Salva (DayZ)

The mod is still viable, yes. Tons of servers and way more options and variants to play. Compared to standalone, the mod offers: Standard DayZ Mod DayZero (survival style like vanilla but with custom features) DayZ Overwatch (lots of weapons and pvp) DayZ Epoch (base building and AI missions) Just to name a few. You're best off buying Arma 2 Combined Operations (Arma 2 + Operation Arrowhead) and then use DayZ Commander (http://www.dayzcommander.com/) to download the DayZ version you wish to try. You can also update your Arma 2 beta patch with DayZ Commander, saves some work. Hope this helped you a bit.

The alpha seems to be horribly optimized at this moment. Granted it's only been out for 2 months, but I can't help but wonder how much the actual performance is gonna improve over time. I remember some talk going around during the early alpha deveopment that the standalone would run as smooth as or smoother than the mod. I very much doubt this is ever going to happen honestly, although I hope I'm wrong.. It's kinda sad to see that people with high end gaming setups can't run the game properly, as if they are still playing on an old dual core - 8800GT machine.

Of course people want good fps. I'm running on an i5 / GTX 670 and compared to DayZ Mod I get terrible frames, certainly not 50 fps in places like Cherno, no matter what settings. I understand DayZ is all about realism and what not, but above all it should at least be playable on decent pcs. Theres still a long way to go for the alpha's performance optimalisation..

Then you obviously haven't paid much attention to the development of the stand alone. It has never been about it having more content at the start in the first place. Having said that, I agree the mod is more enjoyable for now. There's tons of DayZ variants to be played with more guns, base building, vehicles and what not.. the mod is the full experience for now, but eventually the SA will hopefully bring us something nice too!

The mod was worse you guys say? I'm not so sure about that.. I never really dipped below 30 - 25 fps in cherno in the mod (mainly Epoch and Overwatch), but in standalone sub 25 fps in the same area seems to be the norm for me. It almost feels like back when I was playing DayZ mod on my 'old' gaming laptop instead of my new desktop, while it's actually me playing the standalone vs the mod on the same system.. thats how much of a difference it makes to me. So for me it definitely runs worse, and the same goes for my friends who play standalone. None of us had any problems playing DayZ mod, after we got new systems. Yeah, you have your desync and framedrops every now and then, but overall the mod runs almost flawless on any decent gaming system (save for immense framedrops when one person spawns 15 zombies in a town when driving through it with a vehicle). Can't really say the same for the standalone.. yet, and I doubt it will change anytime soon, but time will tell.

Not gonna work.. thats not a gaming setup :(

D3NTH3M3N, have you actually verified other games or programs run as they are supposed to on your hardware? Like do you get simular 3dmark scores to other 3570k/780 setups?

It's fast enough to run the game, but just barely though. Not sure if I would bother if I were you. It all comes down to the issue most laptops have when it comes to gaming.. they just lack GPU power. Now the 6750m actually isn't your typical low budget card, but that doesn't mean alot when it comes to DayZ. http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6750M.43958.0.html Here you can see the card is a class 3 card when it comes to laptop performance. I myself have played DayZ for about 250 hours on a Mobility 5870 system, which is a class 2 card, so a tad faster. I can tell you that it was barely playable, like I wouldn't really go lower than that because the bad performance will ruin the experience. All up to you, but I think it's not worth the hassle..

Sorry for the late response guys, just thought i'd react to a few of your requests. I wouldn't count on the game running well if at all playable on that laptop. One could play the latest games on a laptop, however there is often one problem. Laptops in general are not made to run 3d games with high settings and framerates (unless you spend money on a gaming/multimedia laptop). I'm afraid your laptop is not suited for gaming, since the graphics card is a 6-7ish year old low-end card. So even back then it wasn't meant for gaming, let alone now. Wish I had responded earlier :P Kind of the same story as above, this is definitely a no-go. It's possible that you can run the ArmA II demo on this laptop, but DayZ itself requires much more resources to run well than just the regular ArmA game. Your first gen core i3 would hold your performance back, since DayZ uses alot of processing power. Also the G105m is really not meant for gaming at all.. :( You could get decent framerates out of towns, possibly 50 fps in fields and such depending on the server, mod (dayzero, overwatch, epoch or whatever) and settings. It's hard to predict what framerate you will actually have, especially since the 7750 is kind of on 'that edge' of being able to run the game perfectly smooth and having some performance issues. I wouldn't worry too much though, your system is fine for DayZ, especially on 1280x1024. The first is slightly faster, but that doesn't mean a whole lot. Neither of those systems is capable of running DayZ well. In fact, I wouldn't even try it on that system. If you are planning to play games like DayZ on a system in that price range, your only option would be to build your own system. It's virtually impossible to buy a gaming pc for that price unless you buy the parts seperately yourself or with some help.. Looks like a nice budget gaming setup. However, you won't get 35-40 fps on med-high settings in cities. Even with an i5 and 7950/670 or equivalent system (which is quite a bit faster) you are lucky to get 40 fps inside cities like Cherno on such settings. I speak from experience in this case. Proves how badly optimised the mod is.. When it comes to possible upgrades, personally I would go for something like a 7790 just to be a bit more future proof. Since that card kind of hits the sweet spot when it comes to price/performance in the lower to mid range segment, it's a good option, but there are other options as well. As I said in one of the responses above, the 7750 is kind of on 'that edge' imho. I'll explain why a 7790 is a better option, apart from it being faster obviously: As you can see in this link (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html), the HD 7750 scores about 1.6k points. The HD 7790 scores about 3000 points. So let's say: 7750 = 90ish $ (or euro, its just an estimate anyway) card which scores 1600 points in performance 7790 = 130ish $ card which scores 3000 points in performance That's a 40ish $ difference. Let's say your total system costs about 500$ (making that up). If you get the 7750, you are stuck with that 1600 point performance. If you spend 40$ more, just 40$.. you will get almost double the gaming performance out of the same system. So that translates to.. 500$ pc = 1600 points in gaming performance (which is what you are after in this case) 540-550$ pc = 3000 points in gaming performance This could translate to almost double framerates in certain games and scenario's for just that little price difference of 40 to 50 $. In my opinion, totally worth it! Both cards require 1x6 pin cable, so that shouldn't be too big of a deal. Not sure about the dual core but I guess it will do the job :). I realise when you're on a budget you gotta cut corners anyway and the Pentium should hold up for most games, including DayZ. Starting out with just 4 GB is just fine and you can always upgrade in the future.

