krisfx

If stable doesn't mean bug free, and it's expected to not work so well in EA, why have an EXP and stable branch at all? Just push updates more frequently/roll back if there's an issue and open up the whole process to the player base. Other than new features and constant wipes, I can never really tell the difference between EXP and stable, both have issues that can sometimes ruin the game. I'd rather have no playtime on this for a week with the promise of weekly updates, than 3 years in game with an update once every X months (which generally breaks more things than it fixes). Anyway, it's time to log out for another 6 months to avoid the hilarious amount of blind motherfuckers telling me I don't know anything about design/development.

My favourite is when the devs implement a survival aspect. For example: removing abundance of tins in hopes that you turn to hunting and cooking, which for me seems to be constantly fucked and seems to either kill your character from undercooked food or kill them from overcooked food. Sadly, I'm not sure this game will leave Early Access but I've got my £15 worth over the years so I can happily drop it. I wouldn't criticise (whether constructive or not) on these forums. My last post I criticised something and I had to log out to stop the barrage of knob jockeys. It's pretty tedious, this.

I've been saying that since the start. Other Alphas at the time (Project CARS is probably a good example) were putting updates out daily/weekly, which sometimes broke the game and sometimes didn't, but it was comforting to know that there would be a quick fix. In DayZ, a "fix" never seems to come and if it does, it can be nearly guaranteed that something else will be broken by fixing one component. I don't care that I'm not a game designer and that people think my opinion is tosh, I'm a different type of designer & if I put out this sort of thing to my customers, I wouldn't have a job. DayZ has tarnished the early access tag for me & has also really proven how much the games industry gets away with things currently.

Today, after being rained on, I suffered with hyperthermia! - If this temperature system adds nothing to the game and is so bugged (as it has been since introduced), then I think it should be left in test builds. Why does it add nothing to the game? It hasn't changed my play style, because I know it's so bugged, I'm sure many others are the same. We're all pissed off at really stupid weather scenarios (pissing rain, cooling off, ends up too hot).

They have turned recent builds into PVP heavy builds. Personally, I think it's because they're losing players and so it's easy to tempt casuals back with lots of guns and shooting. The "game" (If you can call it that) has been in Alpha for 3 years and seems to just consistently take 1 step forward 2 steps back. Whenever something is fixed, more things are broken. I do agree that through micro management of play style, it's really taken the fun out of it for me. Fortunately, I've got my £15 worth from it, so I'm not too gutted, but I'd not suggest anyone buys it now, cause I don't think it'll ever go gold. Watch yourself here, it's a wolf pit, any criticism is regarded as trolling, but mindless fanboying is considered constructive.

Played for an hour or so the other day (lucked into the update "just a few minutes ago" and hopped on). They've released much more broken builds to stable in the past. Just fucking push it, it can't be worse than the early persistence and CLE builds at 4fps with hilarious loot explosions...

I think everyone would prefer to play a "broken" 0.60 over a "working" 0.59. As with everything since 2012, every great step comes with a hilarious shortfall. Personally, I won't be going back to 0.59, so I guess it's a matter of finding another game to play while the hype dies down a bit.

Yup, constant "connecting failed" for me, too. One step forward, two steps back :)

Played for the first time in ~6 months last night, impressed with 0.6, would prefer removal of the 90s respawn timer when I'm kicked from a restarting server, though. There are a lot of people who would like this to be stable. With the ability to hotfix and 0.6 being less broken than every build before, I don't see why they couldn't?

As with everything in the modern day, DayZ over promised and has so far under delivered on more or less everything because of a seemingly unregulated sliding timescale, which I think would have been much tighter had the game not been released as alpha. Having said that, I've got my money's worth out of the game in terms of hours played, so I can't complain too much. Edit: Also, as above, developer communication is absolutely awful.

I'm on an i7, believe me, I've dropped down to 4-5 fps, even in the menu!

I just came back from the game after a long wait away, not sure where to post this but, my FPS has gone from 30-40 to 3-4? The game is literally unplayable for me. I guess it's not time to come back yet :(

Critique is also important in forcing the game in the right direction, so there are two sides to the story. The design process needs the "whiners" as much as it needs the arse kissers. Also 0.57 was terrible, which is why exp 0.58 was so busy I think.

Here's a question: Can you be killed by an admin? I was in a private hive stood on the coast, then all of a sudden I just died. No shots, nothing. I had plenty of food and water, no warnings. I know I didn't get shot as the server had emptied out and I was the only one in there, which leads me to believe I was killed by something daft. Apologies if off topic, the server was hosted by Multiplay.

Night play is great, and the map hasn't miraculously changed since 0.57. What's the problem?