Well honestly for me it is nice as it is. This way Aprone can use the cash to invest on new stuff to develop even better games.
It was disgusting the fact that hackers were messing around with Swamp and that the game had to become a payed one, but come on guys, it is not so expensive. With only a few resources Aprone managed to develop the best zombie FPS of this comunity. Can you imagine what is to come if we keep supporting him in the form of gamer accounts? Also don't forget that there are a few ways to play Swamp offline and other little games from him that aren't payed at all.
Best regards, Haramir.

Rory, it is possible to level with the campaigns already. There are a bunch of campaignes to download around the forums or you can create your own.
Best regards, Haramir.

Hi. I'm just wondering. Do you have to pay every year, or does paypaul do it for you. If it does, i'll try to get an account. If it doesn't i'm still trying to get an account. Oh yeah are the campains things where you do missions, and kill stuff? That's what i want, so i can play it on saturday morning and friday night.

Hi all
I just got swamp but when i try to run it says
There is a missing file.

Brad: You might find my article on virtual gaming worth reading in the articles room. I play Swamp on my virtual machine without any trouble accept for lagging on the big mission. But that's because I'm using a Macbook Air.

You make some good points. I've never had things break on me, but then I try to stay above 75% for exactly the reasons you stated, and I haven't played for a few months (no room on this machine for a VM of Windows). I don't have any ideas on improving this right now, but hopefully this will spawn a discussion.

Yeah, I agree with FM's suggestion, the armor breaking thing should be part of the challenge of playing the game. If Aprone keep taking features out of the game due to requests, Swamp will be turned into an online sandbbox.
Best regards, Haramir.

TheTrueGamer, I understand that you disagree with the weapon breaking aspect of the game, but I don't agree with your idea that the game developer should not be influencing how people play the game.  Figuring out what the player is required to do is a part of every game's design.  The problem with your argument is that is can be used against nearly every feature of the game.

I have had people complain that the guns should never run out of ammo, because they worked hard to find them and don't feel like they should have to go out and get something just to be able to keep using the weapon.  It's the same argument you're making, and some games do leave out the concept of ammo, but that would completely change the feel of the game.  I've had players who complained that they could only find certain weapons and armor on specific maps.  They felt they shouldn't be forced to brave sub 1 to find their precious longbow.  It's the same argument against the developer controlling how the player has to play.  Well making all items findable in all areas would change how the player progresses.  Related to that, I've had people complain that they have to travel between maps at all!  They believe they should be able to teleport between safe zones so they don't have to put in any work to go through the sewers.  Same idea.  Zombies shouldn't get stronger over time.  Same again.  I think in the earlier days of Swamp we've all read some very heated arguments about why death should not destroy your equipment.  Those had the same "you're controlling how I play the game!" arguments.  I could continue giving examples, but I'll end with people who have even argued with me that you should not have to worry about dying in Swamp.  Their arguments were nearly identical to yours.  By making them die, I am ruining their fun.  If they want to just run around shooting zombies and picking up loot, I should not be setting up the game to stop them from doing what makes them happy.  I am unfairly throwing in this extra obstacle!  Sounds pretty crazy, but yes people have used your reasoning to argue for all of these changes.

I agree it would be wonderful if every part of the game had intrinsic value, so looting was always fun and was never a necessity to get something you were looking for.  Especially in games like Swamp that go on forever that just isn't possible.  Treating item ownership as a check list, where once you have it you always have it, means everyone would have everything in a super short period of time.  If you're playing a single player game that has a finite end, then sure, let all weapons have infinite ammo and you only ever have to find something once.  By the time you run out of new things to get, you've reached the end of the game.  A game only has so many underlying challenges for the player, so in an ongoing game you have to have ways to bring back a challenge that the player has overcome.  The challenge that the entire game was built upon is the battle between the player and zombies.  It is the foundation that the rest of the challenges are built upon.  The entire need for loot is to get players out in the field where the enemies are, and the loot itself is equipment that will help you survive there.  If there is ever a time when people don't need to loot, then they don't need to face zombies, and the underlying challenge of the game is lost.

I know you said that death should still take away the items, but basically most players don't die.  They aren't dying even when they need to go out looting to replace broken items, so they'll die even less when they have No need to even face zombies.  At a certain point for many players, item breaking is the only thing keeping the core challenge on the table.

