How this game is supposed to be played

[Jugginator]

Uh, I've put about 15-20 hours in it. Started in a burnt biome, searched through a couple of the busted house-things with ovens/etc, found 6 cooking pots in the morning/afternoon of day 2. Looted 2 houses and the couple of house-things. Sounds like you need to lay off the crack. I played experimental about 30 mins after they released it and every day since. Just because you're used to sitting deep in an underground bunker shaking and crying in fear of a rabbit doesn't mean everyone does that.

[Sergoros]

Uh, I've put about 15-20 hours in it. Started in a burnt biome, searched through a couple of the busted house-things with ovens/etc, found 6 cooking pots in the morning/afternoon of day 2. Looted 2 houses and the couple of house-things. Sounds like you need to lay off the crack. I played experimental about 30 mins after they released it and every day since. Just because you're used to sitting deep in an underground bunker shaking and crying in fear of a rabbit doesn't mean everyone does that.

 

Sigh, the point was, that you need to use a skill point, to learn the recipe on how to boil an egg. So, if you invested all starter points already, you have no choice, but to get another level. Which would require him to kill ~20 zeds or die of old age mining.

[Jugginator]

Sigh, the point was, that you need to use a skill point, to learn the recipe on how to boil an egg. So, if you invested all starter points already, you have no choice, but to get another level. Which would require him to kill ~20 zeds or die of old age mining.

 

Well, in that case I think I leveled up to level 2 in about 10-15 minutes tops. Saw I needed to lvl up the cooking skill to get the basics, so I bought it. Idk I don't see the hate on it.

[Roland]

Sigh, the point was, that you need to use a skill point, to learn the recipe on how to boil an egg. So, if you invested all starter points already, you have no choice, but to get another level. Which would require him to kill ~20 zeds or die of old age mining.

 

THAT was your choice. You had six points to put where you wanted to establish your char's starting point. I get the point about not liking that killing 20 zeds can lead to learning how to boil an egg but please don't pretend that there is no choice except to play it that way. If that bugs you then spend one of the first points on cooking and then kill 20 zeds to spend the next earned point on a combat perk. Now the continuity of your universe will be preserved...

 

Honestly I just play the game and carry out my own personal objectives until night comes. Sometimes I notice I have three points to spend on perks and I honestly can't pinpoint exactly how I got them because I've been doing a ton of different activities. Sure, intellectually I realize I must have killed a ton of zombies but I wasn't hunting them down for points. I was clearing POIs and looting them. I was harvesting wood and stone and clay and killed a wandering horde that came near. I was crafting cobblestone and making flagstone and organizing my loot into my crates and then went downstairs to kill some zombies beating on the first story walls of the brick building I was in. Then I'm sitting in my hideout at night on the fourth day and looking at how to spend my points and perhaps the cooking perk is what I decide upon.

 

If you are going around and only hunting zombies to get points because that is the most efficient ways to get points and points are all you are focused on then that is yet another choice you are making in how you are playing the game. But it is in no way shape or form a forced condition or the only way to play.

[LordoftheMoo]

THAT was your choice. You had six points to put where you wanted to establish your char's starting point. <snip>

 

Not quibbling about the rest but... I only got 5 points from the starter quests? Didn't see a 6th (which now matters a lot), should I have?

[Roland]

Trader makes six.

[giKoN]

Well, in that case I think I leveled up to level 2 in about 10-15 minutes tops. Saw I needed to lvl up the cooking skill to get the basics, so I bought it. Idk I don't see the hate on it.

 

The point was, the likelihood of having learned to boil an egg during your time as a teenager is a lot higher than from a zombie telling you the magic secret of eggs as is implied by the level gating. Like every zombie holds a fraction of a point of every secret skill with him.

[Gazz]

However, stating just because the number of players is higher in total that that means that the game now is more popular than at a16 is a statistical fallacy <- which is what has repeatedly been done here in recent days. It is being played. That's as much as you can say. You can't even say people like it or dislike it. It's new, even a lot of people who don't like what they see are playing it right now and giving it second, third and fourth chances. Some will come around, some won't. But you can't make any definitive statement from the numbers presented.

Numbers are only numbers. People will put any kind of meaning into them.

 

My interpretation is that one player has the choice of playing similar-ish games like F76, RDR2 or 7DTD.

If that player chooses 7DTD then it's one concurrent player on the statistics.

 

Your interpretation is that a lot of players who don't like A17 are playing A17. That's cool. Same number, different meaning.

 

 

Like every zombie holds a fraction of a point of every secret skill with him.

Actually, that's exactly how RL zombies work.

