A while ago I sent out a poll for the community to fill in. After some time and a few responses I have recently been able to go through the results and I will now talk about them and how I will act on the results, or my general thoughts about each topic covered by the first poll as some questions were more about getting general opinions on aspects of the server to gauge community sentiment.
Question 1
The first public test will be contained to the Bayside area, are you okay with this?*
*This includes up to the Bayside tunnel and the bridge to San Fierro.
Other Responses
The first public test is purely to make sure the fundamental systems work before continuing with more development. The idea is to have most of the core features in place and then to test them with other players in a small area. The initial test versions will not be canon to the server story and wipes will happen at the end of the public test phase.
So why ask this question? I wanted to get the general feeling around the idea of having a contained test area and also helps expectations not be too high for a public test version in terms of playable area. The whole of Las Venturas is planned for the main release, once core functionality is working.
Question 2
How many characters should each account be able to make?
Other Responses
This question is a difficult one to gauge in terms of the responses as they're so evenly split. What I can say is 3 characters is not even an option to people, and 2 characters is the least popular.
I Like the idea of having some character slots locked off for donors as a perk for donating to the server. However, the question then becomes how many slots is enough for a non donating player. I have considered doing 10 total slots with 5 being locked for donors but that was not an option for this question, poll 2 may ask whether 10 total slots is too many or fine. The first public test will have 10 slots and we can determine after testing whether that's too many or fine as is.
Question 3
Is a playable Zombie "Class" something you would be interested in?
Other Responses
- Yes and zombie NPCs beside them
- Maybe special zombies, like BOWS can be available during special events
Developer Response
It would seem that generally the idea of having playable Zombies is a little divisive. Playable Zombies make for a more dynamic difficulty for players but maybe enforced Zombie play is not the way, as it was previously. While Zombies will not feature in the initial testing phase as they require a lot more work I wanted to get this question in early to help determine the way to go when the time comes.
At the moment I am thinking of having an option as part of the character creator to make a Zombie character which can have its own set of perks and levels as part of its more PvP orientated gameplay. This would fit into the second of the "other responses" nicely. I do play on having NPC zombies however, they require a lot of work and I am limited to how many NPCs I can have spawned into the server.
I will more than likely add a follow-up question in a future poll on this topic.
Question 4
The game mode that is currently in development is heavily inspired by MMORPGs and Survival games. PvP and PvE would be the main focus along with a story made specifically for the server.
The previous iterations were traditional SA-MP light roleplay and PvP with faction wars and lots of human playable Zombies who were the backbone of the whole apocalypse.
Do you think the server name "Zombie Outbreak Roleplay" is still appropriate and fits the server theme given the current server's vast differences to previous iterations?
Responses
The server name in the client currently reads "Zombie Outbreak RPG | Quests/NPCs/RP". I agree with the person who said "Better off with Zombie Outbreak RPG" as it fits the theme of the gamemode better. However, ZORP is still technically correct as it is also an RP server. Therefore this is more a matter of personal preference. This question allowed me to gauge the general feel around the topic of server name and identity.
Question 5
Should the in-game tutorial cover everything in depth or just the basics?
Other Responses
Generally it seems people favour having the basics being covered in game and then for further tutorials to be provided by the website or in game help commands. I think this is the way I would like to go with it too so we seem to align on this one.
Question 6
Would be you be interested in assisting development in any of the following areas?
Other Responses
A few... interesting responses, also hi Logan!
The popular options are Beta Testing and Lore Writing. Beta Testing comes out on top which is great because that's going to be one of the most important aspects of early development.
Question 7
Would you be open to the idea of the playable area being the whole of San Andreas in the future?*
*If there are enough players to make it work.
Other Responses
As a whole the response to this question is an effective yes for having the whole of San Andreas be playable. This will be evaluated if we gain enough players to do so.
Question 8
If there is anything else you wish to add that isn't covered by any of the previous questions then please use this answer box to note it down.
