View Poll Results: Which of these two main features are the more important in your mind

Voters
141. You may not vote on this poll
  • A fully destructible voxel world that can be mined and deformed block by block.

    120 85.11%
  • Huge numbers of zombies that can overwhelm players by their horrific horde size.

    21 14.89%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 73

Thread: Which is the more important main feature of the game II

  1. #1
    Super Moderator Roland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    On a Zipline
    Posts
    11,061
    Rep Power
    2

    Which is the more important main feature of the game II

    Despite my last poll being called the dumbest poll ever it resulted in a lot of conversation and even gave he who shall not be named a few more excuses to bloat his post count by several more...

    So here is another knife fight in a telephone booth* between two big features. This one is a bit different than the last one as we've been told that they are mutually exclusive. If this one turns out to be as dumb as the last one I shall be pleased.


    *Millenials, think Tardis except its not bigger on the inside than it is on the outside.
    Last edited by Roland; 02-18-2018 at 05:41 AM.

  2. #2
    Guppycurian Forum Whore Guppycur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Houston-ish, Texas
    Posts
    17,819
    Rep Power
    1
    Well you can't have two dumbest polls ever, so I guess you're safe.

  3. #3
    Super Moderator Roland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    On a Zipline
    Posts
    11,061
    Rep Power
    2
    That's true!!!


    I'm interested to see how many would be willing to give up voxel terrain in favor of truly massive hordes of zombies. I'm torn, myself, and will wait to vote to see how people respond and hopefully my own view will solidify.
    Last edited by Roland; 02-18-2018 at 05:53 AM.

  4. #4
    Tracker
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    161
    Rep Power
    0
    I want a destructible world that theoretically I could totally destroy down the bedrock, leaving my sleeping bag the only block in existence, save my tired out self.

    I would like more zombies than there are now though.

  5. #5
    Reconstructionist RestInPieces's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    619
    Rep Power
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Roland View Post
    Despite my last poll being called the dumbest poll ever
    Well it seems they were wrong :P

  6. #6
    Community Moderator Crater Creator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    2,807
    Rep Power
    1
    I like this poll better than the last, because the two options actually are related. One can’t just say “why not both?” and call it a day.

    One zombie can overwhelm the player, given the stats of a hundred zombies combined. More zombies would just feel better: more zombie-like than fantasy monster-like. But there’d be little if any functional difference as it is now. Huge quantities of zombies won’t solve any limitations in the AI, for instance, barring a fluke like zombies inadvertently pushing each other around into better positions. In fact AI could suffer, since there’s proportionally less time per zombie to devote to AI calculations every frame. And I will still argue you can’t split your attention between more than ~8 zombies at a time, anyway, so these extras would be more for ambiance than anything. Distant zombies, if you will.

    But the fully destructible, re-constructable world? That’s arguably the biggest thing this game has over similar zombie games. Cutting that down would potentially hurt mining, base building, treasure hunting, and random world generation. In other words, a sizable portion of the gameplay would take a hit, just to multiply the number of zombies spinning in circles.

    This is assuming horde ‘loopholes’ are going to be addressed. If the underground can’t be made engaging, challenging, and balanced, then I guess you might as well fill it up with bedrock and put the savings towards more zombies.
    Last edited by Crater Creator; 02-18-2018 at 06:33 AM.

  7. #7
    Reconstructionist RestInPieces's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    619
    Rep Power
    1
    Maybe I misunderstood then. Second choice is huge numbers of zombies as opposed to the number of zombies we have now or no zombies at all?

  8. #8
    Super Moderator Roland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    On a Zipline
    Posts
    11,061
    Rep Power
    2
    @CC: I’m just glad I was quick enough to “Part Two” one of my polls before you did.

    @Rest: yes. Assuming 64 zombies is the limit with voxel terrain what if 300 were the limit with static terrain. Would you trade voxels for significantly larger numbers that definitely couldn’t be done (as far as we know) with voxels standing in the way.

  9. #9
    Community Moderator Crater Creator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    2,807
    Rep Power
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by RestInPieces View Post
    Maybe I misunderstood then. Second choice is huge numbers of zombies as opposed to the number of zombies we have now or no zombies at all?
    I can tell you the majority opinion is we don’t have huge numbers of zombies right now. At least in Alpha 16 you can enjoy up to the full 64 zombie limit even in single player.

    Roland:
    Last edited by Crater Creator; 02-18-2018 at 06:42 AM.