Game will run flawless on medium to high settings. I've made a simular pc for a friend of mine (i5 4430, GTX 660, 8 GB), and his framerate is almost always the same or within a 10% difference from my own i5 3570k / GTX 670. I wouldn't worry one bit about it. Not sure how the AMD will handle it as I have no experience with that cpu. I quickly looked it up and seeing as its not in the same price bracket as an i5 I'd expect the game to run a little less stable (my guess is mostly lower minimum fps) compared to systems with some faster cpu's like an i5. I reckon the game will run fine though on probably medium to high settings, since the 270X is more than capable of doing that. Game should run well, again on medium to high settings (especially on that resolution).

Okay I see what you mean. Yeah open fields should be a bit better, its hard to predict the exact framerates of course but I reckon those kinds of situations shouldn't be too laggy. In the end only you can tell wether the performance is adeqate for your liking or not :). All depends on what you think is 'smoothly'. If you are willing to settle for 20-25 fps avarages in open areas then sure, it should probably be smooth. However I'd feel much more at ease to tell you wether the game would be smooth or not if your system just packed a bit more punch (say, simular to HD4870 performance, about 1300+ Passmark points or higher). I know systems like those can run DayZ, and for me personally that would be the absolute lowest I would go. When you go lower than that (as is the GT 630) the framerate will be right on that 'edge' of being playable and being too low to have a fun time playing the game. But like I said, it's all up to you, what you feel is smooth or not, and maybe it's not all that bad. That's all I can say about it! Wish you all the best with your new system :).

VecaHZ, I wouldn't put too much value in those minimum requirements. Yes, your system is better. Yes, you CAN run the game and it should be somewhat playable (the latter is debatable). But those requirements are for ArmA II itself right? ArmA II runs way smoother than DayZ mod. Actually it even differs from mod variant to variant. Say, DayZero runs smoother or less smooth than DayZ Overwatch or DayZ Epoch depending on the area. By all means give it a go, it's only 20 bucks anyway but don't expect it to be a butter smooth stable 30 fps or higher experience.

VecaHZ, your system itself is not bad but your GPU will hold back your gaming performance. Looking at the Passmark list the GT 630 scores about 700 points which is somewhat equal to an 8800 GT (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/mid_range_gpus.html). I know from experience that cards simular to 8800 GT performance won't run the game very well. If your lucky u can run it on the absolute lowest details but it won't be a very smooth experience.. If you really want to get into pc gaming I suggest you should upgrade your gpu since the rest of your system is fine!

Why would you wanna know? I'll quote something you posted over a week ago: Must be joking. Seems like you've been playing the game for while! Of course you can run it, your system can run any game and you know it. Good day sir :)

