Jump to content

Commonly Suggested Suggestions


Rathlord

Recommended Posts

Animal.zombie is no

like cat hiv its not transferable in the dna through blood ans fluids. So animals.are safe. Ferral works as no humans to curb them anymore.

Now packs.of wild dogs could be more.dangerous than zombies.

A flamethrower would be great against packs of feral animals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Animal.zombie is no

like cat hiv its not transferable in the dna through blood ans fluids. So animals.are safe.

This explanation is factually incorrect. First, it assumes the zombie phenomenon is a disease. This isn't revealed in PZ. Second, FIV is transmitted extremely well via blood and fluids. It just doesn't infect species other than cats. However there are plenty of other pathogens that infect multiple species and are easily transmitted. There are also pathogens that are unsymptomatic in one host species but cause severe symptoms in others.

Ā 

Zombie animals are primarily no go because they're not present in the traditional zombie canon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The game aims to beĀ realism. None of those are.

Why u think learning things are not so realistic? I think we can get a some stats that can be chenged in game like our speed that is in game. If we fight with zombie why we dont learn about them? after 5-50-500 killed zombie i know nothing about zombie anatomy(where to hit to do more dmg or what use to kill faster). Why getting experience in wepon using is not realistic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh so many pages, canĀ“t read them all :)

Ā 

The first page list did include online multiplayer as yes. I hope that the splitscreen option would be done also and full X360 controller support. These two has been said and promised in many instance, but I donĀ“t know if plans have changed? I know that people want online action, but the splitscreen gameplay is a dying species especially on PC. I just would love to hook my laptop on big screen and play with my wife or a friend.

Ā 

Nothing beats a good old fashioned couch coop and PZ would be a KING in that ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My little suggestion conserns about the saving of the game.. Now... I know that people like the idea of permadeath and so do I, but for this once lets think things a little wider shall we, spare with me.. Now.. What if the game consisted two difficulty modes, lets call them (I have to be really creative with this one), mmmh normal and hardcore, yeah, I think I did it.

Ā 

Now... Normal would allow saving anywhere anytime, but only in one save game slot.. So if your character runs into trouble, you would have a chance to change that outcome with that only save game.. Its a small chance, but if you would have the skills, outcome would maybe change, and precious character would survive without too much of damage

Ā 

And for Hardcore, things would be like they are now.. Permadeath, exit from the game and those jaw droppings of misbelief..

Ā 

Now why do I suggest this? Well.. I have played around now many times and longest run is now 6 days and 15 hours.. I really liked my character, choosed traits which I liked, named my hero as allmighty Artyx Hawkins, was extra careful about everything and still got bitten in the leg by zombie which was stucked between trees day before... So.. At least on Normal difficulty mode you could change a counter that was a true suprise. And I donĀ“t mean that the player wasnĀ“t careful enough because I was.. This difficulty level would allow small changes.. And when we are speaking about only one save game slot, these days its still rather small amount.

Ā 

But the difficulty level naming should be little more creative.. I (letz say) sock in that :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will never happen. The devs have said so, it's been discussed ad nauseum. The problem is that regardless of what game mode you play on, it will cause changes in the way the game is played, chance the public perceptions of balance and difficulty, etc.

Ā 

My case and point rests on a similar permadeath game called Tales of Maj'Eyal. The creator there decided to allow people to turn off permanent death 'because we want it and it won't hurt anyone or affect the other players in any way.' Fast forward to today, and Tales of Maj'Eyal Steam page has threads of people complaining that the game is 'too easy' because they can just respawn and always win everything. It would be exactly the same in PZ- without permadeath, not only would players play differently (allowing them to take more risks and thus win more loot), it would also cause them to think of encounters differently (if you fail at taking the 500 zombie horde, who cares? Reload and go down theĀ other street this time so you don't get trapped). Then you have people asking the devs to spend time rebalancing the game just for them in a game mode no one was ever meant to play.

Ā 

I understand why people want this, but much like a parent telling a child to touch a hot stove- sometimes you just have to recognize that the developers know better than you how games work and how they want their game to be. So, feel free to talk and debate about it- after all, that's what these forums are here for, but itĀ willĀ notĀ happen. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point, very good point and even better example..

Ā 

I do understand this and be willing to leave the thought behind.Game is challeging as it is and this IS good way to go forward. I have noticed that besides I die a lot, it just wonĀ“t take gaming pleasure away. I am always willing to start over, be more careful and so on.. So yes, devs do know better.

Ā 

Still crossed my mind about two modes " a chance" and " no chance".. Where " a chance" would save the game every time character sleeps and only in one slot and " no chance " would be like game is know.. In "a chance" if character dies, gamer would have chance to continue playing with that beloved character from the last wake up, BUT it would also force the gamer to make the right decision before going to sleep.. And by decisions I mean how the gamer lived whole day before. But still, this was just an idea and yes, still, devs knows best..

Ā 

I shall leave this idea behind and wait what awesomes the devs shall create

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's worth noting that it's highly likely modders will pick this up at some point and make a save game mode; itĀ really wouldn't be hard to do at all. So for those people who want this kind of thing, it will almost certainly be there soon, it just won't be something sanctioned by the devs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's worth noting that it's highly likely modders will pick this up at some point and make a save game mode; itĀ really wouldn't be hard to do at all. So for those people who want this kind of thing, it will almost certainly be there soon, it just won't be something sanctioned by the devs.