  10. #10
    Reconstructionist RestInPieces's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    619
    Rep Power
    1
    Thanks for clarifying :d

    Quote Originally Posted by Crater Creator View Post
    One zombie can overwhelm the player, given the stats of a hundred zombies combined. More zombies would just feel better: more zombie-like than fantasy monster-like. But there’d be little if any functional difference as it is now. Huge quantities of zombies won’t solve any limitations in the AI, for instance, barring a fluke like zombies inadvertently pushing each other around into better positions. In fact AI could suffer, since there’s proportionally less time per zombie to devote to AI calculations every frame. And I will still argue you can’t split your attention between more than ~8 zombies at a time, anyway, so these extras would be more for ambiance than anything. Distant zombies, if you will.

    But the fully destructible, re-constructable world? That’s arguably the biggest thing this game has over similar zombie games. Cutting that down would potentially hurt mining, base building, treasure hunting, and random world generation. In other words, a sizable portion of the gameplay would take a hit, just to multiply the number of zombies spinning in circles.

    This is assuming horde ‘loopholes’ are going to be addressed. If the underground can’t be made engaging, challenging, and balanced, then I guess you might as well fill it up with bedrock and put the savings towards more zombies.
    Well, couldn't have said it better.

  11. #11
    Tracker DeadMole's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    207
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Roland View Post
    Despite my last poll being called the dumbest poll ever it resulted in a lot of conversation and even gave he who shall not be named a few more excuses to bloat his post count by several more...
    Ah, I'm not looking for "excuses" to boost my post count, since I don't even care about it. Quality over quantity.

  12. #12
    Gray Thematic Gipothegip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    wherever, whenever
    Posts
    2,638
    Rep Power
    1
    I find this poll odd, at least if taken as absolutes; one option is a primary feature of the game, and the other is icing on the cake.

    If you want number 2 at the expense of number 1, I would argue it'd be a different game.



    That being said, there was a time where Tin experimented by making the world shallower with the RWGMixer. This actually did cut down on CPU usage and I was capable of having more zombies in my game. I attempted to lower the world height via DLL hacks, but couldn't figure out how, so I have no idea if that would've helped further with performance.

    Anyway, one could argue that TFP could make the world less deep and lower world height in order to free up resources for more zombies. In this sense, we wouldn't have to sacrifice option 1 for option 2, and they wouldn't be mutually exclusive.

    The question then becomes whether one would want to cut down on the world depth & height in order to have more zombies, and what would be optimal if any changes were to be made.

  13. #13
    Inventor toores's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    870
    Rep Power
    1
    It's unfair!
    I WANT BOTH! I WANT BOTH!

    If it turns out that the systems can't handle mores zombies then we have in A16, i'm in favour of making the terrain indestructible. I'm fine if i can destroy the rest.

    2nd dumbest poll, because: why not both? (greetings to Crater Creator )

    Edit:
    I voted for destructible world btw.
    Last edited by toores; 02-19-2018 at 12:32 AM.

  14. #14
    Inventor toores's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    870
    Rep Power
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Crater Creator View Post
    One zombie can overwhelm the player, given the stats of a hundred zombies combined. More zombies would just feel better: more zombie-like than fantasy monster-like. But there’d be little if any functional difference as it is now. Huge quantities of zombies won’t solve any limitations in the AI, for instance, barring a fluke like zombies inadvertently pushing each other around into better positions. In fact AI could suffer, since there’s proportionally less time per zombie to devote to AI calculations every frame. And I will still argue you can’t split your attention between more than ~8 zombies at a time, anyway, so these extras would be more for ambiance than anything. Distant zombies, if you will.
    I guess it all depends how the AI is coded. Can the AI be coded so it has a horde mode where their actions are simplified and take less computing power until "x" happens?

    Those ambient zombies would provide much more gameplay value then you're suggesting.

    *Shooting your gun has serious consequences, atm it doesn't.
    *Kiting the "8 zombies you can pay attention to" is very easy, having "ambient" zombies means you'll draw much more in by running around.
    *Stealth gets a totally new perspective, it would actually be easier at times.
    *You would have to plan and work hard to reach some POIs instead of just walking there.
    *Real challenge and reward for bigger cities. Lots of zombies and lots of loot.
    *Manipulating with a horde would become a thing. Can't kill them all, lure them away!
    *Using high ground to move around has advantages. Moving from rooftop to rooftop.

    Just some example off the top of my head..

  15. #15
    Guppycurian Forum Whore Guppycur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Houston-ish, Texas
    Posts
    17,819
    Rep Power
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadMole View Post
    Ah, I'm not looking for "excuses" to boost my post count, since I don't even care about it. Quality over quantity.
    Lol.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •