IshFingers

Met up with 2 friends in Berezinho on a 4/something server - 3 of us, 1 randomer. We wanted to teach one of the guys a few basics - he was new - so started on a low pop. server to ease them in. As we go in the school building, the only other guy in Chernaus comes in shortly after and proceeds to kill us, one by one. We even got the initial drop on him (with friendly intentions, I can assure you.) It was that day we learnt we just aren't very good at this game. Still fun though.

I don't consider it cheating, but I do think it takes away a large aspect of the game (exploration, becoming lost and 'survival instincts' kick in etc.). Before I knew the online map existed, I thought the landscape was much bigger and every turn in the road was an adventure. Now it feels like more of a rush to get from A to B. I do think it removes the frustration of not knowing where the f**k you are - in particular when you're looking for friends or other people in general. Especially if you're only surrounded by fields. I don't reccommend using the online map initially to newer players (including friends) but don't begrudge anyone who does.

Found & drove my first V3S. Got over-excited. Got lost. Died. I love this game.

Is the eating/drinking mechanic different between 3pp and 1pp servers? The reason I ask is because I'm usually on 1pp servers, but hopped onto 3pp for a while today for a change of pace and noticed exactly what OP is saying. 1pp: Perfectly fine. I ate/drank when I needed to, could comfortably hit the 'energised', 'hydrated' and 'healing/healthy' status bars and things just worked. 3pp: 'Stuffed' within 15 minutes of beginning a new character, with no indication that I had eaten or drank too much. No other status bars, just 'stuffed' or nothing. Seemed to be massive fluctuations in how energised/hydrated I was. Only noticed this after I had drank 3 times from a pump. It's not unmanageable - defiantly not game-destroying - but kind of annoying.

Started a fresh character last night on 1pp server after 6 month hiatus, to see how things are progressing. - Started on a 6/50 (I think) pop. server - Wanted to give myself a bit of a chance and hopefully get to grips with some of the newer mechanics. - Spawned inland & ran around lost for hours. Immediately sought out food & drink which was by-and-large in plentiful supply. - My sledgehammer has been my best friend for most of the day; very little luck when it comes to weapons so far. Plenty of ammo though. - Endless entertainment with the thought of opening a can of beans with a sledgehammer. - Eventually found a gun - a Mosin - about 3 hours in. This defiantly helps... Seem to have run in to my fair share of zombies so far. No humans though. - Found the castle, tried to use this to head towards NW Airfield. An hour later I'm on the coast... the fuq? (Trying not to use any outside 'interference' to get the most out of not knowing what I'm doing). - Headed towards Elektro hidden in the tree-line. It's here where I discover the shift-key-sprint feature. - First encounter! Where else... Inside one of the fire stations in Elektro. I was attacked by 2 zombies and bled. To get shelter I duck inside only to hear another zombie on its way... Following some bloke with a gun. He wasn't very friendly, shooting first (hit me twice with an automatic) but ran off when I managed to get a shot off hitting him square in the chest, still chased by the zombie. - All my sh*t is ruined, minus my weapons. Bleeding, grey-screen, thirsty, cold... Suicide run through the buildings of Elektro to gather what I can. (By this stage pop has risen to 20~ something). - Manage to stabilise myself but back to square one - no clothing (all ruined), no food or drink (found meager scraps but still 'hungry' & 'thirsty'), no first aid - used a t-shirt to stop my bleeding, my first-aid kit was ruined. 2 bullets for Mosin, but on the plus side I did find a pistol & mag. just before I logged. Kinda enjoying this feeling of being 'new' again. A lot of things have changed/been added, most notably (for me, anyway) the cold/damp mechanic. Things feel a little slicker (i.e. Melee combat, while not great, seems less random) and loot is less predictable. I did get frozen out a couple of times, both times when I tried to throw a flare - is this a known bug or could it be on my end? Literally just the action of throwing a lit flare caused me to root to the spot. I could still interact with things, just not move - and I could light a flare and drop it just fine, or throw other objects just fine with no problem (other than having no idea where it landed). Tomorrow: To Cherno!