Ā 

And I wouldnĀ“t mind if the game had only this save on exit way.. If we think my suggestion about "a chance" and "no chance" little wider. For balance issues every time you would load up this "save on sleep" save game the world would reset, but only on Zomboid side. Items, bodys and so on would stay as they were, only the Zomboid amount and places (inside/outside) would reset. Now.. What about if the character has traits lucky and unlucky. Lucky choice would bring small change that in neightborhood there would be smaller amount of Zomboids and if you had unlucky trait, things would be other way around.

Ā 

This idea would bring to those traits even bigger impact. Many RPGs has luck trait, but it is usually a trait that the gamer wonĀ“t see in action and rarely feel. In this idea that trait would have a impact that the gamer would see and also feel. Here in Zomboid I always choose trait unlucky, in real life I rarely succeed in anything so that trait is my own personal favorite..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhh, I'm not really sure what you are saying, but its final, no matter which way you twist it, there will never be anything else but perma-death.Ā 

Ā 

I do know.. I just wanted those ideas out of my head so they wouldnĀ“t bother me anymore :) And now IĀ“m free, yay..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so just a few things about this list. Firstly, it's kinda amazing how people tend to add things about special infected. I mean, animals I understand why you'd want them (The first Resident Evil used zombies dogs to scare the hell out of people perfectly) but I also understand why they can't be added. I mean, no one wants a zombie horse easily catching up to them and smushing their brains out. As for the army being mentioned, it's not too extreme to suggest they'd be involved, though if PZ is focusing on small towns and such (i.e. not Washington, New York etc), then you can understand why they'd not care to help the survivors there. We've also got the topic of big weapons like AKs and M16s. This is actually a nice idea, it's america after all, but in reality finding guns anywhere would be pretty hard. Everyone would've grabbed them already and you can bet your soon to be zombified ass they'd grab the big ones first. Finally, my view on sex/rape. Don't get me wrong, a pregnant character and babies/child would add a spin to it all... But would you really want to have to look after them? Wouldn't it get annoying having to run every 5 minutes because the baby's crying its eyes out and luring every zombies within miles of yours house to its dinner bell like lungs? Yeah, sex and what not would be realistic, but the constant threat of having your dingle berries torn off when your moans lure in a stray group of zombies would make any man swear off sex. I know, I know, rape is a common thing in Zombie shows and all, but you have to understand that those creeps do that either before the event or when it's safe. No one is going to get busy with 70 zombies bursting into the house, not even someone into that stuff.

Ā 

So, to sum up, while there are some very nice ideas that COULD be implimented, you have to understand that realism and zombie lore boots most of them to the curb. It sucks, I know, but let me leave you with this thought: If a horde of 100 zombies marched down your street and everyone but you ran for the hills, would you really find anĀ minigun in little Timmy's bedroom?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(tophat)Ā Guys, i think hunger system need some fixes:

Ā 

1.Ā i eat food cooked with 3rd cook lvl for example is -90 hunger,im very well feed now. Then i eat orange -15 hunger and now im slightly feedĀ  :???:

2.Ā In world settings i set real time, and then eat food -100500 hunger, after that i was feed for 2 minutes :mad: Ā where i can find so much food to survive atleast for one day?

+ if i will sleep with real time settings, i can go sleep in real life coz is veeeery very long process in game

Ā 

P.S.: i dont know is that a bugs or game features so i post it here like suggestions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so, the "special" infected that you mean are like "Boss" zombies ?... and it has a [N] @_@ . can you explain why? it would be fun if they implement it that spawns randomly and a single person cant kill it. It would probably add more "thrill" if it chases you or something. or POP up beside you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because PZ is meant to be a serious zombie survival experience; one of the biggest goals of PZ is to avoid all of the ridiculously nonsensical tropes that arcade zombie shooters call home- this is one of them. With the exclusion of the pathogen itself, PZ strives to be as realistic as possible in most cases, and that means "boss" zombies make no sense.

Ā 

And aside from simple development goals, having "boss" zombies also adds nothing to the style of gameplay PZ strives for. This isn't meant to be an action shooter; you should think about your actions, plan carefully, and fight rarely. Including "boss" zombies is directly opposite of the kind of gameplay PZ strives to achieve.

Ā 

I hope I don't come across blunt here- it's something that gets suggested frequently, but it's just not something the developers or the majority of the playerbase want to see happen. Welcome to the PZ forums, and please feel free to ask if you have any other questions!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally i feel that not adding things like children, will make the experience alot worse. Being placed in the care of a child or baby makes survival a whole lot more difficult for you as a player and could add alot of gameplay. sure many may argue that ''they can't add them cuz' it will come off as a child murder sim'' why the hell not i say ? it's a good addition in my eyes and they can just have an off and on switch for it, or make it a rare thing. Not trying to come off as a mad rambeling rager, just your average zombie fanatic wizard, i'd love to hear others view on this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...