[Gazz]

I suggested in another thread, and i'm gonna make a post tonight on it, but I feel like TFP should create a new menu option for spawning difficulty and use that to effect the gamestage rather then zombie difficulty. This way people can have tougher day to day zombies but not have it effect the spawning so that your getting radiated and ferals so fast

Until well past release this is not a useful way to develop a game because it ties up balancing in a spaghetti of options.

[giKoN]

Actually, that's exactly how RL zombies work.

 

Been a while since I encountered them. Mostly only after a long night out with drinks and then those "zombies" were talking rather rubbish.

[Shiana]

Then you were lucky. All zombies i encounteredd only looked down at their smart cellphones and did not even talk to me unless i bumped into them. But even then - just a 1 sec glimpse at me, and eyes straight back to their phones. I don't think on bloodmoon they will outsmart my defenses (unless the defenses are embedded in my smarthome system, and they just disable it via their smartphones......)

[LordoftheMoo]

Trader makes six.

 

Ah, OK. My trader was >5km away and I had a few unspent points from leveling when I Superman'd over to him to complete the quest. I didn't notice that it added one. Thanks!

[Tick Turd]

I really thought there would be threads discussing new strategies and sharing ideas on how to survive horde night. I didn’t expect defeat threads where people would give up after less than a week with the game saying “It’s impossible!”

 

We didn't think we'd have to kill 500 zombies before we can gain enough XP to craft anything useful, build a base, etc. Strategy is now also severely gated by the level requirement for most things. Not to mention your "game stage" seems to increase much faster than your level. Which means 7 day hordes are going to be much harder than most players are equipped to survive. I've already had friends quit because they don't feel like they can progress fast enough to have a chance. A challenge is nice, but when its so hard that it seems pointless, people are going to feel defeated.

[Moldy Bread]

Kill zombies so you can unlock perks to help you kill zombies. Don't bother building a base as it's pointless, it will just get torn apart in seconds. Don't really need to bother looting either, just find a gun store and become a walking arsenal on day one. Once you can graft guns then just kill zombies. Always have beer on hand because you will take three steps and become exhausted, die of hunger again and gain as there are no animals. That's all there is really, the only way to get anywhere in this game is to kill zombies and choose the right perks or you are screwed. That's now the only way to play it. Find lots of guns, they are everywhere now and sell them to buy whatever you need.

 

Chances are though the gamestage will outpace you as you desperately grind to learn how to build a forge or boil an egg.

[Sergoros]

THAT was your choice. You had six points to put where you wanted to establish your char's starting point. I get the point about not liking that killing 20 zeds can lead to learning how to boil an egg but please don't pretend that there is no choice except to play it that way. If that bugs you then spend one of the first points on cooking and then kill 20 zeds to spend the next earned point on a combat perk. Now the continuity of your universe will be preserved...

 

Honestly I just play the game and carry out my own personal objectives until night comes. Sometimes I notice I have three points to spend on perks and I honestly can't pinpoint exactly how I got them because I've been doing a ton of different activities. Sure, intellectually I realize I must have killed a ton of zombies but I wasn't hunting them down for points. I was clearing POIs and looting them. I was harvesting wood and stone and clay and killed a wandering horde that came near. I was crafting cobblestone and making flagstone and organizing my loot into my crates and then went downstairs to kill some zombies beating on the first story walls of the brick building I was in. Then I'm sitting in my hideout at night on the fourth day and looking at how to spend my points and perhaps the cooking perk is what I decide upon.

 

If you are going around and only hunting zombies to get points because that is the most efficient ways to get points and points are all you are focused on then that is yet another choice you are making in how you are playing the game. But it is in no way shape or form a forced condition or the only way to play.

Perk doesnt mention, that it gives you boiling egg recipe btw. As any normal human of average iq, I assumed I am not playing a retarded character, who can't even boil an egg without help of 20 dead zeds. I honestly had the moment of shock, when I found a pot, but wasnt able to boil an egg in it. Chef should be about complex recipes, like stews. But thats just my imho.

 

And, to top it off, I was just explaing Giks pov. For me it wasnt a big problem, unlike one of my friends (not Gik, we are playing in different teams), I am a scavenger in my team, so killing zeds is basically my job anyway. My builder friend, on the other hand...lets just say, he is not very excited about having to go hunt zeds, instead of mining and building our new base. (cause zeds are the only fast way to learn anything in the game).

 

Giks point was, let me explain it again. That the ONLY reasonable way to learn anything, is to kill enough zeds. Which is ridiculous.