I watched a guy fall from the school in Elektro and break his legs, then crawl towards the Fire Station. I spoke to him, wondering if he needed 'assistance'. Turns out he was trying to suicide but failed. So I ran away.

I agree with no Kill-Cam: I feel the unknown aspect of how exactly you died is an important aspect of DayZ. Similarly, I feel it is important to remain anonymous - so no mentioning who killed you etc. That said, some fun demographics/statistics about your survivor could be nice. You know the sort of thing... Time survived, zombies killed etc. etc. And if it is death by zombie, a nice animation of zombies gnawing at your corpse possibly? Little touches like this would add a bit of 'polish' to the game, but are perhaps a step away from the hardcore-gritty-realism the game is loved (and loathed) for. On the whole I feel a few of the UI choices could do with a touch-up but largely for aesthetic purposes, rather than to influence gameplay. And I understand that this should be way down the to-do list.

A while back, myself and a couple of friends met up and headed to NE Airfield (after Berezino > Rify > Krasnostav). We were quite nicely geared up but still needed a few bits ''n pieces. Got into the jail, all doors closed but mostly looted already. Anyway, I picked up what I thought was a water bottle and as we left the building, I closed the door behind us but my character began the drink animation. Turns out my inventory was full so the 'water' bottle was automatically placed in my hands, and rather than close the doors I began drinking it. It was disinfectant. Blind panic ensued. Needless to say in my toxic state I died, but not before attracting any and all nearby groups to our location. Firefights broke out and the death toll totalled over 15 dead players. Fortunately only 1 of my 2 teammates was caught up, with the survivor catching the resulting frenzy on camera. All because I didn't think to check my inventory. Edit: Between the three of us we've each killed one-another at inappropriate times. You know; axing each other when zombies attack, shooting each other thinking they're someone attacking us or simply poorly timed shots which inadvertently end up with the 'You are dead' screen. We're not very good...

Sorry to go off-topic here, but am I the only sceptic at the prospect of modding in this game?Don't get me wrong, I like and support the modding community by-and-large, but to me DayZ just doesn't need it (well... By the time it's finished). Granted I never played the DayZ mod, but to me it all seemed like a step in a different direction. Edit: On topic: Ever grouped with strangers? I don't think I've ever felt so happy with myself/anxious the whole way, the first time I 'grouped' with a bunch of randomers. Part of the fun IMO :).

Whilst I don't disagree with the OP, it's worth noting that this has been acknowledged and it's a work in progress. My understanding was that the North is gradually being worked on with some bigger cities appearing over the coming months. It could just be a case of finding a starting point and working from there, or coincidentally the rate the work has progressed means that, temporarily, there appears to me more focus on the NE. Doesn't the comment of the Sobor's being either neglected or looted by players somewhat contradict itself? I mean... players have to loot, surely? Granted, they're not the most vibrant of cities but there's still a fair share of [decent] loot if you fancy the hike. I've come across a few players in these cities - though none of these ended friendly - and am still cautious around them. I don't always play on high-pop servers (ave. probably being low-teens) and find that I'm least likely to bump into other players in the very SW or directly North. Isn't there also a town in development North of NW airfield? I'm not sure, I've just been told by a friend (and we've tried to go there, but both times were accosted in the Airfield on the way - yeah, ok, our own fault). I think it's also important to note that it's sometimes nice to have a quiet zone. If every town/area was busy, I personally think it would diminish some of the atmosphere from the game. In a nutshell: Give it time. There's more to come, I'm sure...

