of games, works well to incentivise players and is excellent in rewarding players who play well together and cooperate no matter if its a pve or pvp environment.

 

Now lets imagine applying this to 7DTD, I played a very good mod recently where you viewed the world as a ring (yes I know the world is now square, thanks TFP..) and this ring had concentric circles that radiated outwards. The inner ring was zombies never run, PvP was off and as you moved outwards the zombie strength increased until you got to the final ring and it had new boss type zombies with high HP, much better damage, who hunted you actively and there were better POI's to be found with better loot. This was of course just an A16 mod so there was a limit to what the very talented modder could do but imagine a world where rather than the enemies you meet being determined on your level/gamestage they were, just like in life (and MMO's), determined by where you where.

 

Imagine that the radiated wastelands required full rad gear, were populated by swarms of crazed bandits (think mad max) and held both dungeons and NPC bases holding equipment that you could find nowhere else. And even to get to this area you had to travel through multiple other areas of increasing difficulty so that the journey itself was challenging, hard and rewarding.

 

Now imagine taking all that on at level 10 with a couple of friends, sure its possible, more likely though that you would create staging areas on the way to it and build supply bases etc but, if you really wanted to, you could go for it on day 1.

Thats a player driven dynamic world, YOU choose the risk v reward youre comfortable with, YOU encounter enemies not based upon your level, an arbitrary number at best but instead on how difficult the bit of the world you inhabit is. To give you a real world example, if you are a Special forces member of the armed forces and live in New York you dont meet armed insurgents wanting to kill you around every street corner (example does not apply to Chicago...) but if you deploy to Afghanistan then yes, you are gonna meet a lot of scary and heavily armed enemies, it doesnt matter how tough and well trained you are, the world reacts to your location, not your skills.

 

The above is meant to illustrate the fact that TFP continue to remove player choices, to take away the freedom that is implicit in a sandbox game and force you into design culdesacs that remove player choice and freedom.

 

If we were given a true dynamic player choice driven world we could write our own game stories and make our own fun but repeatedly we are given meaningless roadblocks such as being level X to learn how to make a chemistry station, i mean seriously, what about that geek guy who doesnt want to fight or build or explore but gets a kick out of playing with his chemistry set all day? why does he have to spend a load of points on stuff he doesnt need AND get to level 60 before building it? the answer my friends is to block your progress with arbitrary timesinks, but thats a different topic...

 

TFP already have the technology to spawn different entities based on conditions, using my example location could be a condition (eg distance from centre) and could then give you encounters of a difficulty based on your risk v reward choices rather than just ''oh you're level 100 here have 2 radiated cops'' even when you're in that player driven hub in the middle of the map where it makes no sense at all.

 

POI spawns can be handled in the same way when doing map generation, just add rarity and type based on distance from centre so that sure you MIGHT get that bandit camp of doom 5k out but its unlikely, however when youre 10k out you best be damn sure youre ready cause they are all over the place.

 

Let the player make their own story, if they want to spend every bit of experience/perk points on being the most amazing builder ever, let them! if they want to specialise on hunting and tracking to the exclusion of all else, let them.. These kind of choice do not impact anyone else at all, ever, in any way. So what if your whole team skills up like rambo and starves to death because no-one can light a fire? its a learning curve right, next time one of them is going to spread those skills around a bit.

 

Grind..grind.....grind...

 

TFP have done everything in their power for the last 2 years to slow your game down, crafting, harvesting, making mats, making end game equipment, finding end game equipment, the list goes on. Every aspect of the game has been slowed down to add more grind because they have no end game content and they continue down this blinkered path trying to solve a problem that does not exist. Yeah that's right, the problem doesn't exist.

 

Back in the early Alphas people got their axe, shovel, sniper etc pretty fast, there were no quality levels, everything was green, everything did the same damage and had the same usability (tools and weapons and amour, though armour didnt work..). And yet, for all this lack of progression and end game content, people loved the game and played it to death! Why? because they made their own entertainment and the longevity of their gameplay did not depend on getting the next tier of shovel but instead they played because they made their own fun, they built epic bases, gardens, towers, they terraformed, they cooperated, they raided they made pretty forests and captured deer to put in their gardens.

 

None of this required endgame content, none of it needed tiers of weapons and or level locked perks. TFP worried about something that the players generally didnt notice because they were too busy, having fun. Rather than slow the players down to stop them reaching the end game in terms of tools, weapons and building they SHOULD be giving players more freedom in their journey and not focus on the destination. Now sure, I like new toys same as anyone else and have asked for them over the years but that doesnt drive me to play, a lot of my friends would say that once you get to purple Q600 everything THEN the real game begins because you can explore, build fight or whatever without having to worry about that stuff anymore, you can write your own story at that point.

