finnpalm

True, but have you tried to fight on one leg? :D You lose a lot of balance and you become slow and weak since you can't use the ground as support for your movement. But I digress. Maybe they shouldn't be stopped in their tracks from damage to non-vital areas, but at least they should be slowed.

Well, people like to put what is commonly referred to as "wall hangers" on their walls. The swords people hang on their walls are usually made for show and are not functional swords. The reason for this is that a functional sword is very expensive. Sure you can use a "wall hanger" in a fight, but it will usually be too heavy, unbalanced, crome plated or any of several other things that make it less preferable in a fight. I have handled several "real" swords back in the days, both asian (used to practice Iaido) and different historical blades (used to practice historical reenactment showfighting). That said, I'm all for old cavalry sabres and such. The ceremonial swords used by armies in parades and such are mostly real. And since they aren't normally used other than for show, they can be maintained pretty well over the years, and some could be found in the homes of retired, former military officers for example. Even some european police forces carried swords not too long ago, before they all switched to batons. But to find an old european longsword or a katana that was made for fighting is pretty much impossible.

I think you underestimate the damage a bullet does to living tissue. Sure headshots should take them down, but being hit by a bullet in non-vital areas can still tear up a muscle or break a bone and that will incapacitate anyone no matter how angry they are. Then there's the huge difference in firepower between rifles and pistols. Pistols are generally designed for defense at close range, while rifles are designed for offense at longer range. It's pretty damn hard to hit a moving target with a pistol. But.. they're not dead. :rolleyes:

The keys are different from the other keys in the game. For example freelooking can be toggled on by doublepressing the assigned key. The gestures are "one press - raise hand, another press - lower hand". It should be simple to allow to make them "press key - raise hand, release key - lower hand" and "double press - raise hand, double press again - lower hand", just like the other controls.

They're supposed to be alive actually. They're living humans infected with a virus. Much like the "zombies" in 28 days later. If they had been supposed to be dead I would have agreed with you.

Awesome. :)

Did you report the bug?

I don't think you understand what it is I'm asking for.

You tell them! What did they think when they made zombies able to fly through walls?! They should totally fix that. ;) On a more serious note, the wall glitch is well known by the devs and they have poured a lot of resources into fixing it, and are close to succeeding too. Check out the new dev blog.

In DayZ they are not zombies per se. They are living humans infected with a virus that causes rage. A lot like in the movie "28 days later". If you prefer the slow shambling undead type of zombie, like in "The Walking Dead", the new game H1Z1 will have zombies right along that line, according to SOE president Smedley (yes, he actually mentioned "The Walking Dead" when explaining what type of zombies they are trying to make for their game). Personally I like the zombies faster and more aggressive, like in DayZ.

I meant the original Arma games. Not mods. Anyway, if you're right we might see more infected eventually. However considering all the things they plan to add in the game I am thinking they need to leave a lot of room. Don't worry about it. Personally I think traditional techniques like waterfall can be combined with agile elements to some extent. At the moment agile methodology is somewhat of a fad, and I'm expecting this "all new rage" to cool down a bit in the near future. That will give it time to mature a bit, and then it can take it's place among the other methods. Traditional techniques still have their place, and I don't think agile systems are the savior that will revolutionize project management completely. But that's just my opinion.

Um, you do know they're not dead, right? They're infected with a rage inducing virus, and still very much alive. If they become a corpse there's no getting back up for them. ;)

Sorry, double post. (I was under the impression that there was a script that fixed double posts..)

No, I'm not part of the dev team. I'm studying project management among other things. I was just pointing out that they're using Scrum, since that's what they've said they're doing. I wasn't aware that you were referring to the technique named "Agile". I thought you were referring to the general concept of agile project management, which is why I pointed out that they're using Scrum which is an agile method. They are currently not spawned as "frozen objects". They're moving about and doing their little idle animation.