Send the team in first... "I've got your back, lads!" :)

I'm generally a lot more reckless and gung-ho as a loner - generally on 3PP servers. Reason being I a) don't mind death/enjoy re-equipping myself, b ) need a break from the sometimes tedious sneak & scout routine, and c) don't have anyone else to look after. That said, when in the 'hot-spots' I try to scan ahead and, if the opportunity presents itself, would rather stalk someone/take 'em out without confrontation. Unfortunately this never goes to plan. For example: if entering Elektro (or other cities of interest) I will do a 'spiral' of the city - edging further into the centre (supermarket/school/police station) and looting what I can along the way. If I see somebody I make it known (not what I have in mind) with a poorly-aimed shot. I think I've been successful... Twice? Similar tactics to airfields/military bases etc. In smaller towns it's a case of run in, look around, and react on the go. Disclaimer: I am terrible and a liability to myself at the best of times. In fact, if you want to survive just follow me and do the opposite. When with friends etc. I try to be more cautious: though we're by no means experts at this game, we try to add a bit of authenticity to it (I.E. Tactics). Though that usually goes down the pan when you hear "uhhh guys, I think I've done something wrong/drank disinfectant/shot you instead" down the mic... So yeah, I don't think I've been particularly constructive here. Job done.

Glitched through the 2nd floor of an office building, slowly heading towards to my impending doom... Seriously, it was like gravity had been replaced by treacle for the duration of my 'fall'.

I regularly play with two guys fluent in Cryillic and I can only imagine them wincing every time they hear my piss-poor attempt at pronunciation at some of these names. Though I agree, the 'k' makes all the difference :).

I'm not really thinking about this in terms of realism - more in keeping within the theme of the game (or at least, with the way I'd like to see it progress). Yeah, sure, stick down a generator and power your private security system. Hell, hook it up to the microwave while you're at it... Where does it stop? Maybe generators will make an appearance? I hope not... Again, I like the rustic, gritty nature to the game. But at the same time, if something is presented in a well-constructed, meaningful way that makes sense (not like.... Say... A fully-functional tank makes an appearance) then sure.

I really like this suggestion! Simple but effective. As soon as you log in, your first though should be "right... Where's the beans?" And yes, I too agree that after the initial coast-spawn, food & water are too easy to come by/holding off hunger & thirst is too. Unfortunately, with hunting etc. being implemented, I can only see this becoming even easier. Though I can't say I would like to be forced into constantly searching for the bear necessities. Just needs balancing...there's plenty of time for that!

My thinking on this is if there is a way to to create rustic, home-made traps etc. then sure, throw them in. Like say... An axe tripped to drop if someone was to step on a wire, or glass bottles which make loud noises if someone walks through them. Security cameras seem a step too far - how would it be powered? Connect the camera to... What, exactly? A monitor? Definitely not some sort of HUD, IMO. I can maybe see a simple, grainy image being shown on a screen in your barricade, but at the same time this camera would/should be able to be destroyed by any intruders. Vehicles should be scarce and unreliable; granted we don't know how long has passed since the infection/zombiefication outbreak (do we?) but all the bits & pieces - fuel included - have a shelf-life, which would need to be maintained etc. I find it quite funny how many cars are fully-functional and used so liberally in many post-apocalypse pieces of fiction. Though at the same time, if there is a large group of players capable of working together for prolonged periods of time to maintain an entire 'base' - and all the pieces are in the game, somewhere - then it would be a cool idea to attempt to build a productive society. Though that might be a stretch to implement, given current technology & the general gist of what's to come. Basically, I like the idea if it's conceivable in a remote area void of hi-tech know-how.

