The future of multiplayer survival adventures

[Siresly]

For the lack of an actual name of this subgenre, I just made that one up.

DayZ opened up the floodgates and the first thing to get flushed out was unfortunately a turd. But never mind that now. What else will flow towards us? What do you hope to see from these games?

I'mma use this opportunity to pimp Survarium[survarium.com]. Would be the biggest blip on my radar in terms of these types of games. Specifics are still pretty vague, but they seem to have nailed down something solid. Have faith in this cause it's Eastern Bloc and there's a bunch of former Stalker developers on the team. My only concern so far is that it's F2P, and how that may affect the design.

The main thing about it is it will have three different modes which sound like they'll offer wildly different experiences.

One is basically objectivebased team deathmatch. Could be relatively multifaceted.
One is storybased co-op.
And the final one is Freeplay, which would be the DayZ-ish one. Get the impression it'll end up being quite different despite all the apparent similarities. For one there is an end goal. Already has 100% more structure.

https://www.youtube.com/user/vostokgames

[Just]

Sad you start your post with an insult again instead of using the wording as the rest of your post :(

And to be honest here.. you forgot something.. there is another multiplayer surivial adventure.. its called minecraft and has enough players to not forget about it.

In minecraft the pvp, even the fighting against monsters is just a minor thing. The "looting" in there is done by mining instead of collecting from fixed loot spots and a large focus is the building aspect.

The bad thing about survival games is the snowballing nature they have, comparable to tower defence (= survival) games. If you are running on full supplies / health what ever, its usually easier to find more stuff. Once you are hurt the game becomes harder. Especially in mutiplayer this is a real problem, since at some point surviving is either way to easy or way to hard. A game that manages to make an actual challenge out of surviving through out the entire game (and not only the first or last minutes) is something i have not seen so far.

I guess that the game you posted will have the same issue, at some point simply surviving is not enjoyable.. and bandits (pvp) always add a random factor that can barely be controlled. Ofc pvp also attracts hackers.. and even a few hackers can hurt a survival game a lot :(

[Skyforger]

The dead linger, zombie survival that is in alpha atm.
One time purchase, no cash shop. $20 / £12.73

I havn't had it for long but it's VERY promising, the developers are amazing.
They are so dedicated and community driven, there is great spirit over at the forums.
They pump out new versions all the time, there is a new alpha build dew today/tomorow that is adding alot more.
Oh and my favourite part about it, is that the world is like minecraft, it will keep on going and randomly generating.
Also its not pvp based at all, its all about the zombie survival =)

It has a nice community atm, and I can see them being in beta in no time with how fast these people work, then it will really kick off with players investing

Tho that one you linked looks decent from the previews aswell, very stalker'ery vibe(amazing game series).

[Zorlond]

I think a real future for this genre relies upon the realization and application of one concept:

Candy bars and bullets are not a renewable resource.

Seriously. The world has come to an end, and yet if you raid one grocery store every hour or two, you will always find more stuff to carry out. That's how most any game runs these days, exceptions are few. And it's the driving point behind what Just spoke of, snowballing and eventually reduced difficulty due to how much crap you're carrying.

If there's going to be any real future for the genre, respawning items like this are going to have to be abandoned. You want a weapon? You're gonna have to make one. Either cobbled together with bits and bobs, or a return to the days of ye olde blacksmithing. If you're lucky to have the tools, and know the formula, maybe you can whip up a little black powder to recycle spent bullet casings. Have fun finding that potassium nitrate. You want food? Welcome to Hunting and Gathering 101. Maybe if you're lucky, you can find some crop seeds and some areable land to farm. And it's not going to be a couple minutes between sowing and reaping.

Does that sound incredibly dull? Perhaps. But the real difficulty in a survival game shouldn't be finding what you need to survive, but in making what you need.

[Just]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Zorlond:

Does that sound incredibly dull? Perhaps. But the real difficulty in a survival game shouldn't be finding what you need to survive, but in making what you need.