 

When you create grind and lock things behind levels you force players into doing UNfun things so that they can have the tools to start creating their own fun, much better to not worry about how they get those things and let them get to the point of creating their own fun earlier!

 

In todays game you will never know the sheer excitement and thrill of opening a loot container and pulling out a high end rifle or axe on day 1 because TFP insist you spend 56 points on QJ3 before that becomes a realistic probability and by that time, guess what, you dont need the damn purple things because you can MAKE them yourself, see? you are taking away fun and excitement and replacing it with pointless grind aimed at fixing a problem that is not there.

 

If you want to make this game the best it could be and in line with your 'original' vision then the best thing you and the rest of the team at TFP could do would be to stop all dev work for the next month and have everyone go and play the game for that month with other people on both pve and pvp servers, live and breath it, understand what people like and what they dont like, see the frustrations yourself, see what works and THEN come back and make your list for the next release, i guarantee that would be your most popular release ever.

[JCrook1028]

You mean the devs should all actually play the game? Blasphemy!

 

Yea yea, I've heard it before, "some" devs do play and they are the ones that decide certain things. But to me, if the main dev's aren't the playing the game but for a few weeks a year the game will always lack vision and direction and will continue to stagger it's way drunkenly along, changing direction violently every Alpha. Thank goodness the game is awesome enough to counter a lot of this, imagine what it could be if it didn't have to.

[pApA^LeGBa]

Or the grind is there before they make the endgame content. You can´t put in everything at once when developing a game. Like there is bandits coming for example and surely other things also that will make you use end game content.

 

If you limit yourself to only progress in levels and quality, you sure miss out fun. But that´s just a matter of playstyle. You can do how you please, you do not need to grind. not yet that is. Tere is absolutly no need to go past green tbh. At least no need to rush there.

 

The real limitation from TFP side is things like not beeing able to choose the spawnrate of the Z´s yourself anymore.

[meganoth]

In todays game you will never know the sheer excitement and thrill of opening a loot container and pulling out a high end rifle or axe on day 1 because TFP insist you spend 56 points on QJ3 before that becomes a realistic probability and by that time, guess what, you dont need the damn purple things because you can MAKE them yourself, see? you are taking away fun and excitement and replacing it with pointless grind aimed at fixing a problem that is not there.

 

If you want to make this game the best it could be and in line with your 'original' vision then the best thing you and the rest of the team at TFP could do would be to stop all dev work for the next month and have everyone go and play the game for that month with other people on both pve and pvp servers, live and breath it, understand what people like and what they dont like, see the frustrations yourself, see what works and THEN come back and make your list for the next release, i guarantee that would be your most popular release ever.

 

Interesting analysis and some of your points are worth discussing. But honestly, with "see the frustrations yourself" you assume that your taste and the taste you see in your microcosmos of the 7days world is the majority taste. My microcosmos looks differently and available evidence seems to contradict your view. For example people who think the game starts to get interesting when you have Q600 gear seem to be in the minority here in the forum. Not that that is conclusive, but an indication, surely.

 

One problem I have with your opinion is that "the sheer excitement and thrill of opening a loot container and pulling out a high end rifle" happens exactly once in a game and after that rifle and rifle part you find after that has lost any excitement or thrill. Do I want to have a 100%-thrill once or a 70%-thrill seven times in a game? I would choose the latter because such excitement fades fast. And finding a Q600 rifle isn't so legendary that you talk about it for years, not really.

 

Essentially this discussion is once again about the fact that 7days is a hybrid of rpg, sandbox, survival... (according to "original" vision AFAIK) and you want a pure sandbox.

[asmosnuts]

It seems to be the hybrid bit that gets missed a lot. There are very few games with such freedom in play styles and options within the game that let you play exactly how you want. We all have our idea of the perfect game for us.

This game has massively improved and still is improving every time. Never had better value for money from a game. There are so many ways to play and mods adding more all the time.

Grind is part of the game and much less than many others with options to focus on what you want. Making it too easy to get what you really want/need is defeating the challenge of the game. Rng and your luck in game are great for offsetting this. There are balance/progression issues but im sure theyre working on it.

[SylenThunder]

Imagine that they are designing the game they want to make, and it's not the game you want to make.

 

This is still in Alpha.

This is not an MMO.

This is not finished.

 

Bloom, you're entitled to your own opinion, but this thread has little point to it.

[asmosnuts]

Well said that man\woman\person of indeterminate gender!

[bloom_meister]

Imagine that they are designing the game they want to make, and it's not the game you want to make.

 

This is still in Alpha.

This is not an MMO.

This is not finished.

 

Bloom, you're entitled to your own opinion, but this thread has little point to it.