...."easy access via ladders." Oxymoron much? :p

Haha sorry, it's (was?) still morning and I hadn't had my coffee. I retract the parent/credit card statement. Right, where was I... It's not about having a lot of disposable income - it's about where you're spending the money you have. And I mean... come on, £3/$5 p/m isn't exactly ground-breaking in any way, is it? Ok, there are some hardships out there where £3 could make a difference, but I'd think that, being in that situation, there would be other things on my mind (hell, if that was the case I probably wouldn't have a PC that could play DayZ - a simple laptop would suffice for day-to-day needs.). Similar to you, I'd rather spend my money on nice things - I would much rather spend £20 on four nice drinks with friends, than £20 and get sh*t-faced on a Friday/Saturday night. Similarly, I would rather buy some nice food than some frozen ready-meals (don't forget to make it yourself! KFC is nice 'n all but it's not quite what we're talking about ;)) And this stems through most of my purchasing decisions: I would rather spend my money on something I can take genuine pride in than just buy it for the sake of it. The point of this being, if you want nice things, be prepared to pay for them. I'd also have to disagree about subscriptions being a dated concept. Hell, if anything they've not matured yet - the strength is still in the developer's hands. But it changing. It's already changing on the high street (et. al) and it shouldn't be thought of as taboo in the video game world (I'm not saying it is, but a lot of people are uneasy at the prospect - perhaps with good reason). The reason I support subscription-based MMO titles is three-fold: 1) They're cost-effective! If a game is keeping me occupied for a couple dozen hours a month for £10, that beats paying £40+ for the latest video-game-blockbuster-equivalent. Especially if there's constant updates/new content etc. 2) it is the 'other' choice, when the market is being flooded with P2W/micro-transaction-enabled games. These are a slippery slope and a menace to the games industry. 3) they empower the consumer. Having a game subscription-based gives the customer something to threaten with if things aren't progressing. I.E. At the moment, as it stands, if you dislike DayZ at release, you stop playing; your friends stop playing, other people stop playing etc. etc. No new content, no support, you've got yours & the developers got theirs. It's a sort of win-win but with a sour taste in both parties mouths'. In this scenario, nothing changes. If you're paying a subscription however, and you are unimpressed with the way the game is developing - if at all - you take away your subscription. Developers lose support (both financially and moral; 'encouragement', if you would prefer) and need to try to stem the flow. Now... in this case, it should never get to the case where you want to leave. It turns into a customer-service-focussed model. Developers should be regularly listening to their customers (which DayZ do already), and addressing any issues and concerns regularly. Feedback is given and both parties feel more fulfilled about the whole process. Granted, that's how it should work. And I want to make something very clear here: I think the DayZ team currently have a fantastic record for their ability to listen to and discuss issues with us, the customer. I think what we're avoid here though is that the video games industry is a business (well, duh). Someone, somewhere, is trying to make as much money as he or she (don't make me laugh, females in the video game industry? What are we, progressive now? /blackhumour) can. Whether or not Dean Hall says he doesn't need to make any more money is a different issue - someone will be cutting the costs to maximise their profit. And as I've hastily reasoned above, providing a subscription service is the fairest choice for us all. Ok, there are always going to be hackers/cheaters/whatever. There is no stopping that, no matter what you do. However, there are always going to be more people who want to eliminate hackers/cheaters/whatever from the game - so there will always be pressure on developers to take action. if it ever got to the stage where 1) people (customers) don't care enough, or 2) neither do the devs, then the game just isn't for you - so you leave. Taking your money with you. And the reason I lump real-world examples together is, when paying a subscription for -whatever- you are, in essence, paying their wage. Ok, there's an argument for and against this but ultimately, the customer's support is what's funding the game's (or whatever) continued success.

I have yet to encounter a hacker on DayZ, but I can say with absolute certainty, my experience with subscription-based services (not just video games) are far-and-away a more satisfying package. On the whole there is far more care taken to accommodate the customer (I.E. They want my money, and as long as I get what I want I'm happy to oblige.) Have you ever had a bad experience with a subscription service? When? John Riccitiello... John Riccitiello... That name means nothing to me. - one Google search later - 2 responses to this: 1) Surely a man who has overseen the biggest growth in a video game company since... Well... Ever may have been on to something? I don't quite get your point. 2) EA use subscription fees? - another Google search later - Ultina Online being the only one. Aren't EA all about the whole micro-transaction thing? Which, I may have not made clear enough in my original post, is a horrible, horrible concept IMO. A subscription-fee-based-MMO provides a lot greater flexibility and security. Why? Is it the concept or the price? Or do your parents not let you use their credit card?

How would people respond to a monthly subscription on top of the initial price? I.E. £20/$30 for the game, plus say...£3/$5 per month thereafter. Prices are up for discussion Obviously this subscription fee should only be applicable after full release, but to maintain/improve server quality and encourage regular updates & content etc. etc. I don't think DayZ could command the £12+ p/m other leading MMO's require, but an affordable sum which could act as a deterrent nonetheless. Personally I'm a fan of subscription-based games, and loathe the F2P models out there - or rather, 'Play to Win'... And subscriptions do tend to bring a more mature audience. If this is a genuine attempt at creating a game which could evolve over time, I'd be happy for fork over X amount per month for an excellent gaming experience.

