Tempus (DayZ)

I dig this new devblog! Can't say my excitement hasn't cooled down a bit during the past months or that I'm not a little disappointed because of the long wait (though excessively pessimistic, fatalistic comments annoy me just as much as the uber-optimistic sunshine attitude), but this video really gets me in the mood for the standalone. To me, it seems to be the most "professional" (i.e. clear and organized) and informative one yet. A lot of new stuff to see and hear (for me at least) and the feel this build exudes really says DayZ to me, which can't be said for a lot of the previous videos.

Did you not read what he wrote at all? Hint: But alas, I forgot in your infinite wisdom you already considered this and responded to it in a thoughtful and tolerant way: I'm sorry, I just don't seem to understand how people can be this ignorant and egocentric.

Well, I can totally see your point, and as I said earlier, I believe first person view to be "superior" (in feel, not mechanics-wise) and more like the way it is meant to be. I'm still not convinced SA should be more restrictive with a lot of server-side options, though. Maybe I can't realize the extent of deterioration, as I only play vanilla, but I still think people should be allowed to make their own decisions. We'll have to agree to disagree there and wait and see what the SA will be like. :)

Agreed. But to stick with your analogy, what do you suppose to be the right way to do: Showing these kids how much better their lives would be if they got in shape (introduce your friends to first person, post exciting youtube videos about it) and provide sport clubs and diet to make it happen (make sure enough first person only servers are available), or forcing it on them by outlawing obesity (third person view), like some crazy totalitarian government would?

I agree, that's why I prefer first person view. I just can't see people playing third person servers affecting first person gameplay, given there will be enough first person only servers available (which this thread seems to be proof of). I respectfully disagree.

1. I don't understand why there is so much anger and hate in this thread. Surely an intense discussion can be civilised and polite, too. 2. I agree with every point made why first person makes for a more intense, enjoyable gameplay. 3. I don't agree third person view should be removed, I don't even think it needs to be fixed or reworked. Not trying to bullshit or be counterproductive, I just can't see why this can't remain a server-side option. This thread and the posts it contains proof a demand for first person only servers, why shouldn't there be enough available? Is third person view "broken" in some way and does it offer unfair advantages? It certainly does. Personally, I don't much care for multi-vehicle and extra-loot servers too, as they "cheapen" the gameplay in my opinion, but why should I want them removed? In no way am I forced to play on these servers, and I don't. Dean seems like a fairly independent and intelligent guy to me, why should these servers existing change his vision and the way the game evolves at all? I believe the gamers to be mature and old enough to make their own decisions, and even if they aren't, it is absolutely not my responsibility or duty to educate them, even if I believe the way they play to be "worse" than my own. Whatever reason people have to play the way they want to, even if it is because of cheaper gameplay, let them. I would even go so far as to allow "fun" servers with grenade launchers with unlimited ammo, the ability to transport anywhere, whatever. Of course, I wouldn't play the game on them, because the gameplay they offer would be incredibly stupid and lame to me, but I'm not forced to. On the contrary, this would let people who prefer that way of gaming stay far away from the servers I would attend. I can see no harm in letting it stay the way it is. The more support the product gets, the better. Even if the game would be flooded with 1337-CoD-ub0r-kiddies, as some protective types seem to believe (which I can't see happening), I see no reason for Dean to suddenly let this change the way he develops the game.

Are you being serious? With early access, paid alphas and betas, incredible pre-order exclusives and kickstarter craze everywhere, I am really worried about today's gamers' critical, sensible mind in general as it is. Now you suggest making it ridiculously expensive to test and try to help improving a game that seems to be a work-in-progress for quite some time, even after alpha release? Dean has said a couple of times the price for standalone will continue to rise, as game development progresses. This is the only right thing to do. Honestly, if they would do something arrogant and assholish like you suggested, I would consider not giving any money at all to a company that haughty, regardless of how much I want to play the game. And by the way: Really wanting to play a game has little to do with how much you are willing to spend on it, in my opinion, and nothing at all with how much you are able to.

