LaughingJack (DayZ)

I think ozelot is mad, because she found out that DayZ is not pronounced "days" or "Day-Zed" but Day-zee, like Daisey, what in fact is ozelots real name. Case closed.

Blue Öyster cult - don't fear the reaper ;)

Good thread Grimey, but in the end, not the game or anything in it is the problem you are facing, it's just the players. If there is no "outside limitation" that forces players to play together - e.g. Teams - and there is no penalty in being an asshole, people behave like assholes. As you pointed out, the only way that there is a small chance that people will work - sometimes - together, is when they are facing problems they simply can't deal alone with...like an abstruse mass of Zombies. Just go through some of the most mentioned things... Chars life is not valueable (like it is now) : Kill everyone because...fun? Chars life is valueable (gear hard to acquire, slowly gained passive skills): Kill everyone because otherwise I don't die. People just kill, because they don't have anything else to do - Even if there were a million things to do, people would kill each other. Why? Because they can. Massive amount of Zombies: Wait for player to loot town, kill him afterwards. Meet player in town? Kill him as fast as possible or hide because he might kill you. Even more Zombies: Help player to loot town, kill him afterwards. Even more zombies: Wait close to a town. Kill everyone that is alone and eat his meat....well, or his beans. And I'm not even getting started on Clans or other teams, that don't need anyone but themselves and will always just...well...kill anyone. So in conclusion: 1) I hope so. Not only a huge amount of Zs but also every other danger in the environment - from diseases to weather. 2) "have to" is too much. So...imho, no, never "have to". Except you count a bullet to the head as interaction... 3) Risk is already here. Relevant? Hm. Maybe? See above point... 4) I hope it is coming. It may be coming...who knows...a guess? It will be unforgiving and hard, but in the end nothing a skilled player can't do alone. And even IF it was impossible to survive alone, people would not interact, but kill. Because even then, the rule would say: "If I go into interaction, there's a chance I get killed. If I just shoot this guy down and grab his things I'm fine." You want interaction? Play a game that forces you to play together because you have to - BF, CoD, LoL, PS2 whatever. If people are not forced to play together in a team and there is not only no penalty but maybe even a reward for killing everyone they see (no matter if it's loot or sadistic joy because they know that that guy has to start from scratch or just fear that they maybe would have been killed otherwise), people will do exactly that. And no, I'm still not for any humanity system - doesn't make any sense at all in a game like DayZ. Or like my friend Psycho said so eloquently "Everyone I shoot is a sucker more, that has to start at the beach again and is no threat for me, because until he is geared up or only run back here, I'm gone a long time and he can't shoot me anymore." You know, if you read the bible (I have, even tho I'm an agnostic), god kicked the humans out of the paradise, because he gave them a free will. And what did those brats do with the free will? The only thing they shouldn't do. Same goes for DayZ - Give people the possibility to do what they want in a game and they will kill each other. You want interactions between players in a sandbox game with weapons and no penalties for killing? Well. The only possibility for some of the players (for sure not all) to get into interaction is what you mentioned: Make the environment so freakin' dangerous and impossible to survive alone, that it doesn't make sense to kill anyone, because it actually lowers your chances to survive if you kill another survivor instead of interacting with him. Can that be? Maybe. If there IS a game, that can make this possible, it's DayZ I believe. But even if they achieve it to make it so (and still somehow balance it out), a ,lot of players would still kill, just because they can. So...I know, I'm not that optimistic as usual, but yeah, you asked and whiskey makes me dramatic.