I think, being the 'flagship' game of BI (I know; Operation Flashpoint, ARMA etc etc. came first, but DayZ is the first game really thrown into public awareness) it would be PR suicide to let this game fail. Just look at the hype... Hell, the stats speak for itself; 1.7million customers purchasing an incomplete-but-promising product. Upon launch, I'd imagine that will be just a fraction of players. Mod or no, I consider SA to be the beginning of this journey - the mod was just a tester or plaything. One man's flight of fancy, limited because it wasn't a game in its own right. I have every faith in the developers producing a fully -finished, well-rounded product. And I can patiently wait another two years for it.

Maybe this is too 'hardcore', but maybe... When you log out out, your character stays in-game. Resting, sleeping, whatever, but the point being your character is still surviving somewhere in the world. Now hear me out: When a player logs out, they are forced to find a suitable location; be it discreet or secure (after barricades are implemented) - meaning a player cannot just log off in a possible danger zone, susceptible to zombies, players or the environment. Add tents/campsites into the mix and you could safely 'rest' in the wilderness. Similar to barricades, they're impervious (if that's their intent) to zombie assault and environmental hazards. Though human players could still break in. There would/should be benefits to resting/sleeping, notably regenerating fatigue. Possibly speeding up sickness or mending parts of your body which are in pain. The offset to this is the obvious vulnerability you are under whilst logged out. Though I don't think you should die of hunger/hydration (or sickness etc.) whilst under this status. Just suffer ill-effects if you're logged out in an open area. Maybe this is asking too much. After all, a character would have to be stored on the server; you couldn't really distinguish between a resting player and an active player unless there were major changes. It also favours a hardcore play style above a more casual one - I.E. Encouraging regular log-ins (daily) than perhaps once or twice a week. It also doesn't help people who have to log off for real issues. Any maybe Chernarus is just not big enough to find suitable places for everyone to rest in peace (pun intended). Though it would offer some sort of functionality to those enormous apartment buildings most of us just don't bother exploring after the first walk through. It's wishful thinking though. There are far too many hitches/game-breaking elements which could enable such a system without very long consideration. Though this would be (IMO) the ultimate in survival MMO and completely eliminate server hopping when combined with the log-in counter. Though by this point I'd assume server hopping would be the least of our concerns. I mean, who cares if someone's logged in nearby when you desperately scramble for a safe place to sleep. These are just the ramblings of a spur-of-the-moment idea which I don't doubt will be slated for many, many reasons. But if done right -and of technology allows effective implementation - then it could be the next step in the 'realistic survival-horror' genre.

I've had similar experiences as this but only now put 2 + 2 together... I've had items of clothing go from damaged/badly damaged to ruined after being 'soaked' for prolonged periods of time, though I couldn't tell you if it was raining at the time of the change in damage. Similarly, myself and a friend were on a rainy server when we were hit by server reset. Upon rejoining the server, we both made a 'pain' noise and an item of clothing was ruined (I think our trousers were ruined, can't quite remember.) A couple of items were also ruined but nothing major. It does urk me slightly that the 'soaked' status stays with me at the moment. I'm like seeing all green on my inventory screen. But whatever, not exactly game-altering in any way.

The timescale is what I took to be the meaning from the roadmap - world divided into quadrants, which reset after X amount of time once looted. Though it does raise further questions: How much loot needs to be taken to trigger the re-spawn? What happens to players in this radius? (Possible Hunger Games/Battle Royale-type scenario gets my vote, but I've got no idea how that could be explained/implemented without ruining immersion.) Would this be on top of server resets? And could players manipulate the re-spawn mechanic? I'm sure they could - and undoubtedly will - which is yet something else that will need to be addressed. Sorry, derailing gone on long enough. I'll stop now.