ZedsDeadBaby

Yes, people mass killing entire servers all at once over and over again is why the survival rate is rising. Nailed it. NAILED IT.

I keep hearing this and every time I login and I'm behind the wheel. I'm not in a clan.

85% players, 10% zombies, 1% doors, 1% ladders, 1% trying to peek over a ledge, 1% friendly fire, 1% clicking respawn.

Look, I'm not trying to quash dissent or claim to hold the truth of the matter. I'm just suggesting people take a bit of care before making such definitive attributions and bold claims. We are visual beings. And social. Seeing is believing and all that. The presence of the bandit skin was visceral. You saw, you could believe you had the truth of it and make a decision with confidence. Your brain remembers all the times bandit-skinned folk tried to kill you and all the times survivors helped you clear out the grocery store and shared loot with you, and it tucks away all the contrary evidence - the stuff that might make you question your eyes and hence your confidence - all the times those survivors fresh off the coast emptied a clip of makarov rounds into you as soon as your client loaded the beach. Waves crashing then BRAP BRAP respawn. You don't file that away under particularly memorable experiences because it doesn't match up with what your other senses are telling you. Then, the bandit skin was gone. You felt less safe. Less confident. You couldn't be sure of anything anymore, and at the same time all these other variables are changing around you - more players in the game, more experienced players who know where to find ammo, how to avoid zombies, and where players tend to hang out, frequent lanes of travel, popular watering holes, vehicle spawns, hospitals, grocery stores, etc. With greater knowledge and greater numbers comes greater threat from players and because this happened to coincide with a visual change your brain is more than happy to say "Oh, hey, the skin went away and suddenly I'm getting shot more often so obviously one thing caused the other." You can see, though, how that might not be true even though your brain is trying really hard to make those pieces fit together for you? And if there were a small change, how easy it might be for your brain to mistake it for a medium-sized, significant, or life-altering, game-destroying one? Without pure numbers (pre- and post-change) - raw data and an in-depth analysis that considered the multi-dimensional nature of an online environment with ever-changing players on one side and game parameters on the other, you have to tread so carefully in making claims like this. We see similar pitfalls in the world of online poker. You see arguments 50 pages long on poker forums where people claim that one site or another is "rigged" because they personally insist they have seen too many straight flushes, or quads, or get "sucked out on" too often, etc. They don't consider that they're playing 225 hands per hour instead of the 25 they're used to seeing in real life - sometimes 2, 3, or 4 tables at once. 1000+ hands per hour vs. 25 but their brain doesn't care. It ignores completely the 999 hands that aren't amazing and stores that 1000th one under "holy shit" and over time suddenly they're like "Gee, my holy shit file is filling up awfully fast. Something must be amiss!" You bring up the "hundreds of posts on the forums" which is true - there are many. But, again, none of them say anything but "I seem to be getting shot more and this other thing over here changed and made me feel uncomfortable." Nobody provides any statistics, just a series of anecdotes or more often nothing at all and then a definitive statement of fact about the source of their woes. It's a recipe for cognitive bias. One person posts a message, and the next person comes along and is like "Oh, hey, my brain likes the way THAT sounds" and suddenly you've got a chorus of anecdotal agreement that yes, in fact, storks do bring babies. I joined DayZ well before the skin was yanked. My first experience in the game with another survivor was epic. It was one of my first shoot-outs with a true horde of zombies - 15+ chasing me into a barn. As I finished them off, I heard shots from outside. "Friendly outside barn near Elektro?" I asked in side. "Yes." He came in. He went up the west stairs and I went east. He found some beans and makarov rounds and made his way over to my side where I had found a Winny with 3 stacks of ammo. As soon as I picked it up I said "He's going to want this." and my brain hadn't finished the sentence before I heard the report. I spun and pulled the trigger and hit him in the neck. He went down instantly. I was the better shot. In my panic I backed off the ledge of the the barn and broke my leg. The gun shots hand angered the rest of the zombies outside. I had to shoot them from the ground while the dude bled to death above me. Maybe it's my brain that's tricking me because this was my first impression, definitive DayZ experience. Again, neither of us can really be sure until we see the truth in numbers that no amount of anecdotes or gut feelings is going to tease out.