And in that case....that gimmick is THAT bad? Yeah Zombies have been overused, especially in the gaming industry (and DayZ is for sure to "blame" for this, at least a little bit) Just my guess: Dean added Zombies in the mod not to make it interesting for the Horror-gamers but to add something dangerous to make survival harder and force players not to only to kill each other. Well, in that case, I hate to say it, he failed, just because of 2 reasons: a) people are deep down egoistic assholes b ) in games, people are even more egoistic assholes. Sure he could have replaced it with an overpopulation of bears, wolves (even if they do not attack humans normally) etc. but in the end it would have bee the same. The problem is....make a Chars life more valuable: People shoot in fear that they will get killed. Make it less valueable: well, you see at the moment what happens. #YOLO PoS-festival, running straight to the hotspots to join the Deathmatch. Make resources rare? Kill others for their goods. Gimmick or non gimmick...the problem is, without "factions"/teams whatever, something non-realistic that forbids them to kill some of the others, people will always do that...and that's DayZ. And not only DayZ, that's every open world sandbox game with weapons ever. The only chance that people would not try to kill each other, without adding something fictional like "teams", is to make the environment so dangerous that people actually need to work together or die...but well, that fine balance between this status and "unplayable" for 90% of the time is hard to find... Aradia & Judo: Shhhh. Everything is good. And now play nice or you get no Icecream.

^This. Additionally: Don't vault if you are not on ground level. Like...never. And take your time (if you are not under fire) if you move up/down, no matter if you use stairs or ladders...patience is always the key in DayZ. No matter what the topic is ,) But a glance at the bugtracker ( that's, where you report bugs btw.) shows taht these issues are known since some time and I'm pretty sure the devs are aware of it. So, also on regarding fixing this bug: Patience :)

What if I told you that Zs are part of the environment? An additional danger if you want? Call it "gimmicky" if you want and replace them with....wild dogs or just delete them all together, it wouldn't change anything. And "non gimmicky gameplay"...what does this mean? Hunger? Thirst? Temperature? Weather effects like rain that makes you cold? ...because all these things are in DayZ already. So basically you want the Standalone just without Zombies? And still: Even if everything you described in your posts in this thread (extreme survival aspects, "authentic" post apocalyptic scenario without Zombies, etc.), it would be an open world PvP. Players would just have one reason LESS not to kill each other...

...but removing Zs would...? And what DayZ "evolved" into. Yeah. Evolved. *chuckles* because it was never this way. If never means always... Zombies or no Zombies would make absolute no difference for the game experience you seem to want (and honestly I think that's the kind of game Dean always had in mind - with or without Zombies). - your problem (and the problem of the game of course) are the players.... If an Arma3-DayZ (and Z stands for Zero and not Zombie)-without-Zombies would come exactly like in this pictures, all that would be there would be an open-world-pvp without any environment danger, that isn't in DayZ as well...

I want a volume & weight based inventory system. Rocket said in...hm...I think February that the old inventory system will be revisited, so maybe there is a chance...a little one...^^ I like the trolling from Irish.

Lorewise. You get washed up there... But i think hicks talked about this and mentioned, that it is considered, but with some restrictions (as far away from high loot spots as possible, nowhere where you are stuck etc. )

Well....If you are only here in the form, you may not be well informed, if no changelog is posted. If you follow the other official channels via the devtracker (twitter, and especially tumblr) and reddit, you get a lot of Information. Example from yesterday: What happened to this weeks patch? Rocket: Some of the implemented changes caused some gamebreaking issues. We've been wanting to do a push to experimental for over a week now, but there have been some major issues that we wanted to resolve before this occurs. I'll outline more in this week's blog post. And: Roger, I'm trying to be much more regular with the updates via the blog. Will make sure I cover the status of item persistence in it. And: we are still on target for these dates for push to stable. We don't commit to specific times for pushes to experimental. We consider doing an update to experimental daily, however we don't commit something to experimental if there are issues beyond a certain point.

