Target Practice (DayZ)

To my mind, it's because the devs are paying too much attention to the QQing. No matter what the devs do, some people are going to bitch and moan about it, either because it changes a feature they liked, or because they just hate change. I would like to see a little more self-belief from the dev team and a little bit more of a firm hand - stop trying to be all things to all people and create the game the way THEY see fit - there's a difference between 'listening to the community' and 'listening to the complainers'.

I shot one in the face with a double-barrelled shotgun. It noticed that. As did every single one of its buddies in a five mile radius. Not one of my better ideas.

Oh yeah, I'd assumed that was the case, that it's spawning zombies more or less on the loot spawns and then they're wandering out from there, but there seems to be quite a few cases where one of the zombies is bugging out slightly and just standing still right on top of the loot, making it more or less impossible to get that loot without either aggroing or killing the zombie. It's not a problem if you're geared up, but for a fresh spawn without a real way to kill zombies and with loot being harder to find, it's a bit of a frustrating one. Edit: just to clarify as well, it's not just inside spawns - I've noticed that they're doing it a lot around the spawns near the non-enterable houses.

Interesting you raise that point, as I've just seen the exact same thing. I was crawling through a small village with only some very basic gear (double-barrel shotgun with no ammo, a can of coke and a water bottle) and out of nowhere a CZ550 shot rang out and pinged into the ground next to me. Not stopping to laugh at how bad a shot the guy must have been to miss a crawling target from that range, I got up and ran like hell, zig-zagging and generally doing my best to shake him. I could hear aggro behind me and figured I'd be okay, as he'd have to lose them or risk losing his gear. But he kept on shooting. He managed to get a lucky shot in and broke my legs, so I turned to look, and there he was, swarmed by zeds, taking aim at me to finish me off. Not two minutes later, he was dead. I just don't understand the logic in that - he clearly had far more to lose by taking the kill - heck, my legs were broken, he could have just run off, lost them nearby and come back to finish me off. I think it's an unfortunate side-effect of the game becoming as popular as it is that has resulted in it attracting those who have no interest in playing it 'in the spirit' of the game, and are simply out to kill as many people as they can. Even more unfortunate is that there's nothing we can do about that.

I'm afraid you've lost me there. Why does killing on sight affect the likelihood of some random guy with an AK opening fire in Cherno? I don't have a problem with KoS players - I don't play that way myself, and I feel like they're missing out on a big part of what makes DayZ what it is, but it's their experience, and they're free to play as they choose. What does annoy me is when they try and justify it by saying 'well I only play KoS because everyone else does and it's me or them' - bullshit. Yes, there will be times occasionally when firing the first shot is a sensible move, but those are generally pretty rare. I have fired the first shot exactly twice, both were at Stary - one was a misunderstanding, and the other was at a guy lurking near the military tents in a ghille with a large rifle. I've been shot at unprovoked more than a few times, I've had some pretty tense standoffs a few times, and I've made a temporary ally a few times as well. Yet still I don't feel that I HAVE to shoot first to ensure my survival. You do not HAVE to shoot first to ensure your survival when meeting other players - if you choose to do so, that's cool, and it's your decision to do so. Just don't make out that you've been forced to do it by other players, because it's a limp excuse, plain and simple.

One of the better posts I've seen on this subject, have some beans. I entirely agree that a large part of the frequency of KoS players is down to the abundance of weapons and ammunition, and would very much like to see how the game would play if these were drastically reduced. I think your assertion that older players are less likely to shoot on sight has a lot of mileage, although obviously we both know it'll never be that black and white - there are older players who enjoy the whole KoS thing just as there are younger players who will go out of their way to help a complete stranger. My personal theory is similar to yours - older players will obviously tend to have more life experience, and through their jobs or their home lives, they'll be used to situations where the only way of asserting control of a situation is through communication and behaviour (as tempting as it might be, you simply can't deal with a difficult client with a few rounds from an AK47!). That kind of thing will translate into DayZ - a player who's confident in their ability to control a situation without resorting to violence is going to be much more likely to use those skills than someone who doesn't have that experience and confidence. I do agree that it would be very interesting to see how a server full of older (25+) players would compare to a server full of younger (14-17) players and how much interaction took place and what forms that interaction took.

I think you're misunderstanding my intention. I'm not talking about the whole of DayZ when I say don't use the 'unrealistic' argument, as there's obviously a certain atmosphere and setting that the game has, and in general you want to keep things within that setting - for example, a laser gatling gun would be awesome, but completely out of place, because it's unrealistic for the setting. Where I have an issue is when people say 'X zombie isn't realistic'. Why? What 'real' experience does that person have with zombies that qualifies them to make such a statement? Zombies are no more real than vampires, werewolves or ginger kids with friends, and therefore to claim that a specific interpretation of them isn't realistic is in itself a complete misnomer. Just like Frankenstein's monster, Dracula and any other character who's been committed to folklore down the years, each creator will put their own slant on the myth and modify it as they see it. Whether you like it or agree with it is down to the individual, but to suggest that a given interpretation is unrealistic just doesn't wash, as they are by their very nature unrealistic creations.