Trying to figure out what this has to do with EULAs. Do people think that if they don't sign a EULA that means they get to do whatever they want with other people's intellectual property?

Hey I totally love this except the parts I don't love! You will learn to cope. Or not. It's nothing to us either way.

Being a good guy in real life is generally harder, too. That's kind of the point, isn't it? Part of the pride you're supposed to take in being good and pure and true, that it's not always easy but it's morally just and ethically pure? That you sacrifice the "easy way out" in favor of what is good and right? You can't have it both ways. And hey, if you think bandits have it too easy, get a gun and shoot some of their fucking faces off. Make life a little harder for them.

Maybe trying is the point?

Source for this? 'cause, I mean, the textures already exist in the game for interiors so they're already being loaded. Using more of the same texture doesn't increase memory usage - only draw calls - so I fail to see how this could possibly be an engine limitation.

Giving everyone a permanent parachute for now would at least be a tiny band-aid while the larger problems are dealt with.

Holy hot bowl of shit please just search. You don't even need to use the function, your eyes will suffice. There are like 2 other threads in the last 15 minutes on this topic, both of which have polite responses from the lead dev... Stop now, okay? Please?

Nope. This "parliament" would have carte blanche to filter out whatever ideas their arbitrary opinions deemed unworthy of the dev's attention, and the process of making ideas "more concise" or "implementable" would inherently involve whittling out parts of the original idea, or ignoring sections of the ensuing discussion - again, based on arbitrary preconceptions. rocket and his team have things under control. If they lose control, they can hire a community manager to do this job in house and train him/her directly. They don't need a bunch of unqualified forum warriors who think they know what's best for the game to swoop in and clean house for them.

Well, gee, lets start with the subject line. Do something "already" implies an impatient demand for immediate action - a lack of patience and understanding that researching these issues are more important than fixing them right now. Then "This game is going to shit" is pretty loud-mouthed if you ask me, no? Then "i just refuse to play this game anymore" like okay? Then fuck off. You're here specifically to test and find issues like this and yet as soon as you run into them you bugger off and stop playing? Then you're worthless to the devs as a tester. Then you wrap it up with another appeal to impatience, "do it before this game turns into..." So, yeah. Is that not enough?

He's bringing up a real concern like an asshole and making loud-mouthed demands as if this were a retail game. "Fix it now" bullshit doesn't belong here. The whole point to Alpha is to dig into issues like this, get at the root of them, and come up with long term, stable, workable and scaleable solutions. If you're not patient enough to wait for those kind of fixes, which can take a ton of time to research let alone implement, then you can fuck right off and play another game until DayZ is Beta or Final. Besides, a single search would have turned up plenty of other threads and all the information about what the devs are doing that he could want.

False when it was said a week ago. False yesterday. False today. There are plenty of Incentives to Cooperative Play.

Right, unless the admin chooses not to restart purposefully which is what the thread is about? Lord, man. Try to step down off the admin soapbox there a bit and join the conversation.

Of course they do. If their server bugs out and zombies stop spawning (as often happens) they can simply not restart the server to rectify the situation, hence resulting in a server with 0 zombies indefinitely until it crashes involuntarily.

ARMA 2 doesn't have a monthly fee because it's ARMA 2. Like, a sequel, right? We had ARMA 1, and before that OFP. And soon, ARMA 3. Is that the model you want for DayZ? Pay for DayZ 1 and get fewer content updates because the team is working on DayZ 2 which will receive still fewer major updates because the team moves on to DayZ 3: The DayZiest? Monthly subscription allows for a full team and focused, ongoing updates with tons of new content and features. That's what DayZ should get, and that requires ongoing revenue - either through microtransactions or a monthly subscription. Probably both.