 

So in your opinion, discussion on design direction is off topic ? It could hardly be more on topic Sylen but judging by your recent actions such as misquoting me on other forums in order to slant and spin a discussion in a particular direction (yes I was told) this would seem par for the course. Note for you, people afraid of open and civil discussion (which this is) usually have something to hide or cannot justify their actions.

 

Peace.

[Gamida]

Imagine that they are designing the game they want to make, and it's not the game you want to make.

 

This is still in Alpha.

This is not an MMO.

This is not finished.

 

Bloom, you're entitled to your own opinion, but this thread has little point to it.

 

To me if they are making a game to sell and to make a profit then shouldn't they listen to what their customers are saying?

 

Lets say I was going to make a chocolate chip cookie. I make a cookie and have lots of customer that like it. They come in regularly to buy one. Now I think to myself "You know, I like crunchy stuff so I think I will add a cup full of gravel to the mix." So I do and next day my sales drop and I get some customers coming in and saying they are not fond of the new cookie. Wouldn't it be in my best interest to listen to them and change the recipe. If I still want crunchy I could try a different ingrediant and see how it works out or maybe have a suggestion box which doesn't mean I have to do it but gives me some different ideas to mull over of things I know people like. Just saying "Nope, it's my cookie I will make it my way, take it or leave it." It seems to me a lot of people will leave it.

 

I know this is not a good comparison because people only need one copy of the game and you can sell same person cookies over and over, but these are people that will recommend the game to their friends or buy copies for their family and friends.

 

I also know there may be many flaws in my thoughts here but that is just how it seemed to me at the moment and the translation between my brain and the keyboard may not be in sync so don't shoot the messenger even though you may think the messengers message sucks.

[Jedo]

To me if they are making a game to sell and to make a profit then shouldn't they listen to what their customers are saying?

 

You assume that they want to make a profit, specifically at the expense of compromising what they want to do. They may not. (I suspect, instead, that they think that what they want to do will be popular on its own.)

 

Lets say I was going to make a chocolate chip cookie. I make a cookie and have lots of customer that like it. They come in regularly to buy one. Now I think to myself "You know, I like crunchy stuff so I think I will add a cup full of gravel to the mix." So I do and next day my sales drop and I get some customers coming in and saying they are not fond of the new cookie. Wouldn't it be in my best interest to listen to them and change the recipe. If I still want crunchy I could try a different ingrediant and see how it works out or maybe have a suggestion box which doesn't mean I have to do it but gives me some different ideas to mull over of things I know people like. Just saying "Nope, it's my cookie I will make it my way, take it or leave it." It seems to me a lot of people will leave it.

 

I know this is not a good comparison...

 

An improvement to your metaphor would be adding a crunchy ingredient that belongs in cookies rather than something that not even mental health patients would accept in a cookie. (Seriously, it isn't as though TFP has made a change to their game which is completely foreign to the world of video games or to this genre.) Let's say, you add pecans. Now, a significant portion of your first customers don't like pecans in their cookies and they tell you so. On the other hand, some of those first customers tell you that they love the new addition of pecans. Later, some new customers come in (completely unaware of any changes), and they say that they love pecans in their cookies. Some new customers also come in wanting to try the new cookies, but upon learning that they have pecans in them, just go away without purchasing anything.

 

What's the result? You now make a cookie that you want to make, and you still have people that enjoy it. The same people or as many people? Maybe not.

[Roland]

I think that players can STILL make their own stories as much as they ever could before.

 

I think the grind isn't so bad if you like the journey of progression. If all you care about is getting to the top of progression as soon as is possible in order to gain advantage over others on the server or even just because you only like playing with best gear and being the strongest you can get and dominating then the grind has got to be a huge irritation because it stands in your way.

 

People complain that TFP keeps artificially slowing the game down. If you play at a slow pace already it isn't really noticeable.

[Gipothegip]

@bloom_meister I agree with this. I like the idea of area based difficulty and think that should play a role in progression.

 

I'm not totally against the progression we have now (in terms of developing player skills), but I think on top of the points you made having some areas pose different levels of threat with loot to match would make exploring in this game more worthwhile and much more interesting.

 

I've been suggesting something in various discussions on this forum for years. Things such as area based difficulty, and a more dynamic loot system are something I'd like to see in this game. The cities that spawned at the origin of the map were a step in the right direction, IMO.

 

Albeit I will note that I think it should be less predictable where things are going to be difficult. Rather than difficulty be based on distance relative to the origin of the map, I think it should be region based and quasirandom (perhaps in a way that difficulty levels mesh appropriately), with appropriate ques so the player can judge what they're getting into.

[Gamida]

You assume that they want to make a profit, specifically at the expense of compromising what they want to do. They may not. (I suspect, instead, that they think that what they want to do will be popular on its own.)