Ah, fair enough - I didn't know the exact damage figures, but those seem pretty reasonable in context, so damage is fine it seems - as you suggest, a bit of a boost to range would be helpful though.

No, you're right. The one thing I look for in my zombie apocalypse games is realism. You know, with accurate real-world zombie modelling based on real data that... meh, you get my point. I don't mind whether people like or dislike the new virals, but for the love of sweet zombie jebus folks, DO NOT use 'it's not realistic' as an argument. Anyway, on-topic, and yeah, I'd like to see the crossbow get a little bit of a buff, even if it was just a better sight of some kind - take a look at an actual crossbow being used sometime on a human analog (a dummy or a pig carcass or something) - that is going to do just as much, if not potentially more damage as a low to medium caliber round.

Indeed. The absolute worst time for someone to see/visit the DayZ community is just after a new patch, as all the RUINED FOREVER types come out and start complaining about everything. That's not to say that anyone who doesn't immediately love the patch is a whiner, but there's a mountain of evidence that Rocket would probably be interested in climbing that suggests that many of the complainers simply register to rant, then give it a week and realise that actually, things aren't as bad as they were making out and go back to quietly enjoying the game.

Every time there's a new patch you're in here saying that it's ruined everything forever and that you're stopping playing the mod because of it. Yet the moment the next patch comes out, you'll be back in here saying that you're going to stop playing it. You should be careful with that, less someone more cynical than myself think you're just being melodramatic about a bit of change and will carry on playing regardless. :)

That's actually not a bad idea. I know they're making weapons modular to a point in the SA, so something like this would be a nice addition, and probably not too hard to implement. As long as they don't make them decay insanely fast like they did in Far Cry 2, this could be a good idea.

What's running in the background? (antivirus, firewalls, stuff that sits in your system tray) - it's always worth checking that out just to be sure it's not something silly like your antivirus trying to scan files as they're accessed!

Well, ask a silly question... ;) Hope it works for you.

Oh shit, I must have stayed in the shower too long and somehow ended up going back to 2009. While we're at it, did you guys know that the cake is a lie?

Hang on... Let me just get my crystal ball and check for you?! Seriously dude, there's no way of knowing. You're just going to have to try it and see. I can say fairly safely that it's unlikely to make things any worse.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=install+dayz+with+dayz+commander

In some ways, yes - in others, no. He's typical of the 'bad' side of the community. They register (usually after a patch), moan, bitch and complain about whatever it was that was changed that they didn't like and then vanish within a week. They're entirely interchangeable and leave no lasting impression on the community or the game other than a bad taste in the mouths of those that have to interact with them. They'll have slowed down a bit in a week or two. However, he is NOT typical of the larger community, which most of the time is actually populated by some pretty decent folk who have a lot to offer with regards to intelligent debate and discussion about the game, and I'd urge you not to judge all of us by this idiot's behaviour.

Interesting point you raise there regarding teaching a cat to read, because it seems I'm in a similar situation right now - you've been given the advice and seem to be of the opinion that you have the skills to help fix the issue you have such a problem with, but instead seem far happier to just sit here from a distance and make vague assertions about the talents of the people who have made the game you're playing. Heck, a less polite person than me might assert that you're just engaging in the time-honoured internet tradition of 'keyboard warrioring'. Anyway, have a pleasant day, I shall leave you to your posturing. :)

*shrug* - you're entitled to your opinions and your right to voice them in a reasonable manner. I'd be lying if I said I didn't think you were overreacting though. Perhaps if you've got as many solutions to DayZ's problems as you suggest, it might be worth contacting the team and offering your assistance and experience rather than badmouthing them from a distance? :)

If you disagree with their method of testing the Alpha, there's always the option of not participating.

Whilst I see your point (and agree to a certain extent), I feel that maybe you've misunderstood what the aim of the Alpha is - it's (as I understand it) a testing ground for features/balances that could go into the finished Standalone. Now, sometimes, a feature like the tackle will be introduced - sadly ARMA II's engine has more or less no way of accurately modelling such a thing, so it would likely need to be hardcoded into the engine or some such (I'm afraid my understanding of programming game engines is fairly limited!), which is likely going to take a fair bit of skill and time to do. Now, it's an interesting feature, and they want to try it out, so they work it in there as best as they can with the existing tools. Sure, it's ugly and does the odd strange thing, but the mechanic is in there, and they can now see how it works and what effects it has on the way players play the game (if it makes them more cautious, whether they change their approach at all). That's my understanding of what they're trying to do - yes, it's not perfect, and yes, it looks ugly as hell, but we are playing an Alpha version of the game, and DayZ is a hell of a lot more complete than most Alphas out there!

What system are you running it on?

Yeah, cannot overstate how much better flying with a stick is - even a cheapo-deluxe like the one I got off Amazon for £12 - having a thumb throttle so I can go from full throttle to engines dead in a split second is just crazy useful, not to mention that it makes precision flying a lot easier too.

Aye, DayZ is currently one of the few situations where Steam isn't actually the most convenient/efficient way of running the game. DayZ Commander is much better for that particular task.