:rolleyes: :D :lol:

If you want engine details, read up on ARMA 3. Seems like a no-brainer. If rocket wasn't going ot use the ARMA engine, what sense would this deal make? And if he's going to use the ARMA engine, he's sure as hell not going to tie a brand new, freshly-launched project to a 4 year old engine that is about to be replcaed.

Those are absolutely, positively, definitively not the definitions. I have been developing games for 10+ years and I have never, ever seen or heard anyone ever use those definitions or anything even remotely resembling them. Beta, above all, means the game is feature complete and entering final testing, optimization and bug fixing. A game in Beta will not have any new features or mechanics implemented before launch - only existing mechanics will be tweaked, debugged and optimized. So, no. We are a very, very long way from Beta. The truth is we're not even in Alpha yet. More like pre-Alpha or prototype by traditional definitions. You're dead wrong. That's really all there is to this entire discussion. And I don't know what the fuck any of it has to do with hackers. Good day, sir.

My suggestion for a player identification system. 100% less magical fairy dust sprinkled in your eyes that makes immediately able to distinguish friend from foe with 100% accuracy from 2km away. 100% less total bullshit. Stop with the magical bullshit suggestions. Thanks for shopping Zedsmart.

Surprise! Banditry rates are at a low point and murder rates have held roughly steady for a month. Seriously. Now can we talk about something that's relevant?

Banditry and murder rates have been steadily falling for months. And life expectancy has practically doubled since 1.5. So just stopping in to say that any claims thus far that have been made regarding the "recent rise" or the "explosion" or the "spread" of PvP within the game is a complete and utter fantasy with absolutely no basis in any reality outside the "pay attention to my forum drama" fantasy land that so many people around here love to create. Can we talk about something that's actually relevant to the motherfucking game for once, you ridiculous nincompoops?

I hate to burst your precious little bubble but it was never significantly more or less possible than it is today. The myth of the utopian friendly DayZ is just that. It never was. In the first releases you got murder by revolvers, then makarvos, now hatchets. It's all the same and always was and ever will be. Don't be sad. It's still really fun.

He probably benefited because it's pretty fun whacking the snot out of someone with a hatchet. Then we benefited because we got to read this hilarious story of your crippled ass getting eaten like a Johnsonville Bratwurst.

I say you still didn't read the motherfucking proposal I fucking asked you to read. You said "read this article" well guess what that article is about? The proposal I asked you to read! Did you read it? Because it doesn't say anything about a new engine or replacing the existing engine. In fact, it specifically calls for continued use of the existing engine as I have repeatedly said and directly quoted from the proposal so that's what I fucking say. Holy fucking shit dude. The proposal also says this by the way: DISCLAIMER: This notice does not constitute an invitation for bids or a Request for Proposal (RFP) and is not a commitment by the U.S. Government to procure subject products. No funds are available to pay for preparation of responses to this notification. The Government will use the information received to assist in the development of the GFT Flagship requirements.So those 7 companies in question aren't actually bidding for the contract; they're just providing "data" to the government which they will turn around and use to continue to develop the existing Flagship product. Nor is Bohemia in danger of "losing" said contract if they don't develop this mythical "new engine" which the proposal doesn't ask for "by 2014" which the proposal doesn't dictate. Now if you want to have a fucking discussion about the fucking proposal fucking read it for the last fucking time.

Yes. New training scenarios implemented into the existing engine. Not a new engine. I'm talking about the fact that your claim that they have to develop a "new engine" is completely false which you can see for yourself by reading the proposal in question which you clearly haven't done yet. It specifically calls for continued use of the existing engine to facilitate the addition and expansion of new equipment and training scenarios. No mention of a "replacement" engine or a new one developed from scratch, as you imply and as the PC Gamer article falsely claimed. I suggest you read the proposal if you're so interested in having a "discussion" about it.

Haven't I a clue? At no point does the proposal mention "replacing" the engine nor developing a "new" one. It talks exclusively about expanding on the existing engine functionality. Fucking read it if you want to discuss it. Here's a quote from the proposal: The current GFT flagship product, VBS2, was procured in a competitive source selection in Dec 08. Over the last three years, the product has evolved to include capabilities such as terrain paging, improved graphic realism, IED training modules, insurgent methodology training scenarios, Special Operations Command(SOCOM) enhancements, an improved cultural and language training capability, and a terrain database plug-in that will facilitate incorporation of Synthetic Environment (SE) Core databases. The Government has also invested in several middleware capabilities that provide additional features such as enhanced indirect fire skills training and combat lifesaver and medic training. The required product will provide the User the ability to connect existing and future middleware via an Application Programming Interface (API) or plug-in. This will enable the addition of new training capabilities for seamless training using the Flagship game as the user interface. This will ensure the reuse of a multitude of Governmental and Commercial Off-the-Shelf (GOTS/COTS) products and features already developed. You're obviously not interested in a "discussion." You want people to agree with you, which is difficult because of how completely wrong you are.

Oh look, another genius who only read the headlines of PC Gamer article and didn't actually read the article or the text of the proposal in question which specifically says they are not replacing the existing engine but rather seek to build upon its functionality.

I've never seen anyone outright deny the existence of hackers. What I see people rationally claim is that: It's not nearly as ever-present and dominating as some thread titles would have us believe and can be mitigated relatively quickly by simply switching servers, and: It should not necessarily be a critical priority for the development team at this time due to the relatively imminent release of DayZ's stand-alone version which will most certainly change the way client scripting works and disable 99.9% of the "hacks" that are in play at the moment. We're not saying there aren't any hackers; all we're saying is calm down and deal with it by changing servers periodically because it makes no sense for the development team to sink hundreds of man hours until solving this problem on an engine they're about to abandon in two months anyway - throwing all that work out the window in the process.

Just join your mom's. I heard it's huge.

Hint: You suck at hiding vehicles. Our group keeps them for ~15 days on average. As to the OP, rarity is good. If they weren't rare, they wouldn't be precious; and if they aren't precious, people will have no reason to risk their lives acquiring and defending them. Keeping them rare gives veteran players a scarce and precious commodity over which to fight and vie for control and dominance. It's the only end game we have. It gives us reason to hunt for 90 minutes at the end of every night for that perfect hiding spot because you don't want to use the same one twice. Take it away and all we will really have left is murder; and people seem to feel we've got enough of that around already. And trust me just because you don't see them doesn't mean they're not being tested.

If you read the proposal from the Army it says exactly the opposite. They want to keep the existing system and build upon it. It also says they're not actually seeking a new contract, but rather "gathering data" which means they're probably going to take it right back to BIS. Do you know what going stand-alone means?

I'm no admonishing him for playing that way, I'm admonishing him for playing that way and then complaining about it. I run around in Cherno a lot. I just expect to die when I do and I don't complain about it on the forums when the inevitable occurs.