Sorry, but I wouldn't like that at all. I can't help but fear everybody would jump all over the place (avoiding bullets or just being obnoxious), really taking away from immersion and making the game look silly. It's not like you can realistically jump that high anyways, though most games unfortunately make it look that way. I agree there should be a better and more aesthetically pleasing way to climb on things though, I suggest turning the "vault" animation for fences etc. into a "climbing" animation, depending on the object you are standing in front of. However, this has to remain a dream of the future for some time, I guess. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamescom Yeah, gamescom did start already, but only for press and other special guests, it will open for public audiences tomorrow. I have no idea what kind of interviews, shows or presentations are planned for DayZ though, would like some information on that too. ;)

I agree first person makes for a more immersive and exciting game play. One thing that hasn't been brought up though is the more wobbly and bobbing camera movement in first person view compared to other first person shooters, which tends to make some people motion sick and nauseous, as I've been told, making them switch to third person. Personally, I've never had any problems with this, but this more realistic camera movement is rather excessive indeed and the people who told me aren't the most competitive/exploiting kind of guys, so I'm sure this is a valid reason for some to refuse first person view.

I just wanted to voice my thoughts on pc/console development. Dean being ironic doesn't make what he said irrelevant, does it? I'm sorry if I am mistaken and got it wrong.

I guess so. I am a little worried still, because the video game industry has changed (not in the pc's favor) in the last 12 years and in my opinion games like the new X-Com, which I still loved, suffered heavily because of console-heavy design. I do hope that both of us are right and there's nothing to worry about, though. ;)

I don't approve of this knock. Considering myself a hardcore pc gamer, I'm not a fan of consoles and console games personally, but I don't hate on anybody who is, it's only a matter of preference really. The reason I figure a lot of people like myself are sceptical of DayZ being developed for consoles as well is the change of design of controls, interface and overall game mechanics this sometimes means. Pc games aren't better than console games, but they are different. As seen in the past, a compromise of design can get pretty annoying and frustrating and I guess it could be even worse for a more niche/hardcore survival game like DayZ. I like to hear the pc is the number one system for development (though I would have liked to hear that in a less cynical and aggressive way), but I really hope that keeping a console release in mind doesn't affect game design at all.

As seen in http://dayzmod.com/f...pha-to-be-good/.

Thank you very much for the good laugh I've just had! On a more serious note, you do know that Rocket answered this during your absence, don't you? I'm pretty sure you aren't being serious, plus this presentation is a few months old, but it shows pretty well how Rocket thinks about immersion and how far he is thinking about going with it. Which fortunately doesn't seem to be as far as your suggestions are going. Also:

Every time I visit the forums to look for a standalone release announcement and I don't find it, I come to this thread to cheer me up. :) I like to imagine this is what Dean's reaction to most of these pictures is!

I can't club them, I love them seals! D: But on a more serious and hopefully constructive note, I won't be siding with either group - those who don't mind those cans and those who do. But I can see where either of them are coming from and understand their different points of view. Let's face it - this whole debate in its core is about two different "sub-communities" resulting from two different ways of playing the game: one group wanting to have a more deep, realistic and immersive kind of gameplay and the other just trying to have fun and enjoying this sort of campy stuff (to simplify things and be blunt). Whatever decision is made or compromise is found in this specific case, either way some players will be disappointed or upset by it. I actually like NonovUrbizniz' suggestion (http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/125793-the-notorious-can-incident/page__st__60#entry1207557): The only way to please everyone and to NOT let someone feel like "the mod is headed in the wrong direction" is to let everyone decide which way they want to experience this game by choosing which server to play on. Compare it to the classic MMOs - and I know DayZ isn't one of them (neither do I want it to be), but just like server-architecture etc. this is one thing this game might positively learn from them. Specific "roleplaying" servers are very common amongst them and not only have a different policy, but also let players who want to immerse in the game's universe and lore gather and be safe from "normal" players who break their immersion by having peculiar names or texting and acting in accordance with the players behind them rather than the characters. Of course, this sort of option does seem rather abundant just for some sorts of food and drinks... but it can be used for much more, like the weapons and vehicles available on the server, the effects of lighting, the zeds' behaviour etc. For the future, I do think the distinction between "normal" and "roleplay" (or "veteran", "hardcore" or whatever you might call them) servers might be a viable option for combining and simplifying existing server-specific options, like crosshairs, 3rd person view and, well, having the new cans and other things. TL;DR: Include this sort of stuff in the server-specific options. Also, I do love them seals.

It says "Ein gutes Zeichen für Hacker auf dem Server ist, wenn der Server anfängt zu laggen. Also sorry, du joinst und es fängt übelst an zu laggen.", which translates to "It's a good sign for hackers being on the server, if the server starts lagging. Well, sorry, you join and the server starts lagging like crazy." Hope this helps.