rickyriot

Which, and forgive me if I am going over the same ground here, is the very essence of creating a two tier system - if that was applied to DayZ as it is with Arma. Greater textures provides better detection of the terrain and players, thus you end up having an advantage if you pay for the DLC. Now I suppose, to abstract this argument further, you could postulate that those with lower quality PCs have to run the game at lower resolutions thus already providing a "multi tiered" hierarchy based on financial ability - if you can afford a better gfx card you can play at higher resolution - so in that sense a high/low texture DLC isn't quite the same as a DLC providing unique content. Not that I would wish to be seen to be arguing against my own point.. ;)

We seem to be at cross purposes here. I already answered the issue regarding lower textures and the advantages that would give a user with those enabled. However you quoted my reply regarding the Arma3 DLC which you said.. And that is not the case. You need to pay to get the Arma 3 DLC Bundle, my link shows you this, it is not free for all users. You did however go on to say... Which is the crux of matter here and what I had hoped the thread would reflect.

As stated the rain does nothing. In fact it's been rolled back a little from when it was introduced with only one indicator of wetness (oo, er, missus) rather than each separate item of clothing having a wetness value. I do agree that when it does start to have an effect then they made need to dial it back, either that or provide ways to protect yourself from the rain. Ponchos or raincoats for example ensuring you don't get wet (a coat doesn't seem to make any difference just now, or if it does it's slight). I like the fact that rain can provide you with a level of "sound cover" allowing you to sneak up on people easier. Edit: Oh and being a Scot I have, in connection with my Northern European cousins, no problems with rain as it is a constant in every day life.. ;)

That is simply not the case. Did you look at the link I provided? You pay for that DLC, it is not offered to all for nothing.

The question I would have is would you pay for that? If you would then you are immediately separating vanilla players to those who have the extra cash in order to get a better start. When you spawn as a vanilla you are defaulted to a character than needs to eat and is not at full water/food/health, that would not be the case for everyone using your DLC suggestion. I would like to point out I don't mind the idea of different spawn types but they need to be consistent across the server rather than at an individual basis. OK, a little randomisation is not a bad thing. Some people might start with a can of cola, some might start with a bandage but on those sorts of cases it should be a random thing. If you were, for example, to start with a pistol and 8 rounds then everyone should start with that and not just those who have enough money to buy that privilege.

I won't copy and paste your whole comment, but I do want to point out that I am not debating over what is and isn't DLC (and if we wish to be specific we could simply say any content that is downloaded is DLC) but the thread is about DLCs that are purchasable; as in you pay for them, and upon purchasing provides you with an advantage over a "vanilla" player. I have absolutely no problems what so ever with different game modes, but the difference with those is that everyone on the server would be at the same level. You wouldn't for instance have a server mixed with (for example) standard survival mode and battle royale. The same applies for maps. If a purchasable DLC for a map was available that would be fine as all players on the server running that map would need to pay in order to get that map and thus play on that server. OK, it does separate it from those who have the money to pay for the map and those who don't but every would be on the same level.

So what is your opinion of the Arma3 DLC Bundle? http://store.steampowered.com/app/304400/ If DLC is handled in the same way then it doesn't look like it will be released to everyone or that everyone necessarily gets to use it. I have no problem with DLC, as I said previously, but I do worry about it creating a tiered environment of the haves and don't haves based on money. Even the idea of high resolution textures would subtly alter the balance with those with the textures being able to make out enemies and loot better. I have worked in the IT industry longer than I care to mention (long before the Internet as we know it even existed) and if there is one thing I can guarantee it's that companies no matter who they are look to get the best value out of their products. Offering DLC is a prime example of that in the modern gaming era, that and mico transactions. When you have decisions at board room level trumping any made by developers I just can't believe that it won't be the option taken. Especially as the precedent has been provided with Arma 3. I don't want to come across as a hater, or a doom and gloom merchant, far from it. I am a flag waver for DayZ and the Alpha development. I don't think I have complained ever about the progress of the game other than perhaps the recent Session Lost issues with the current experimental and even then it was more a lament than a complaint. So please don't think I am trying to make BI out to be the bad guys, they are not. but I do worry about just how finely balanced the game will become if the decision to include purchasable DLC is made. Unfortunately I believe that decision will be made and I do think it will create a "class" system with the community.

Did you read my first post fully or just read the title and the poll questions? Perhaps it was my fault for providing a TL;DR, but if you had read the full post it would be obvious to what I am referring and the problem of in game balance in regard to purchasable DLC. It's clear you didn't read my second subsequent post as I explained the lack of referencing micro transactions. However, I do think you have addressed the issue I was trying to raise with your following paragraph... ...and I certainly share your concerns expressed. Although the devs being aware of the consequences and being able to stop the decision being made to include them (either as microtransactions or as DLC) are not mutually inclusive.

What you have described there would be specific server setup not DLC. When I mention DLC, and certainly in the context of this thread, it's content you pay for that is only available for your use. The ability to own a specific weapon that only you and others who have bought that DLC can use for example.

I am tempted to put in a *sarcastic fry* meme here. BI is a company, it needs to make money in order to continue trading, developing DayZ and developing new titles. That is "back of a cigarette packet" mathematics, it simply doesn't work out like that. The net profit made will be massively less than simply multiplying the price paid with the amount sold. Vastly so. Now that is a fair point. It is obviously open to debate the level of untapped market there is out there. The problem I think BI have is that they tapped into that market early and as such will not see the standard return of investment based on the money they are spending on developing the title now.