Future questionnaires may cover topics given as an answer to this question and suggestions or opinions here will shape future questionnaires and development updates.
Responses
Some... interesting responses here. To tackle the topic of factions brought up here in a roundabout way: I am unsure how to handle factions yet. What I do know is that I want them to all be unique in some way. I also want to avoid if possible having faction leaders who are also admins of the server, this has been something that has caused friction previously. However, I am unsure if this would be possible as generally the faction leaders should be someone who is fully trusted. Factions will not be showing up in the initial testing phases as more time needs to be spent working out how best to implement them.
The feedback about the NPC zombies from previous test versions I have run over the last few years have is valid. That is why they won't be making an appearance in the initial testing because they require a lot of work to make them useful and fun to play against.
Finally, the PvE systems are something I want to work on the most, especially in the initial stages, they'll function as the core gameplay loop of the server.
Question 1
The first public test will be contained to the Bayside area, are you okay with this?*
*This includes up to the Bayside tunnel and the bridge to San Fierro.
Other Responses
- Bayside and El Q
- I prefer other areas but it doesn't really matter this much
The first public test is purely to make sure the fundamental systems work before continuing with more development. The idea is to have most of the core features in place and then to test them with other players in a small area. The initial test versions will not be canon to the server story and wipes will happen at the end of the public test phase.
So why ask this question? I wanted to get the general feeling around the idea of having a contained test area and also helps expectations not be too high for a public test version in terms of playable area. The whole of Las Venturas is planned for the main release, once core functionality is working.
Question 2
How many characters should each account be able to make?
Other Responses
- 2 for normal players & 5 for donors
- As many as possible. If it's not enough for some people then they will make new accounts anyway
This question is a difficult one to gauge in terms of the responses as they're so evenly split. What I can say is 3 characters is not even an option to people, and 2 characters is the least popular.
I Like the idea of having some character slots locked off for donors as a perk for donating to the server. However, the question then becomes how many slots is enough for a non donating player. I have considered doing 10 total slots with 5 being locked for donors but that was not an option for this question, poll 2 may ask whether 10 total slots is too many or fine. The first public test will have 10 slots and we can determine after testing whether that's too many or fine as is.
Question 3
Is a playable Zombie "Class" something you would be interested in?
Other Responses
- Yes and zombie NPCs beside them
- Maybe special zombies, like BOWS can be available during special events
Developer Response
It would seem that generally the idea of having playable Zombies is a little divisive. Playable Zombies make for a more dynamic difficulty for players but maybe enforced Zombie play is not the way, as it was previously. While Zombies will not feature in the initial testing phase as they require a lot more work I wanted to get this question in early to help determine the way to go when the time comes.
At the moment I am thinking of having an option as part of the character creator to make a Zombie character which can have its own set of perks and levels as part of its more PvP orientated gameplay. This would fit into the second of the "other responses" nicely. I do play on having NPC zombies however, they require a lot of work and I am limited to how many NPCs I can have spawned into the server.
I will more than likely add a follow-up question in a future poll on this topic.
Question 4
The game mode that is currently in development is heavily inspired by MMORPGs and Survival games. PvP and PvE would be the main focus along with a story made specifically for the server.
The previous iterations were traditional SA-MP light roleplay and PvP with faction wars and lots of human playable Zombies who were the backbone of the whole apocalypse.
Do you think the server name "Zombie Outbreak Roleplay" is still appropriate and fits the server theme given the current server's vast differences to previous iterations?
Responses
- Yeah, it's good the way it is.
- I think the name both heralds to an older era that might still have recognizability, and still perfectly sums up todays gamemode. Zombie outbreak, roleplay. Simple.
- Yes
- Keep it ZO-RP!
- Depends on how you want to advertise it. I think the zo-rp name should still be in there but maybe with an extra tagline to signify the new.
- The name is fine. I think it should be kept for legacy's sake at least.
- If we are going for the MMORPGs and Survival Games approach then Roleplay will not be the correct naming, Better off with Zombie Outbreak RPG.