 

///p.s. not really a problem worth arguing over tho. Xp rates would be changed on the server I would play anyway. I mostly joined the discussion, cause I wanted to explain the point to other guy. Didnt really need a mod accusing me of being dishonest.

[Poojam]

Numbers are only numbers. People will put any kind of meaning into them.

 

My interpretation is that one player has the choice of playing similar-ish games like F76, RDR2 or 7DTD.

If that player chooses 7DTD then it's one concurrent player on the statistics.

 

Your interpretation is that a lot of players who don't like A17 are playing A17. That's cool. Same number, different meaning.

 

 

 

Actually, that's exactly how RL zombies work.

 

No. He was referring to Roland's posts in another thread stating that the player count has ballooned with the release of A17 and there are a lot of positive reviews.

 

In actuality, me and several others pointed out that the game is on sale for $9 over a holiday weekend, and they just had a well orchestrated PR campaign with streamers. But perhaps most importantly, when you buy the game in Steam and install it, you are playing A16.4 by default. I suspect the majority of players aren't even playing A17. I reviewed over 400 of the positive reviews from Nov 21-24 and could only find 26 that indicated to me they were playing A17. When you sort the reviews by "Most helpful", all of the reviews are from players with >300 hours played, are negative, and explicitly state A17 ruined the game for them.

 

Roland later recanted his statements about the player counts justifying A17. There is simply not enough public data to say that.

 

I have requested additional data in several locations on the forums. At a minimum, I would love to see how many people are actually playing A17.

 

I know Madmole is aware of this, because he even went to the trouble of responding to one of the negative reviews a few days ago. He indicated that the negative review was basically a whine and the guy hadn't played it enough. Which is quite appalling imo.

[Kosmic Kerman]

Read Gazz’s post again. It’s understated but he completely gets it.

 

Edit - Also Roland (and other posters) are not always responding just to one person or one point. There’s a history here from A16e and the A17 dev thread that colors how they are responding.

[Poojam]

Read Gazz’s post again. It’s understated but he completely gets it.

 

Edit - Also Roland (and other posters) are not always responding just to one person or one point. There’s a history here from A16e and the A17 dev thread that colors how they are responding.

 

Mmkay. I'll take your word for it. He is usually the numbers guy, so I was smh for even having to explain it.

[Poojam]

Mmkay. I'll take your word for it. He is usually the numbers guy, so I was smh for even having to explain it.

 

edit - I wanted to elaborate on the Steam Review that Madmole commented on. I find it amusing that 243 people found this review helpful and 27 people found it funny. That's a pretty high score all things considered. I'm not going to comment on the review, but I do find it arrogant that Madmole would reply like he did. First impressions do matter, even in video games.

 

 

FadeXF Posted: Nov 20 @ 7:08 pm

"I used to be a very solid YES to recommend this game.

 

This developer spent over a YEAR to get the latest update out - no exagerations: literally a YEAR for an EARLY ACCESS game.... and what do they do? They COMPLETELY rewrite the entire basis of the existing designs. They go from a really fun, and fair design to cheap and unfun - for example prior to this latest update a player would have been able to develop a base, and then dig downwards under their base - set up traps along the outside of their base - and then spend the nights mining. This was a stable strategy since inception of the game. While it may be considered cheesy: it allowed a player to be active at night time instead of essentially AFKing for several minutes of time to basically wait out the nights. Now the designer has made it so that zombies will dig down towards any type of sounds - like they can hear a 50 blocks/tiles under themselves... and then have super human strength to just dig you out.

 

So that entire play style is now completely stripped from the game... ok - moving on then: so now you start populating existing buildings - but now you find out that the designer has made every single building in the game a major "event" - in which there are major number of zombies present - ok so you very carefully and painfully slowly pick your way through every single house... guess what though? It takes about 10 shots to kill each zombie - and when they hit you somehow you take 1-2 hits and suffer a "bleed" effect which can be anywhere from 3 secs upwards of like 10 seconds... essentially you have 100 life and take quickly 20-60 damage and then suffer a debuff that drains your life at like 2 damage per second.... it literally means you will die: a LOT.

 

The curve they had for playing start to "end game" used to be really quick - and I agree: it was too fast. However a combination now of making stamina regenerate a LOT slower mixed in with the zombies damaging the tilesets SO HARD makes it so the investment into building a base completely NOT WORTH IT - so they have basically done away with base building.

 

The new stamina system really makes it exaustively slow - tediously boring - and completely unfun - combine that with crazy numbers of overtuned mobs in "event" style buildings, and allowing zombies/mobs around you to key in to you on a virtual hum of sound makes the game insanely overly hard. (Consider I died more in 4 hours of play in the latest A17 build vs an entire 4 months of play.)

