-
Content Count
209 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Community Reputation
124 ExcellentAbout shagohad
-
Rank
Survivor
-
The Instruction at 0x00d1b2e2 referenced memory at 0x00000000. The memory could not be read
shagohad replied to marcelo7421's topic in Troubleshooting
Issue seems to be fixed now with a small patch today, made a bug tracker last night : http://feedback.dayzgame.com/view.php?id=21709 -
The Instruction at 0x00d1b2e2 referenced memory at 0x00000000. The memory could not be read
shagohad replied to marcelo7421's topic in Troubleshooting
I have also tried verifying and switching to experimental, restarting steam, restarting comp. With my internet I cant re-install very easily. If someone has the same issue and could try that would be great :) otherwise maybe help from devs? The issue began today, haven't experienced it before. -
also having this problem
-
MAYBE STOP PREMATURELY EJECTING YOUR AMMO HAHAHAHAAHAHAH
-
Go ahead, make a server with long nights and enforced gama.... and then watch it only ever have 5 players on it max. The truth is people dont like playing that shit other ways to make the game "hardcore" can be interesting but really all the things listed should just be in the base game. If its a survival game whose design ethos is based on realism why would one game-mode have different stamina/hunger/thirst settings? Why would one mode have less complexity with regards to weaponry? I think the game itself needs more balance with regards to realism but Its fine for HC mode to be basically the same thing just without the gameplay crutches of regular, ie: Crosshair, 3rd Person, Location on map
-
oh absolutely, its pretty crazy to think how much warfare has developed within 50-100 years considering its something we have been working on since the beginning of the human race. I just think quite a few people know very little about WW1 and how costly outdated military doctrines were to the people that fought in it.
-
haha, interesting but I'm not sure I understand your point? If its just a cool thing to look at alright, but if you are suggesting that warfare has always been horrific I absolutely agree. Its not like massive battles and wars were not fought before the modern era, it is however a fact that those wars were very different to the industrial wars fought after and though armies may not have adapted instantly they did adapt
-
I think you guys are connecting 2 different things and not really accounting for the context. The first real industrial war was arguably the American Civil war. Citing the war against the zulus is comparing a very different scenario. At the time the weaponry was available it had yet to be deployed in way that demonstrated its power. After the American Civil War there were activists who fought to stop the 1st world war which was being championed by romantic idealists who very much bought into the whole idea of of bright coloured men on horseback ect. They anticipated that if the new weaponry available was deployed on a scale perhaps even greater than that conflict, the resulting war would be horrific. And yet at the begging of the war most men felt that it would be a just like the other wars previously, short, and full of dashing men in uniform riding into glorious battle. An example of this as someone else mentioned in the thread is the French who suffered horrific casualties in the early days of the war as they were simply not prepared for the modern war they were fighting not just in their uniforms but in their tactical inability to adjust. I mean the entire concept of trench warfare came about because commanders could simply not adjust to the nature of modern war and so still insisted on fortified positions and slow advances across open terrain towards the enemy even though they proved to be routinely disastrous. Sorry for the history lesson but the point Im trying to make is there was an overlap between the age of chivalrous warfare with bright colours and heroism, and the age of modern industrial conflict. It wasn't because one could survive with the other, it was because few people anticipated what was coming. Warfare changed dramatically in a very short time when it became less about being a playground for aristocrats and more about survival (see WW2)
-
DayZ - Steam: "Unable to locate a running istance of Steam"
shagohad replied to RedElv's topic in Troubleshooting
wow, running steam as admin worked. Maybe a sticky or something could be created with fixes for this? Because I worked from the hardest solution to the easiest lol jsut based on what random threads were saying, ie: reinstall game, steam, gfx drivers, run exe. as adming and none of those worked even though I have been playing fine for months. Cheers for the fix though, I guess sometimes the most obvious fix is the right one -
DayZ - Steam: "Unable to locate a running istance of Steam"
shagohad replied to RedElv's topic in Troubleshooting
bumping this, Still have no fix :( -
DayZ - Steam: "Unable to locate a running istance of Steam"
shagohad replied to RedElv's topic in Troubleshooting
I have read both those threads, neither fix is applicable/works this thread seems to be the closest to the issue: http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/159724-game-wont-launch-nothing-happens-when-i-press-play/ however my issue is I have one guy I dont know who hosted some DLLs (now removed). This issue is all over the internet and has no official response as far as I can tell -
DayZ - Steam: "Unable to locate a running istance of Steam"
shagohad replied to RedElv's topic in Troubleshooting
Unfortunately it may not be that simple. I have a similar issue. When attemtping to launch DayZ through steam nothing happens (the app looks like it opens for a second then closes instantly, in the task manager it appears for just that millisecond) If I create a desktop shortcut I get the same error as the OP when launching it. I have tried re-installing Steam and DayZ to no avail. I have seen this error in multiple other threads but there doesnt seem to be a response from the actual dev team. The fix seems to be replacing some dll files, however I would like to have something more official before I go larking about with my windows files. I have been playing the standalone since release switching between experimental and stable every now and then. I have only recently had this problem edit: another fix proposed is a complete Steam re-install, which seems a bit drastic to me and not something I think I should have to do -
PMC gets you the default survivor skin that you spawn in as well as the hero skin (jeans, cap, checked shirt), BAF gets you what was the camo uniform. Its worth noting if you are playing a few of the different mods out there the camo skins may have been replaced by ARMA2 versions and you may not even spawn in the PMC one. If you are just playing vanilla then it might be worth it.
-
Well, I think you are wrong on the first point, on recently returning to the mod the movement is as godawful as ever, but hey if you really prefer the previous generation of ARMA movement I guess thats up to you. The standalone really has improved it. The zombies are obviously a work in progress. I and everyone I play with has consistently better FPS than in the mod where stuttering (not really frame drop jsut weird stuttering) was a constant issue. I mean if you are going to review an unfinished product, I assume because you want it to improve, maybe tackle major issues like the player to player desync. Everything you mentioned is either redundant or performance based which for all we know is just your computer...
-
oh yeah thats right, AKM just hit harder than stanags and AK74, still the point still stands, the standard rifles are a lot more interesting combat wise at least in ARMA2. If you look at groups like ShackTack they just dont use the sniper rifles in missions because they don't like the functionality in ARMA for PvP. Im fine with sniping in dayz but it should be challenging.