- It's perfect for me!
- Yes
The server name in the client currently reads "Zombie Outbreak RPG | Quests/NPCs/RP". I agree with the person who said "Better off with Zombie Outbreak RPG" as it fits the theme of the gamemode better. However, ZORP is still technically correct as it is also an RP server. Therefore this is more a matter of personal preference. This question allowed me to gauge the general feel around the topic of server name and identity.
Question 5
Should the in-game tutorial cover everything in depth or just the basics?
Other Responses
- That depends on how this version will change compared to everything else we saw
- Think it should be optional between those two. But there should be a way to access the tutorial or some "codex" or "help" via a command wherever you are when questions pop up. This should make it easier to digest for people. We shouldn't press too much down their throats at once if possible.
- Basic tutorial in game, in-depth tutorials on the forums.
- Depends on how much the game is going to change and implement. I'm leaning towards in depth
Generally it seems people favour having the basics being covered in game and then for further tutorials to be provided by the website or in game help commands. I think this is the way I would like to go with it too so we seem to align on this one.
Question 6
Would be you be interested in assisting development in any of the following areas?
Other Responses
- I'm your only mapper lel
- Fuck yeah, I'm part of OG's so my name and epic IC actions need to be mention somewhere!
- Fuck yeah! I'm the MF-OG and would love to put my hand on erasing Red Tabs. Seriously, i think it's a must at this point to get some qualified people together
A few... interesting responses, also hi Logan!
The popular options are Beta Testing and Lore Writing. Beta Testing comes out on top which is great because that's going to be one of the most important aspects of early development.
Question 7
Would you be open to the idea of the playable area being the whole of San Andreas in the future?*
*If there are enough players to make it work.
Other Responses
- Yes, because I remember early days when we had max. 20 players and most of them didn't even follow the basics of RP. Those were amazing times and RP or any sort of activity somewhere else were one of the best
- Way back it was like that and whole SA was open. I liked those times, although a little less RP but great memories.
As a whole the response to this question is an effective yes for having the whole of San Andreas be playable. This will be evaluated if we gain enough players to do so.
Question 8
If there is anything else you wish to add that isn't covered by any of the previous questions then please use this answer box to note it down.
Future questionnaires may cover topics given as an answer to this question and suggestions or opinions here will shape future questionnaires and development updates.
Responses
- Fuck RedTabs and don't put toxic cunts into position of power in factions like STARS and UC. We all had dreams to become members of these factions yet they didn't wanted people that are way more passionate about the game and RP to get in there
- Last i played the game the npc zombies were too easy to deal with and caged into certain key areas. I don't know how it is now but would be nice if the hotzones spanned a larger surface of the infrastructure areas. Jolly cooperation is something that would keep bringing people together. Perhaps to increase the difficulty of the pve content to the point where it encourages people to cooperate more instead of grinding on their own. Mutated zombies? I don't know if this is possible to code in but for example have different enemy types where you have to use various tools to deal with them like some take more damage when on fire or are weak to certain weapons or even simply different weak-points, not only the head.
- You're already doing a good job with the development nothing more
- FUCK RED TABS for their non-RP! Let's make ZO-RP Great again!
- Add unique PVE systems, more solo stuff to do
Some... interesting responses here. To tackle the topic of factions brought up here in a roundabout way: I am unsure how to handle factions yet. What I do know is that I want them to all be unique in some way. I also want to avoid if possible having faction leaders who are also admins of the server, this has been something that has caused friction previously. However, I am unsure if this would be possible as generally the faction leaders should be someone who is fully trusted. Factions will not be showing up in the initial testing phases as more time needs to be spent working out how best to implement them.
The feedback about the NPC zombies from previous test versions I have run over the last few years have is valid. That is why they won't be making an appearance in the initial testing because they require a lot of work to make them useful and fun to play against.
Finally, the PvE systems are something I want to work on the most, especially in the initial stages, they'll function as the core gameplay loop of the server.