But does Arma have loot lying around all over the map? I also think it's suboptimal to have only that which is in the vicinity of the player spawn, because then we get the effect like in the mod, where you can tell if someone is close because there are infected spawned in an area. Also, slow infected are a lot less dangerous than fast ones, even if in hordes. They need to be a serious threat in my opinion. Not just a nuisance to be avoided. And, as I've said earlier, the idea of slow moving "zombies" stem from them being risen dead, and not being able to move normally because their bodies are decomposing. The tendons in the body are among the first things to degenerate after you die. There is nothing in a virus that seemingly induces rage that makes it logical for the infected to move slowly. Rather the opposite, since rage causes the adrenaline to flow, and since the infected in DayZ are supposed to be living humans we can assume that such bodily functions still work properly.

You're misunderstanding me. I'm arguing that because of limitations it's not possible to have the hordes you would like to see. Then I argue that the current direction they're taking the infected is more suitable to the setting. I'm not forcing anything. It's my opinion. Take it or leave it. Or by all means argue against it if you like.

This is not the Arma 3 engine. Again, they can have many infected if they remove everything else basically. If you want a world that's completely empty except for infected, then yes, it's doable. If you want other players, loot and so on, then no. Well, then I don't know. Hope you figure it out. EDIT: Oooh, the forum has a new script that mashes your posts together if you double post. Neat!

Are you actually using the sprint or just running normally? Maybe check your control settings?

The devs are using Scrum, which is an agile project management technique. 5000? They managed to have what? 400 infected when they removed all the loot? Are you running with a weapon in your hands? Because you run slower with something in your hands than you do with empty hands.

Apart from the single player games you mentioned, what is different about the multiplayer games you named compared to DayZ? There are a few key things that explains why they can have slow hordes in those games. Think in terms of number of consecutive players, size of zones, other things that need to be rendered on screen in the game and so on.

What other games? All you people asking for hordes of slow infected need to consider a couple of things. - Slow infected means you can avoid them, which means people will usually do that. - Hordes or just large numbers put a huge strain on the game and will make it run less smooth. Now, if there are hordes of infected that everyone went around killing for no special reason it would lessen the problem since the hordes would be diminished or wiped and thus less of a strain on the game. However if they're slow people are more likely to avoid them instead of wasting massive amounts of ammo or risking their life getting into melee. This leaves hordes upon hordes of slow infected that does nothing but slow down the game. Faster infected is a compromise in part because the infected need to be dangerous, but since they can't be numerous they instead must be stronger and faster. And finally the concept of the slow, stumbling undead is based on the fact that they're actually dead and decomposing which is why they stagger slowly and fall over easily, since the tendons and muscles are among the first things to degenerate in a decomposing body. Now instead consider living people infected with a rage virus. They will have adrenaline flowing and blood still pumping to oxygenise the muscles. They will be fast, and strong because that's the effect of the virus and adrenaline. Now, they're also unarmed and suicidal which is their weakness and compensates for the former. Basically faster, stronger infected make sense logically and technically. Slower weaker actual zombies make sense in other scenarios. But not here. The only real problem at the moment is the pathing. Once the infected can't glitch through walls any more, they will be pretty much perfect from a playability and storyline point of view. Maybe some minor tweaking, but nothing drastic. I understand that many of you really prefer the slow type of undead from the Romero movies. But think about if you want a laggy game with huge slowdowns, or if you can compromise and settle for smaller groups of more dangerous infected. Yes they did manage to run the game with several hundred infected spawned, but only after removing all loot. If they are to go for slower hordes, something else will have to go. Higher player numbers? Loot? Animals? Vehicles? What do you suggest they leave out to be able to have those hordes that you want to see?

Absolutely. That would be the whole point. Situational gear. Just like the raincoat.

We do indeed know that they're living humans infected with a virus that causes them to rage. Like the virus in "28 days later".

They're not rotting corpses. They're living humans infected with a virus similar to the infected in the movie "28 days later".

The way I see it they do look quite similar as of now, but then again they're both just skeletons of what they (hopefully) will be once finished. So basically I'm hoping that Bohemia takes their game one route and SOE another. If they manage to profile their games enough they will turn out pretty different, and diversity is good in my opinion. Some days I might want one and another day the other. Fingers crossed..