doctorbadsign

I was tempted to see if i could bind run forward to one of the buttons on the side of my mouse, will this work? I used one of them for free look, but a run forwards on the mouse would be handy, it would mean I can sip my tea whilst running.

I can't wait for there to be some kind of stamina system. The main thing that annoys me at the moment about DayZ is that you can run everywhere like some kind of terminator. It will be nice when you have to think about whether you can make it to Balota without collapsing from fatigue. It may lead to radically different survival strategies.

Increasing the number of items that are imperative for survival would decrease the space available for other loot, meaning that you would not get people running around with enough ammo to kill every player on the server several times over and 5 guns etc. If for example it would increase your long term survival potential if you always carried spare clothes, a cooking pot and gas stove etc then you're automatically going to encourage a more survival focused game because their loot is tied to their survival.

Caffeine deficiencies

To people who: A. Are not Dean Hall and B. Might not necessarily want to put it all back into DayZ or all at once It is worth noting that they have expanded their team already. But as I say, Rocket will obviously take a slice of the money but its not all his, nor is it his job to delegate it.

I agree completely. However I do still have reservations about Early Access. For instance we get no guarantee that our game will be finished. That it will wind up how we pictured it would be when we bought it. We cannot foresee whether the development company will pull the plug on the project or not. Its wide open to scams. Whilst I agree that we should come to expect buggy unfinished products when we buy into an Early Access title, however there are many things that may happen that we do not expect. Of course I'm not saying DayZ will go down this route, but I think in general people are too willing to part with their cash for something unfinished with little to no guarantee that it will be anything other than that when it comes to games.

I agree. They are sold on the premise of being tested. However, the majority of people who buy games do not do so for that purpose. I don't want to test games as a hobby, I want to play them. I seriously doubt that the majority of the 1.5 million people bought DayZ for anything other than entertainment. The main reason I got it is because I knew I'd get it cheaper. Because of this people end up frustrated. Like you mention dying of a heart attack because you have to run everywhere. From our perspective of wanting an entertaining, non-frustrating experience having vehicles before heart attacks makes perfect sense, but from the perspective of the dev team it may not for various reasons. Hence we are given a frustrating experience. To their credit the DayZ team has been very vocal in warning people against buying the game. However, as I mention I seriously doubt that most of the 1.5 million who bought it care about that. Herein lies the problem. DayZ is broken from an entertaining gameplay perspective and will remain so for quite some time. When it is finally released I doubt there will be many still interested in it (all who want the game have it already) and it makes you wonder where then does the incentive to finish the game come from?

I'm sure the dev team have their logic behind the order in which they are implementing things, so I think its a bit presumptuous to say that they are doing them in the wrong order. Remember, whilst you might have bought this game because you wanted some form of entertainment (who can blame you, that is what games are for), the game is actually very far from being completed. Unfortunately, for PC gamers at least, the days in which games were finished before you were allowed to play them are gone. Whilst it might seem appealing to get "Early Access" to a game, all you are really getting is a chance to play an unfinished broken version (which is kinda why 'Early Access' is a misleading title). What I am trying to say is, the logical order in which the dev team implements features is different to the logical order that we want as gamers. Really we shouldn't be playing it, but we are, and whilst we are we have to deal with that unfortunately. My proposition would be that we as consumers stop being conned into thinking that Early Access is a privilege (back in the day they paid people to test games) and avoid it where possible or at least be extremely cautious of it. Maybe then games developers will develop the incentive once again to actually produce finished games that are fun when we play them. Personally I don't really play DayZ anymore because of the problems you mention and more. I'd be surprised if people are still interested by the time it launches, if it ever comes out of Early Access (that's another issue with the program, we don't get any guarantee that the games we purchase will ever get finished). I love the DayZ concept and I do keep checking out new features here and there, but I've come to realize that the Early Access program does not really benefit consumers. Excuse my rant...

I think its a symptom of the fact that there is absolutely no localized loot in the game. What we need is for there to be specific rare items that only spawn in certain locations. Between Electro and Balota you can have every useful item in the game, that's the problem. There is no need to go any further.

I don't mind his videos. Not particularly a fan. I do respect him though, he sure knows how to edit together entertaining footage and people seem to like it, so fair play to him. If I could do what he does and make a few bob out of it I would.

Mostly my encounters have been somewhere in the middle. Non-hostile, but not friendly. On one occasion I had a Mosin pointed at me until I put my axe away then I was allowed to leave. Another occasion I was at the NEAF, saw a guy that was clearly a bit afraid that I had a gun in my hands (they were unarmed), I told them it was cool and I wasn't going to shoot them, but they said nothing and I left them to it. Another time I was playing with some friends and we saw a guy with an SKS we just told them to keep their hands up and face the other way whilst we went past. None of these encounters were friendly, but at least no one died.