I just quote Dean Hall on this one: so...well...Start of the Alpha in January 2017? At the same time, when Arma 4 comes out and the same question with different numbers would occur? IF anybody would be interested in DayZ still? And cashgrab...that's such a thing to say...sure, BI is a company and wants to make money, like every company out there...so every game would be a cashgrab by that definition. The question is: Did you get your moneys worth already because you played and had fun? Yes? No cashgrab. And thinking, that the game is still in development and you may have a lot more time to spend with it and fun, you will even have a better revenue.... Edit: They have. They have an entire team working on it right now... -> look here: http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/175596-summary-of-dev-qas-from-streams/

"Now, look at where we are now in this game, look at it as unbiased as you possibly can and finally say" ....so you telling me that i should finally say something and now telling me that you didn't do that? And I just told you off, because you weren't posting an opinion, you war stating "facts". And obviously wrong facts, which, in internet slang, is "spreading BS". This is an example for this. "already had a better foundation then the standalone will ever have" - is a fact (sorry: the "truth" as you wrote.) And, btw. a wrong one. Which leads again to the "spreading BS" thing I was talking about. So please, take no offense, but if it is the first time in life that someone told you that you should not state an opinion as a fact, well, then it was goddamn time.

This. And no, I don't like it (what a question....), it's annoying and just a bummer. But better teh server determines where I am, than the client. And as quoted before, I hope it will be reduced...a lot. ^^

Just to make sure...you know that the DayZ engine is not the ArmA 2 engine? It's a complete changed arma 2.5 heli engine. And "the mod had a better foundation then the standalone will ever have" is pure and absolute BS, sorry for that harsh words, but if you state "facts" and "truths" that are obvious wrong you deserve it. So you either know nothing, but still post "facts" that would require knowledge, which would make you an idiot or you know them and lie on purpose...hm. Either way that's not nice. Unbiased perspective? My ass... I'll try to explain with an analogy I used already here: Imagine ArmA 2 as a small house with a shower (the Multiplayer) in in the second floor. Somebody started building a bathtub there (DayZ). The inhabitants were absolute happy, but soon demanded more and more, it should be bigger, have more things, made out of marmor etc. etc. But the stairs were too small to bring the things up, so a crane was put on top of the house and a hole was broken into the side of the house to bring it in. So the bathtub was getting bigger and better, but the house wasn't made for that and it became cracks and the water pressure destroyed the pipes, the floor was hanging through and nearly breaking and the neighbours brats were inserting nasty things in the pipes, since they had to be made outside the house... So, since there was no way to make the bathtub any bigger without completly destroying the house, a new house was built. This time with a bigger stair, hardened, waterproof floor, better pipes inside the house etc. etc. But the inhabitants only saw the bathtub, that was brought upstairs and as soon as water was running they demanded to bath, even if they were told, that it was not as comfortable or shiny or with all the funny extras they knew from the old bathtub, hell not even the roof of the new house was finished and sometimes it was raining straight into the bathtub. But since they were begging and begging, they were allowed to bath - and they complained about the missing of the shiny things they were used to, the cold water that sometimes came out, the rain that fell through the roof, and that these idiotic brats still were able to get to the pipes, because some windows were missing. But you could see that now it would be nice, because the bath would be bigger, better without destroying the house... I really hate to say this but....that's what an Alpha is. Developing new features, breaking things, pushing other features in, breaking more things. And that is totally normal.. That the Engine isn't the best...well that's no question for me. I'm not gonna debate (again) if DayZ should run on snowdrop, Arma3 or unity because, tbh, that is going nowhere. DayZ belongs to BI, BI has an inhouse engine that they want to use and that's it. And, while I also could think of other possible engines for DayZ (just from guessing), I think the used engine is by far not the worst possibility... Ah, and the dev team isn't that small anymore. DayZ has no end. Well, it has an end, the death of the char. But if you don't want to play anymore, because you already have a M4 and vehicles are not in the game, you have two choices: a) play somethign else and come back next year or B) live with it and don't see "gearing up" as the main goal. Pf. Don't tell me what to say. And 1) BI would't have paid the devs for supporting the mod (they also can't chew on lines of code), 2) the limits of the mod (mods) have already been reached a long time ago. There was nothing more that could have been added or bigger changes that could haver been made...well let's say "correctly". So, I look at you as unbiased as possible and say: "You state facts and yell "truths" without having an idea what you are talking about. You know what this makes you? A complete tool."

Yeah because you can't repost a vid... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLBebi-7N6Y (3 weeks ago, even by the same user...) especially this one was already posted here and discussed...