Sounds like minecraft :)
but in the end .. the ressources to craft stuff are limited as well.. and we are back at the same issue with realism..
Even if not.. the moment you have a good gun you can find better material for even better gun,. and the snowballing starts again.. i think its simply the nature of those games to be snowbally.. and getting rid of this is only done as a single player game.. or a small scale coop game which has no open world.

Another great survival game is burntime. Its very old, so i will just assume no one knows it. In the beginning the game is about looting stuff (which doesnt respawn) and trading it for what ever you want/need. Food and water is always a limiting factor there. As you progress you can trade or craft stuff like snake/rat traps and hire some doctor and tech guy to help you out. You can clear some village of the mutants and put some of your men in there to defend it. When placing the traps in one of the building you will catch food. So the game shifts from pure survival to area control. In the survival process you do not really fight with other players but in the area control part you can attack towns owed by others. Once you have killed all other players you win.

the game is very old and still very good, by changing the game focus during the game it stays challenging

Maybe thats a good place to "look for ideas"

[Zorlond]

That actually sounds like what I was trying to describe. Making food in realistic terms would require area control, particularly when dealing with crops. And weapons, well, that's a matter of scale. How quickly bullets get used up or how worn down your axe gets vs how quickly you can make new ones. Sounds like Minecraft is too lenient on the latter half.

I've also been having thoughts on how zombie hordes might work, since WarZ came out. Right now, all zombie games have the same basic AI for the walking dead. Stand still or lurch randomly until some trigger makes them go into combat mode. I've been thinking that zombies should be on a more active role when not trying to rip your face off. Let them smell the living on the breeze from miles away, and slowly (and relentlessly) lurch towards the scent. Grunting and groaning zombies catch the ears of others, and they start clumping together in reaction to the sound. Having to deal with a large horde every few hours simply by the fact that the players are trying to stand ground on top of hunting/farming areas would increase the rate of weapon use over time.

[Skyforger]

That does sound amazing/ideal, but sadly it would only attract a small crowd.
As the increased difficulty aspect would drive alot off, the foraging etc. I love the idea/concept, but alot of people would rather have it handed to them.

Tho in saying that demon/dark souls had major success, aswell with a few other difficult games.
FTL, the space rogue like game, very challenging, some times just damn well cruel =p
Tho still very well recieved and liked, especially for an indie game.

The zombie survival horror genre must be hard to get right i guess, every attempt so far has been less that steller.
Remember dead island =/ Was decent, but no zombie survival.

[Sealer Moon]

The way I see it, our love for zombie genres persist, but the game companies that is supposedly making them now only care about money.
It's funny how Resident Evil 3, from year 2000 or something, could beat most zombie games if they added endless survival properties. Ironic, isn't it?

Also heard Dead Rising 3 is coming out soon, but that's probably also going to be a major disappointment.

[Just]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Jo-Barf Creepy:

The way I see it, our love for zombie genres persist, but the game companies that is supposedly making them now only care about money.
It's funny how Resident Evil 3, from year 2000 or something, could beat most zombie games if they added endless survival properties. Ironic, isn't it?

Also heard Dead Rising 3 is coming out soon, but that's probably also going to be a major disappointment.

The problem is not only with zombie games.. i am one of those who started playing when 3d was only 16 color wireframe. Compared to the "good old times" most modern games are purely designed for the money. Just compare the mmorpg szene.. when i started playing the first mmo 9 years ago we had battles of more than 1k players... then see how mondern games claim 40 players are "epic battles".

[Sealer Moon]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Just:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Jo-Barf Creepy:

The way I see it, our love for zombie genres persist, but the game companies that is supposedly making them now only care about money.
It's funny how Resident Evil 3, from year 2000 or something, could beat most zombie games if they added endless survival properties. Ironic, isn't it?

Also heard Dead Rising 3 is coming out soon, but that's probably also going to be a major disappointment.

The problem is not only with zombie games.. i am one of those who started playing when 3d was only 16 color wireframe. Compared to the "good old times" most modern games are purely designed for the money. Just compare the mmorpg szene.. when i started playing the first mmo 9 years ago we had battles of more than 1k players... then see how mondern games claim 40 players are "epic battles".

They give more power to each individual which is supposed to feel like epic battles instead, I guess.