 

Clearly they want players to play this game a very set 1 possible way: nomadic survivor with absolutely no desire to claim any part of the world they are in. Ok cool: so good luck then with that - and way to cut a very large % of the population out of your game.

 

Terrible developer - clearly a chip on their shoulder who only listens to a tiny % of playerbase - making egotistical AND VERY SLOW TO PRODUCE RESULTS even to begin with... I cannot possibly recommend this game now sadly."

Madmole Responded: Nov 22 @ 10:10am

 

"This is a complete knee jerk reaction to the first day of an experimental build. Every point you complained about can be rectified through making wise choices in the perk trees and turning down the difficulty while you are relearning to play the game"

[badger2013]

I started with A10 and over time -- and even before A17 -- the trend has been toward making base building less and less rewarding in terms of time and resources spent. If your goal is to simply survive, you're probably better off playing the game as if you're a nomad rather than a base builder. This isn't inherently bad, but at least from my perspective it's unfortunate since the base building is the main feature that I enjoy the most in the game.

[Kosmic Kerman]

@poojam

 

1) Devs are people too

 

2) He’s not wrong

 

In my playthrough I spent every night mining without being attacked by zombies. I also had no problem clearing zombies from POIs.

 

I’m sorry but I have no patience for people writing rants in a review on the first or second version of an experimental. This is how players lose access to open experimental builds. It also shows a huge sense of entitlement that I find very unappealing.

[Poojam]

@poojam

 

1) Devs are people too

 

2) He’s not wrong

 

In my playthrough I spent every night mining without being attacked by zombies. I also had no problem clearing zombies from POIs.

 

I’m sorry but I have no patience for people writing rants in a review on the first or second version of an experimental. This is how players lose access to open experimental builds. It also shows a huge sense of entitlement that I find very unappealing.

 

Yea. I agree. He's not completely wrong. But it's still an arrogant and unprofessional thing to do. Seeing as how so many people found it helpful, I'm clearly not the only one who thinks so either.

[Kosmic Kerman]

Yea. I agree. He's not completely wrong. But it's still an arrogant and unprofessional thing to do. Seeing as how so many people found it helpful, I'm clearly not the only one who thinks so either.

 

And I’m sure that’s exactly why he responded to it, because it’s unfair for early experimental and inaccurate. In my opinion, if that poster has an issue with the experimental the poster can post in the steam discussions or here. If the poster still has an issue after it goes stable the poster should feel free to update their review. But that’s just me. I would never post a steam review about an experimental. Of course I also would never post a review that wasn’t even-handed and fair.

[Sergoros]

And I’m sure that’s exactly why he responded to it, because it’s unfair for early experimental and inaccurate. In my opinion, if that poster has an issue with the experimental the poster can post in the steam discussions or here. If the poster still has an issue after it goes stable the poster should feel free to update their review. But that’s just me. I would never post a steam review about an experimental. Of course I also would never post a review that wasn’t even-handed and fair.

 

I mostly agree with you about the review on experimental build thing. Except of 1 thing... of game representatives on the forum repeating themselves over and over of how this experimental is exactly how they want their game to be, and if somebody is unhappy about it, they should just find some way to live with the changes.

 

But, it was mostly on the first days of experimental. Last 2 days replies seem to be more even handed on the forum. There is now talk about changes and balancing, which is much better, than "just deal with the changes". I can understand if people would write a review after hearing answers on first days. Especialy after Roland bringing numbers and how reviews are now so positive, so dont complain git gud.

 

Hmm, makes you think. When people bring the matter of reviews changing from mixed to positive, it is somehow a good thing, and shows that game is on the right path. But. When you bring negative review, you suddenly hear "HEY! You can't do that! The game is still in experimental!!!!!"

 

Only positive reviews are allowed in experimental versions, huh?

[Reth]

And I’m sure that’s exactly why he responded to it, because it’s unfair for early experimental and inaccurate. In my opinion, if that poster has an issue with the experimental the poster can post in the steam discussions or here. If the poster still has an issue after it goes stable the poster should feel free to update their review. But that’s just me. I would never post a steam review about an experimental. Of course I also would never post a review that wasn’t even-handed and fair.

 

MM's response was not "This is experimental, we may change it in the stable release based on the feedback from the community, please, wait till then before reviewing our game", his response was literally "Git gud". A response I'd expect from an emotionally unstable teen fanboi, but not from the company leader. My hopes that TFP would actually listen to our feedback went down after reading it.