Shadow Man

I don't think there's enough time to die... I do like the idea of having to do transfusions at the hospital though.

I think you're missing the point of DayZ slightly. The way you should be looking at is this: You wash up on the beach and you have to survive. If all you're thinking about is getting to the NWA then there's something wrong. You should be trying harder to not die, and if you do die, your punishment is to go right back down to the coast and start again with a little voice that whispers "try harder". If there is a spawn anywhere near NWA, what do you think DayZ will become? Three guesses. No I'll just tell you. It will be "NWA deathmatch-with-a-few-zombies-getting-in-the-wayZ"

I like the idea of a breakable environment in general. You could give things like doors hit points perhaps, so that they could be repeatedly hit and degraded. The amount of damage done could be slightly randomised so as not to be too predictable.

Some flying skills here (not me). Whoops! Haha video would be good...

Everyone will just write in their own "code" so others cant use the info. Well thats what I'd do. The other thing you'd get is just silly messages. People would write some probably obscene nonsense for another player to read.

No, but maybe a little off topic. My own view is that food shouldn't regenerate blood. Improve the blood bag system would be good.

And you call yourselves survivors? "Oh no, how are solo player going to survive?!" For starters if you lost a lot of blood irl, no amount of stuffing food in your gob is gonna change that any time soon. The harsh reality is that a zombie chewing on your arm would likely result in severe blood loss which would take days to regenerate. If you don't die from some awful infection before then of course. Limiting how often you can eat and how much blood regenerates is a great idea. I think people should stop whining about how hard the game is and get with apocalypse man! The whole point is to find a way to survive!

Well it seems to be unanimous on the traits thing, I'm glad to say. A little character customisation would be ok. But only a little.

No. People will always gravitate towards the bandit skin too much. The whole "Look at me with my badass bandit skin, It shows how good I am at killing people" In fact, get rid any bandit skin at all and just have the hero skin.

Yeah I lone wolf it all the time. Every time I've randomly joined up with others it was fun because it was different, but I end up dead! I stumbled upon a Russian sounding Ghillie guy with a silenced rifle of some sort. We were on the west side of Cherno and I decided he was safe enough because I wasn't already dead. He took the lead and headed into Cherno. He moved through town at an unsettlingly fast pace and the whole time I felt very exposed. He picked off nearly all the z's as we moved off east. As we neared Elektro, we headed up to approach from the open fields to the NW of town. He kept moving without really stopping, aggroing and killing z's as he went until a hoarde descended on us. He was overcome and I ran for it but bled out soon after due to not being able to stop and heal. It was memorable, but I think I would have survived longer on my own.

You can run away from them, but you never really know if you have or not since they're invisible. What really pisses me off is that they finally make the environment hostile, but hardly anyone wants it. Most of the servers switch off bloodsuckers and ERV's. Half the DayZ community is obsessed with going out there just to find players to pvp with.

I'm all for realism in DayZ. But there is a limit to how much realism can be created in any game. If you keep going, you actually start making the game LESS realistic. Maybe a better way of putting it is that the players perception of realism is less convincing. The more things you bring in like your psychosis bar, the more layers there are between you and the world. Although I fully understand your idea, I think its one step too far. The problem with bandit behaviour won't be solved by this. Players will just moan about it and call it a flaw in game design. If this idea were to work, you would have to make it more passive than your suggestion. In the same way that you can tell your cold because you're shivering. The problem with psychosis, is that a real psychopath would not think he were a psychopath. He'd probably just think everyone else is wrong or something. My point is that psychosis can't be portrayed properly in a game because of its nature. The player/person wouldn't be aware, so a psychosis bar contradicts that.

The reason there are so many bandits is for the simple fact that if you die, you can start again. If DayZ were real life, the life expectancy of a bandit would be relatively short. The difference is, in real life, when he's dead thats it. He doesn't come back and start again. There would not be that many bandits because many would just die. You may be left with a few ninja bandits that are truly lethal. But most would get hunted down and killed. Despite "Permadeath" (which only has any effect when a brand new map is released) its still essentially a bunch of people dying and respawning and "having another go". Not enough players really try and stay alive. Its almost easier to kill yourself and respawn than run back to Cherno from NWAF. The ONLY way you'll ever reduce bandits would be if you only get one life. Then you have to buy the game again. I'm sure many people would play very differently if you only get one shot at it. To be honest though, you'd probably still get some fag who pays just to kill others for the sake of ruining their fun.

Buy a new Graphics card. Buy minecraft and play until SA release. Will pass all time instantly.

I cannot find words to describe how much I want this. It takes me back to the very first time I crept tentatively up the beach and had a look about the deceptively peaceful Chernarus. I just can't fucking wait.

Page 33 onwards brings up the subject of whether we have to make more than one payment, which leads to questions. The answer is simply that you pay for the game (if you're not a tester) and after that any updates etc are free. There will be no marketplace shite going on either, but we should all know that.

I think its a great idea on the whole. But if it were to be implemented then it would definitely need to be realistic. As someone else said, shots to the head should only damage anything worn on the head. Shots to the arms legs should not damage items in your pack. Shots to the front of your body should have a different effect to those fired at a players back and different effects depending on calibre etc. Sounds a bit too much for them to actually achieve it perhaps. Would be nice but doubt it will happen.

No. There should be no messages at all. Not even normal kill messages. Don't make DayZ a statistics war.

Well I may as well have one more flog at this old dead horse. The trouble with telling players to "Go and find a 1st persn server" is that, to me, I don't want to have to play on an exclusive server. I want the game to be the same for everyone, so that being good at it, is simply about how you play, not what view you choose. The argument that states 3rd person is harder, is true. But the game is harder for the wrong reason. If the game is hard because the other players are better me thats fine, but its not when its because there are invisible players round every corner and on every roof watching you. If they want to spy on you then they should have to expose themselves. Even if you do use 3rd person its still a stupid exploit that really puts me off. I like realism. I like the idea of trying to creep through a town (like Cherno) and attempt to use my stealth skills to "beat" other players by not being seen. You simply cannot do this with 3rd person. It forces a playstyle which makes people just run through town because there is no point using stealth, and in turn removes alot of the suspense and atmosphere. If we are given a choice, the entire DayZ community will be divided in two. It has to be one or the other. If it ends up being 3rd person then so be it. Maybe I'll buy it, maybe I won't. For me the best thing would be to improve 1st person. No one minds about all the other games that are 1st person. Probably because they never had the choice in the first place. On a side note... The motion sickness IS real, I get it playing Borderlands when using mouse+keys something awful. There is a general opinion thats says (in ArmA) smoothing should be turned off but I find it helps to stop jittery movement which could cause motion sickness. It could vary depending on hardware etc. It is possible to change the FOV in first person but I haven't checked it out.

The most important thing to me is a level playing field. I don't believe options are a good neccesarily. Servers should be 1st or 3rd without an option to choose. I prefer 1st person but nearly always use 3rd if the option is there because if you use 1st you're at an instant disadvantage. I absolutely loathe the way you can peek round corners and into rooms. Its the worst thing about the game.

More gore definitely.

Fallout style looting would be much better. In terms of having many places to look to keep a player occupied and potentially vulnerable. It would add a lot of suspense.

:D

Thats some er.. interesting chatter from that guy. Funny how they don't really do that much, pushing that lad about and then just standing there while you shoot them. They're pretty lethal from what I've seen of them.

Nevermind guns, food and clothes, does a Ural engine block fit into a Czech backpack?