grizzle

Clearly a sign he intends to remove PvP from the game.

I've stopped but am keeping an eye on the game to see if it actually delivers what it promises. If it doesn't, I won't be back.

Track you down and steal your bike.

People slamming ArmA are utterly clueless.

No. DayZ does not allow any other mods.

It's never been a question of fairness, but one of good gameplay. Why take a game that promises so much and reduce it to just another shoot on sight death match?

Bullshit. It's a game. I don't care what rocket says about it. It's still a game. Hey... I know... let's create an "experimental anti-game" where we throw a bunch of people on the same server, give them guns and food and tell them to survive with no rules... NO RULES MAN!!!. Wouldn't that be cool? It'll all be about emotions and fear and shit. It will be so unpredictable man, unlike anything anyone has ever seen. Lo and behold we have a very large world death match that pretty much plays like any other FPS out there except it's a lot slower. Wow. Who would have guessed that? For crying out loud all you have to do is load up ARMA2 without DayZ and play with a group of people with no rules. BAM! you have the same exact thing as the "anti-game" that rocket tried to create. It's nothing new but it sure sounded cool to a lot of people who can't see it for what it really is. DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE.

Which is exactly why zombies should be removed. The game would remain the same without them. Rocket had an idea for a no holds barred zombie survival game... only the players have decided that zombies don't matter. So either rocket needs to make zombies a consequential part of the game or he needs to remove them and just rename the game "Survive!".

The problem with this rationale is that this is a game and people respawn. Bandits would feed on themselves until they eventually wipe themselves out - this cannot happen in the game. Surviviors would capture and either kill or incarcerate bandits - this too cannot happen in game because bandits respawn and there is no way to lock them up. Killing someone as a potential threat means NOTHING in this game because they respawn and become a "threat" once again. Fear of "perma-death" has nothing on ACTUAL death. Imparting hypothetical real world acts and attitudes into a GAME that can't even come close to emulating the real world experience is utter bullshit. This game is what it is simply because there are no negative consequences to killing other players. End of story. If rocket REALLY wanted to "experiment" and create an "anti-game" he would make death as close to real world death as one could get and that would mean that if you die, you never, ever get to play again. Do you think that might change the dynamics a bit? "If this were to happen in real life..." MY ASS.

Not getting shot on sight.

A game about survival should only track how long one has survived. Having a leaderboard and tracking kills only encourages griefing and senseless PvP.

There is nothing there to be concerned about. You will be disappointed.

LOL. What year were you born?

What should it be called?

Well, he's failed on that front too (for me anyway). I haven't felt or experienced emotions in this game that I haven't felt in others. I also am not the type to take pleasure in making another players game experience a bad one. Knowing that I just made some derp on the other end of the line angry/sad etc. doesn't thrill me in the least. Great concept for a game but very poor execution (and no I don't buy into the whole anti-game/social experiment line either - what a load of crap that is.) I've said it before and I'll say it again - remove the Zombies from DayZ and the game remains the same. It will only be successful if he concentrates on feeding the mindless PvP addicts. Marketing it as anything less than FFA PvP is utterly dishonest. I'll be keeping an eye on it as the concept still interests me, but I have little faith it will change much from its current state if the issues aren't addressed.

Or one could just stop playing because the game does not deliver as advertised. This is why DayZ will ultimately fail. Rocket would be wise to remove the zeds, leave in the rest of the mechanics and just call the game Kill or Be Killed. It would no longer be a zombie survival game, but let's face it, it hasn't been that for several months now.

QQ

But unlike RealLife , in DayZ they respawn. So "eliminating the threat" only delays the threat until they respawn and gear up.

Six was designed to managed the multitude of mods that you cannot even use with DayZ. It's a lot of overhead for an installation that amounts to copying the DayZ files to a mod folder. I vote for manual.

Yes.

No it's not. It's advocating discouraging certain bandit behaviors. As it stands now, the only players getting "punished" are survivors that want no part of senseless PvP.

This is the sort of PvP that adds depth and excitement to the game. Good on you for (sometimes anyway) playing this way. If only your playstyle were adopted by the gankers, DayZ would be SO much more enjoyable.

Agreed. Muggings and non-lethal ambushes make PvP exciting. Anonymous killing for shits and giggles adds nothing to the game.

There has to be a source of light to be reflected. No Moon, no light. That being said, the blackness of the night has long been a topic of discussion with ArmA. It hasn't changed in all this time so I doubt very much it ever will.

It's the server. I routinely connect from the US to servers in France (due to my being limited to playing at night) and I have zero problems. In fact, my ping in-game is always better than what shows on the server screen. I even connect to some servers showing 2500 in red, but once I connect it's just fine. Ping isn't nearly as important in this game as it is in faster paced games. Sub 300 pings are completely playable so don't let ping be too much of a determining factor.