 

 

 

An improvement to your metaphor would be adding a crunchy ingredient that belongs in cookies rather than something that not even mental health patients would accept in a cookie. (Seriously, it isn't as though TFP has made a change to their game which is completely foreign to the world of video games or to this genre.) Let's say, you add pecans. Now, a significant portion of your first customers don't like pecans in their cookies and they tell you so. On the other hand, some of those first customers tell you that they love the new addition of pecans. Later, some new customers come in (completely unaware of any changes), and they say that they love pecans in their cookies. Some new customers also come in wanting to try the new cookies, but upon learning that they have pecans in them, just go away without purchasing anything.

 

What's the result? You now make a cookie that you want to make, and you still have people that enjoy it. The same people or as many people? Maybe not.

 

ok let me make it a shorter way.

 

Baker: "I am making the cookies the way I want no matter what you say. So ♥♥♥♥ you and the horse you rode in on"

 

Your comment also makes sense even though it is different than what I said.

 

There can be many ways to do something and they can all be right and wrong at same time. Isn't that weird.

 

Some are saying "Put x in, it can always be modded out." Some are saying "Take x out, it can always be modded in." In truth they are probably both right. I am lazy though. I like for my stuff to be in so I don't have to touch anything. Just start game and play. Maybe lots of people are like that and that is why they want something the way they do so bad. Maybe the only way for peace is to have a settings menu that spans 40 pages with every kind of tweak they can imagine and another 50 pages for whatever they didn't.

 

I dunno. I just want to drink my coffee and play my game.

[Jedo]

I dunno. I just want to drink my coffee and play my game.

 

I get that.

[Roland]

Sometimes a title is a little too controversial. This is the Pimps house so starting a thread with the title proclaiming that TFP is doing it all wrong is going to be flame war waiting to happen. I changed the title to something less flame baity and moved it back to general discussions to see how it goes but if it ignites then it will just be closed.

 

I'm positive that Sylen moved it when he saw the original title. So as a compromise I changed the title and I'm giving fair warning that as a discussion piece for alternative design choices that might benefit the game it's fine to proceed. But if it turns into insulting the developers or making them out to be stupid or incompetent and that starts an argument between defenders and attackers then I guess we will all see that Sylen was right in the first place.

 

Want to show Sylen he was wrong? Then play nice and be respectful in your analysis of the choices TFP have made and how you would do things differently. Even if you disagree with design choices that TFP made or if you come on here to disagree with the alternative design choices that the OP or someone else proposes you can point out the alleged flaws with good grace and without toxicity.

[bloom_meister]

Reasonable and fair as usual, thankyou Roland.

[asmosnuts]

What we are really doing is killing time ill a17 . TFP are making their game their way in their time.

If they tried to act on every complaint/suggestion the game would NEVER be released.

I'm sure if someone came up with a brilliant idea they hadn't thought of, it would be given due consideration.

Ask 20 people what they want and you get close to 20 different answers. Cant please everyone, nor should they try. We all have things we would change, given the chance but still enjoy the game regardless.

[Sinz]

I didn't read the entire OP because wall of text.

I agree that TFP block our progress with arbitrary timesinks but I also have faith that this will have improved in A17.

I disagree with your opinion that we're losing freedom of dynamic gameplay experience and that TFP are trying to force players into one playstyle

 

But I do like your idea of difficulty defined by area.

I would love to see TFP add this to the game.

 

Currently in A16 there are a few prefabs that have significantly more difficult sleeper volumes and will spawn ferals and zombie cops for low level players, but they are few and far between.

I have faith that TFP will make more prefabs of that nature with A17 and beyond.

TFP have also mentioned that they plan to make an irradiated biome as a more difficult area much like you described, it will come. This would cater for higher difficulty environment and zombies.

 

I will expand on the idea of difficulty defined by areas with suggestions:

Looking to the future when NPCs like settlers and bandits are in, I think they should have factions that player can get negative and positive reputation with.

By default players would have significantly negative reputation with all bandit factions.

I imagine there would be multiple divisions of bandit factions that spread across the map.

Some factions would have more difficult bandits than other factions (and subsequently have more reputation making them harder or impossible to friend)

The map would have a toggle button that shows color coded highlights over faction territory.

 

BAM

Difficulty by area.

Hope you like it.

[Wamplet]

I made a similar post in another thread about them being out of touch of their own game because they seem to only play it in creative godmode and have a knack for making complex solutions for problems that don't exist to us, but to them for some reason.

[meganoth]

I made a similar post in another thread about them being out of touch of their own game because they seem to only play it in creative godmode and have a knack for making complex solutions for problems that don't exist to us, but to them for some reason.

 

Generalizations. MM uses godmode because he does graphics, others playtest what they are working on.

 

And they are doing the game they want, not the game you want. Obviously that makes the problems they see different from the problems you see.