Do you know what the problem is? It's ArmA, or DayZ mod, whatever you like. Even depending on what server you play can make a huge difference in performance at times. Have you tried different servers, or different mods like DayZero (which generally gives BETTER performance) or DayZ Overwatch? Don't buy into the 'your CPU is the problem, go buy a new one' advice here. It's as if what everybody says is just true without even showing some evidence as to WHY your CPU is, or isn't good enough. People who just blindly shout "3.2 GHz just isn't enough" might just as well not post, as it doesn't contribute any knowledge since it is completely false (even the latest and fastest cpu's don't have a much higher clockspeed than 3.2GHz) Let's get real here: your CPU is not bad by any means. It scores about 5,720 points on the passmark high-end cpu list, which isn't bad at all (http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html). Note though that this score is not an absolute, it's only an indication. This does not include performance of each CPU in different games as they may vary. What I have found though is that your CPU is really good at encoding and multitasking, and not so much at gaming (http://www.techspot.com/review/345-amd-phenom2-x6-1100t/page10.html). Yes, it does have 6 cores, and it does have a high clock speed, but all of these things don't necessarily translate into a great gaming cpu. The actual architecture of the CPU is probably the most important part when it comes to that. That is why for instance an I5 2500k is faster in games than your CPU, even though it only has 4 cores and about the same clockspeed. And again, don't forget DayZ is a b*tch when it comes to running properly. Even people with top of the line systems can and will lag at times in DayZ. I bet you can play tons of other games perfectly fine with your setup, although your CPU might at times hold your performance back a little bit. Still, I bet there are loads of people playing DayZ on CPUs twice as worse as yours. If you really wish to upgrade in the future, go with an intel i5 or i7 (the I5 4670k would be a nice choice for instance). Those generally are way better for gaming performance than any AMD CPU, as you can see in the picture here, where the Intel I5/I7 scores are way higher than the AMD scores, dispite the fact that some of the AMD ones have 8 cores and the Intel ones only 4! (http://www.techradar.com/news/computing-components/processors/intel-vs-amd-which-processor-is-best-936589). Hope this helped you a bit!

I'm afraid Rocket is probably a bit too busy to deal with your nazism fetish :|

Imho, in the end it's always the consumers fault. The consumer determines for himself wether a game is worth the money or not, they vote with their wallets. It seems that people are often impatient and will buy the game regardless of it being broken or not. To me, one example (I'm not sure if I'm allowed to talk about it on these forums) is WarZ. People wanted something like DayZ, but better and less buggy so badly, they preordered WarZ without even knowing if the game would be good or not. Of course, the devs fucked up the game, nothing the consumers can do about it. But if the consumers would all just be patient and wait to see what the final product would be like, I bet you WarZ wouldn't have made alot of money since it's a shitty game. It seems that stuff like that just happens too often, consumers get 'sucked in' and will buy the games anyway.

And how do you know the game 'had alot more potential'? Are you a game developer? What's the point in releasing a worse version of the current DayZ mod we have? If Bohemia (or Rocket, whoever it doesn't matter) thinks the game isn't ready then it just isn't ready. There is nothing we can do about it other than just be patient and wait until the game eventually comes out and is at least decently playable so we can all be happy!

I wonder what keeps people like you busy during everyday life.. Don't get me wrong - we all want the standalone to come out pretty badly by now but fortunately there are many other things to do, and this includes playing games. Do you realize the mod is still very active? Tons of variants, livestreams and whatnot. Do you even play the mod or are you only here to tell us about how mad you are about how "Rocket said A or B in the past"? Get a grip mate.

I'm not sure if this is a so called bad habit, as I suppose it happens to many people. As of late I'm starting to realise I often look around me in DayZ, but don't really 'see' what's going on. More like glancing over area's, not really taking in what you see. Case in point, yesterday I was near Stary, and in chat people called out there being some snipers around. I decided to move out through a forest, and grabbed my M14 out of my backpack in case I ran into someone on close range. Then about 30 seconds later I got shot by an AK from way up close which literally gave me a heart attack. I watched back my recording footage and the idiotic thing is, I could have seen the player WAY earlier. He was clearly in my view, but I didn't see him even though I was 'tactically' walking around with my M14. I have to admit, it was very late in the night, but I wish I could somehow pay more attention to what I'm actually looking at instead of running around like a headless chicken.

All the guys of 'the squad'.. Sacriel42, OshiSeven, DaSquirrelsNuts, Ngotie, StoneyOC, (Fhrope, Hoggy) - I really like their playstyle. Pretty weird I haven't seen any of these names so far in this thread. I guess Jackfrags and Frankie made some really awesome cinematic DayZ video's, although nowadays I'm not so sure how to think of 'certain things', but I won't go into that. edit: typo's

Saw DayZ for the first time on Dendi's livestream over a year ago, and it instantly caught my attention. After that I found some awesome gameplay videos on youtube (mainly Sacriel42, but also a little credit to ThatSneakyDuck and others) and I've been hooked ever since. Convinced some of my friends to buy the game as well, good times!

Not working here either :/

I play DayZ to blow off steam :D What happens in the game doesn't really affect my emotional state, as in I don't get easily stressed out because I died or someone stole my car but that's just me. I see what you mean though, I guess when I'm bored or somewhat mad at the game I go to Elektro or Cherno and try to hatchet geared players to death :P

Ingame name: Salva Location: The Netherlands GUID: cee3f773821994245cb2e44d27b4a807 Reason: I'm introducing a friend (Franko79) to the game and we wish to play in a safe environment. I've played on zombie world before, back when there was no whitelist. I stopped playing DayZ for a while but the stand alone got me all excited again. Thats why I really want to join you guys again! Ingame name: Franko79 Location: The Netherlands GUID: 01c6192d8b33d2ba2d5cffaddb5913d7 Reason: I'm new to the game and I would like to play on a safe server without hackers but with a nice community so I can get to know the game at my own pace.