It's a very valid counter argument to paid for DLCs, however if that is the case then how do BI aim to generate money from a game that has seen a development cycle and revenue stream that has had an unlikely early spike? Edit: I have no problem with BI making money, btw, just want to point that out. Would hate to see them kill the golden goose though.

Oh, and to nail my colours to the mast, I do see DLCs being offered and sadly I do see them affecting the vanilla game balance. It's just a hunch and as I said in the opening post I don't want to come across as a hater, but I just have a feeling that's the way it will go. In terms of timeline I would expect to see them being offered as soon as the game leaves Alpha.

Well done (and I don't mean that in a patronising fashion at all), when I was writing the OP I couldn't think of a way that DLCs wouldn't affect the core balance of the game but certainly paid for maps might be the primary way you could.

As a slight caveat to the above, I have not touched on two subjects that you would naturally flow on from this debate. Those being the introduction of microtransitions and the porting of DayZ to other platforms. Both have different effects on the revenue stream to BI. I have purposely not included them as I wanted the main poll question to be as simple as possible; DLCs yes/no, and game balance bad/good. Edit: If you answered Yes to the first poll question, could you reply in terms of the timeframe you expect them to appear? This doesn't need to be exact. It can be a contextual reference (ie: during the move to Beta) or absolute (by Q1 2015).

I killed a cow, admittedly with a garden hoe (and yes it took some time!), and the body was the same - nothing to be scavenged. That said, I didn't have a machete nor a kitchen knife and if this is like the mod then you needed a knife to gut a dead animal. Thanks. I did give it a shot, but didn't spend too long. Obviously without illness or damage being tied to clothing wetness then it's not important just now.

*** Mods: Oops, I started this thread in the wrong forum, could you move it to General Discussion please? Thanks in advance *** I appreciate the game is still in Alpha, and there is a possibility the rendering engine used just now won't be the one that powers the final game, but one thing that annoys me is the inability to really utilise the insides of buildings in terms of stealth against those outside them. Sure you can look out of windows, but the actual view you can get is somewhat limited. For example go to the 1st floor (2nd floor for you US readers) of a building in game and look at how much of the ground below you can see. The same is relevant for upper floors. Whether you are holding a weapon or not makes a difference (for example holding a mosin will restrict how close you can get to the window and that I suppose makes sense) but even without holding an item you seem to be restricted to a stance some half a meter from the actual glass. Now go do this in real life and you will get a far greater level of vision. Don't get me wrong, the inclusion of the enterable buildings is massive for the game. You only need to compare it to the mod and you'll find that out straight away. Ideally windows should be openable, although I'm not sure how easy that would be to implement (essentially they would all have the same mechanism, but you are in turn increasing the number of variables you need to hold and render), it may just need a simple subroutine for all windows or perhaps you would need to do it bespoke for every building type, however in lieu of anything that advanced, you should certainly be able to get a far greater range of vision from a window. Whether this requires an extra action (ie: press Q, W or E next to a window to lean in and get a different camera view) or simply if the collision detection near a window is reduced I don't know, but it certainly would help the game imo. TL;DR? Windows should provide you with more visibility, allowing for greater stealth and improving immersion.

Completely understand where you are coming from, and naturally I would prefer the game was more difficult to 'exploit' than feature rich or more realistic, but I do miss the ability to properly look out of windows like you can in other FPS games. I think some of the problem is also related to the limited number of stances. There is no point in prone as you will see nothing, leaving just crouch or stand, and neither provide you with the right eye-line when in 1PP mode. Obviously this is all related to 1PP/Hardcore. I never play 3PP and I'm sure that those who do will wonder what I am talking about in terms of limited visibility.

Along with cooking, does the fireplace dry out clothes?

Thanks for that, I made a pretty ham fisted attempt at a thread, first placing it in the wrong forum then asking for it to be moved to a slightly less wrong forum.. B) Anyway, I feel the point is valid. The interaction with windows could be a lot better. I feel you are too restricted in terms of the vision you get from them.

That's not new, the previous experimental (which I presume is now the stable) allowed you to put the pot on a gas stove and it would become hot. The problem is you can't put anything into the pot.

Simplest way I have found? Go to a forest, walk through the forest (don't run) while continually scrolling the mouse wheel. As the process of gathering kindling is an action it will show up at the top left of the screen ("Search for kindling"). Of course you would need to trigger the action for it to start but it at least gives you an idea of where you can search. Simply retrace your steps until you have the action available and perform the search like you would for any other action. The same method can also be used for searching for apples although at least with apples you can see the relevant trees you need to search.

I see someone already replied to your comment, but I also added in a post. In short, use an AdBlocker and your levels of confusion will be greatly reduced. In terms of vanilla DayZ mod, I would actually recommend Epoch rather than the vanilla. It's available for Arma3 as well as Arma2 and has some pretty advanced features in comparison to the vanilla mod and a world away from the SA. http://epochmod.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

Of course the mischievous may suggest that is because he can't hack in the same way as the mod.. ;) Have you tried PlayWithSix (link)? I used it when DayZCommander would freak out my Internet connection. Don't get me wrong I would prefer to use DayZCommander but PW6 is not a bad alternative.

It's a fair bit down the road, but for those of you who picked up on the dev blog comment about separating the game engine and rendering engine should make a huge difference if implemented properly.

I wouldn't suggest that the performance is better, but the inventory interaction and the ability to go into all the houses is a massive step forward in the game.