I hope someone makes a mod that removes the zombies, and adds cannibalism... Then we could have The Road the game.

Arma 3 runs better, with higher fps and on higher settings for me than DayZ does. In my opinion Arma 3 looks really nice given it's setting, the strong vibrant lighting fits. However, I think dull and drab fits DayZ. I don't want to walk around Chernarus feeling like its a summers day in the Mediterranean.

Just be weary, this could be a 'hey bandits, here's everything I have, I'm prepared to meet up with you [so you can kill me]...' kind of topic. Make sure you don't meet anywhere that you might get ambushed, or bring back up ;)

What do you even mean? I don't know where anyone could be hiding in 1PP either, but I play safe in the knowledge that no one can shoot me in the back after using their superhuman powers to know when my back is turned whilst remaining invisible. If you enjoy dying/killing like that then fine, but some of us find it unrealistic and frankly rather pussy. And in 1PP you have to constantly watch your back, its much more immersive, tense, and realistic. As I say, I expect none of the 3PP advocates to make any arguments about things being realistic in DayZ, they enjoy the benefits of the least realistic thing in the game, thus their opinion is invalid on said matters.

To be fair I think it is an example of broader lighting changes as a whole. From what he said I gather these lighting changes will mean that playing at night time will be better---which is something people have been bitching about from the get go.

The thing is in 1PP I have to look over the edge of a building to see you coming. Ergo, the guy running towards it has an opportunity to see you popping up to look. If you're prone on a roof in 1PP you can't see shit without compromising yourself. In 3PP you can lay on the roof watch the person run into the building without them knowing you're there, watch them run out stand up and shoot them in the back. This is way different to what can happen in 1PP and totally different to hiding in a bush. This is the difference, of course there are advantages and disadvantages all over this game however you play. But most of them are ones that would exist IRL (hiding in a bush etc.) Being able to see everything around you whilst lying on your belly on a roof is totally unrealistic. You'd need to take a risk and peek IRL, thus meaning the person below might see, and start shooting. There is no waiting for the opportune moment in 1PP you just have to brave it, unlike in 3PP. I don't really care if people want to play with such unrealistic advantages and disadvantages at the table, but really if they do they might as well drop any other argument that they have pertaining to realism in game.

The person on the street below the guy on the roof. If you want to be able to see out of a tree or bush fully in 1PP you need to stick your head out a bit or else you will have leaves in the way. Also it provides no cover. The thing is people can hide in bushes IRL, people cannot lay on their belly on the roof and get a 360 degree view of their surroundings whilst remaining invisible to everyone below...

Hiding in a tree or a bush does not provide 100% clear visuals, or cover, nor does it guarantee not being spotted. Hiding on a roof in 3PP pretty much guarantees all of this. Don't get me wrong, play on 3PP all you want, but to say it does not create an uneven playing field is objectively wrong.

There's a big difference between getting the drop on someone and remaining totally invisible without a chance of being spotted, totally uncompromised until their back is turned. Surely you can understand that. I can remain in cover, spot you and keep an eye on you whilst not even compromising myself for a second, I can then wait till the opportune moment and then kill you in 3PP. This is not the same as getting the drop on someone.

Yeah, but if you're in that position it really isn't equal footing, you can peep over and kill someone before they have a chance to see you. Normally to take a peek at someone from behind cover you have to risk exposure.

Not true. With 3PP enabled I could be in a position where I can see you clearly, yet remain in cover in a position where you cannot see me and vice versa.

My theory is that it is because of the influence of certain youtubers. Most of the popular DayZ youtubers I've seen use 3PP, often unashamedly to look around corners etc. This influences other players to mainly use 3PP.

Real Life

Why would you need a disclaimer stating that he is going to leave the game when he is no longer needed? Why is that important. He has stated emphatically that he will remain with the development as long as he is needed. Also he has never said that DayZ will not be as good as it can be within the limitations of what it is as a concept. Nor has he said that it will be unfinished. All he has said is that it does not match his vision as the perfect multiplayer game and has fundamental flaws. Not once did he say that the flaws were anything preventing the game from winding up as a finished product, or that the they will result in the game being broken in its finished state. Reading this into his words is pure speculation. All you can really gather is that he views the game as falling short of his vision as the perfect multiplayer game---which I would be inclined to agree with.