I'm in that same boat as well. I just haven't been motivated to play because i'd rather not gamble on losing everything because the game has a not quite balanced armor system. Sure, people will moan and cry about the game needs to always be challenging and i would mostly conclude with that point of view, but i don't want to play to only have to grind for 3 or 4 hours and then lose my equipment in 2 minutes, just because i went on a mission, and i get vital armor broken, and thus lose my much needed protection. And no, i shouldn't have too by 5 sets of pricy gear because the game decides to break it. I'm not spending rep to die, rather to survive, and that's supposed to be the point of the game after all, right? I mean, when you hit q in game it says simply, "survive." Not die and have fun doing it. Get my point? Sorry for the rant.

well woof there, time to throw in my personal doggie pallet. hmm, chicken flavor? any how. here goes. getting armor tweecked just right is the main chalange on the table it seems. so lowering the odds that armor mite begin, to brake seems what i would suggest as well. fifty percent? perhaps. but in all fareness. once its fixed. sixty percent or 55 percent should help. reason  for me saying this is as follows. consider this. you do not want to be caught in a swarm and armor only brakes after 50 percent health because?  if u then lose 3 or 4 pieces, u will not have chance to heel much before u get zombie chow.
so? there fore if armor does brake there still needs to be time for you to heel.
this is what you guys must consider. so there fore. my suggestion of say 55 or 60 percent, seems dooable. uff corse. 50 percent is fine by me, but i am only pointing out a future obstical you guys will run in to.
if you set it at 50 percent. why do i say this? simply because.
u gonna take more damage. if a piece of armor brakes. and that mite trip you up in future.
the other reason why i suggested 50 percent is because of the following. sure you happily hopping along and swarm comes. and hits you.
suddenly u at seventy  percent health.
ooo not a good place to be, but at least now. u no u can take a few more hits, uh, wink, maybe 1? before u got to heel. your death is not as close. as if you was on fifty percent when your armor should have started to brake, and thus kissing your heeling chance by by.
a bit late her in the early hours so i mite not be making sence.

and with that? i am ending my humble fluffy contributions.
feel free to ring my furry neck later if i forgot to mension something. smile

You're making the assumption that just because we don't want our things to break at 75 percent, we're demanding to keep our stuff eternally. That's far from the case. Dying is a part of the game. Losing stuff is half the thrill. But the gamer has to be given a fighting chance, and we aren't all at the same skill level here. We handle swarms differently. We have different fighting styles. And as another poster pointed out, melee is apparently dangerous, and that's my main MO for getting out of Swarms. I'm not saying Swamp is a terrible game, far from it. But something is very, very wrong with armor balance right now.

Actually Cinnamon, that is exactly what TheTruegamer Is asking for.  He wants the entire idea of items breaking to be removed from the game, with death being the only exception that can destroy any of your items.  That is what he was saying in Swamp chat before he came here to post his above message.

TheTruegamer, actually I thought I did cover your other 2 argument, though they weren't really argument so I can't be entirely sure.  The first stated that you need armor to fight stronger zombies, but armor is easily broken, and the second mentions how losing a desired weapon can make your battle much harder.  Both of those statements are pretty ambiguous so I can only try to guess what your actual argument was on each.  I assumed you meant armor and items shouldn't be breaking, though you could have just as easily been trying to say that zombies shouldn't get stronger or that you should be able to buy replacement weapons from inside missions.

I'd like to find out if you're complaining because it took you a long time, not to find armor or weapons in general, but to find a specific item among all of the items in the game.  If you have told yourself that Ceramic armor and a Vulcan are the only way to go, and you loot the map until you find those 2 items, then yes the game is going to seem more grindy than it should.  The game has many different types of armor and many different types of weapons.  If the game hands you 10 armor pieces and 10 weapons that you are choosing not to use, then that becomes your problem and not the game.

If people decide that the break odds need to be reduced then that's fine, but your proposal to have it completely removed is just not going to happen.  The next update is addressing the armor system and drop rates for various items, just in case some response is going to try to justify why "only ceramics will work", or something else to that regard.

To those who stated that they don't play because they don't want to risk losing their acquired items, was that meant as a joke, or serious?  That is on par with people telling TheTruegamer that he shouldn't wear his armor if he doesn't want it to break.  Not playing is even worse than playing and possibly losing the equipment.  Even if you only got to fire some fancy new weapon one time into a zombie, that is infinitely better than knowing it is locked away on an unplayed character forever.  Using it gives you a guarantee that you'll get at least some (and probably a lot more) enjoyment out of it, while never using it guarantees that you'll get none.