BeefBacon

I think most people do. Hell, I remember being a wee lad waiting for Half-Life 2. Waited for like 2 years (an eternity at the time) and practically exploded when I saw something about Half-Life 2 in some gaming magazine a friend was reading on a bus to school. Oh Jesus, I remember when my brother was building my first PC and I asked "will it be able to run Half-Life" and he said "Yes... Half-Life TWO." I exploded again. Those were the fucking days. Now everybody has to be privy to every single step in a game's development. Imagine if they'd done that for Fallout 4. Imagine how angry everybody would have been from, like, 2009 or whenever it started development. "OMG Bethesda are unprofessional hacks who can't develop games quickly enough for me." Obviously that's symptomatic of early access, and it's sort of understandable. People like to be reassured that their investment was worth it - but then they were made aware of the nature of early access. They knew that development would take 2 - 3 years, but they bought in anyway, and then they whine thinking the developers owe them something. Now if it gets to the end of next year and we're on .60, yeah I think people have earned the right to complain at that point. For now, however, DayZ seems to be more or less on track. That's good enough for me. Having said that, some more info would be cool. I, for one, would love to know how the new renderer is doing, or the new animation system. I'd also like to know, to some extent, what the new renderer will do. Dynamic shadows for fire, for instance? New particle effects? I'd also like to know more about the new sound module, or whatever they call it. Then again, maybe that will all be covered in the next status update, which they say will be a big one. Who knows.

Stop adding clothes? Replace clothes with full sets? Choose what set we wear at spawn? Brilliant. Play the mod. Zombies are making a comeback in .59. Yeah, you heard him, devs. Stop purposefully creating bugs. Fixing one bug and creating 50 more doesn't make any sense according to this guy, who should know because reasons. Gardening will be useful once food is scarce. Currently it isn't, therefore gardening is near-useless. Eating and drinking is simplistic. Time consuming, maybe, but still simplistic. Guns are pretty common. Mosins are pretty common, as are most civilian weapons (though I've not found as many Winchesters, Blazes and repeaters) I'm pretty sure military bases spawn military loot. You can tell, because people have military loot. I actually agree with the HUD thing. The text display sucks. Selectable spawning? Ooh how about a buddy system where you can spawn right on a friend? Yeah let's remove gear degradation. This one guy speaks for all of us, and he says nobody likes it. No, I think it should be changed. Pristine/worn/etc is a horrible system. I'd much prefer, say, a percentage system. Optimisation will come in time. New renderer. Etc. Of course they plan on finishing the game. Don't be stupid. A delayed update and a seemingly slow development time doesn't mean they've stopped making the game. Games take time to make, usually a few years. DayZ's development seems slow because we are witness to every update. Games are usually announced a few months, maybe a year before they're released; they've usually been in development for a few years prior to that. Most of DayZ's development time has been going into the engine, which is why it might seem like there's not been much progress. They're laying the foundations still. Yeah the ragdolling is shit. I'd prefer if they'd just left it out because it clearly isn't finished and doesn't really add to the game in its current state. DayZ is supposed to be difficult. It isn't, but it will be. Survival will be a major element, as such what you wear will be important, how you find food and water will be important and so on. It sounds like you just want the mod, which is fine, but the Standalone isn't the mod. If it was just a slightly polished version of the mod what'd be the point? The price tag for early access? Yeah, I do actually think it's a little bit high, but in fairness it was considerably lower. Hell, H1Z1 is supposed to be free to play which puts DayZ's price into perspective a little; they're not charging literally infinitely more than what the game will cost at release. Anyway, welcome to the forums.

Who the hell can? ;D It isn't easy shooting somebody wearing rocket skates. I prefer to jog around rather than sprint. Once I have a backpack I prefer wearing stuff like jeans and checked shirts rather than military gear. I tend to stick to improvised backpacks as well, rather than going for the massive ones. The game, in this state, is much more enjoyable if you impose limits on yourself. I recently tried a Slav playstyle with a friend. Tracksuits, flat caps, baseball bats and leather shoes - plus a taloon bag. Was the first time I had a loaded gun in a chest holster.

Good guide - pretty solid considering you only have 3 days' worth of playing. Obviously it'll be rendered obsolete before long, but there's some good tips in there. The compass hotbar thing, for example, I only learned about a few days ago. Speaking from personal preference and experience, I'd say give 1pp a go at some point, and hold off using online maps for as long as you can. When I first started playing the feeling of being lost was awesome. I could pick a direction and run without much of an idea of what I'd find, so I'd explore around and see what I saw. Now I've learned the map pretty well, I have a good idea of where I am all the time. I miss being lost, but I'm looking forward to community-made maps so I can get lost all over again. Anyway, welcome to the forums. I dunno, I quite like the sawn-off. Makes a solid backup. I guess the 133 is the best primary, but you don't get to Mad Max or Ash Williams - which is obviously the most important aspect of wielding a shotgun.

Work is ongoing. .59 is taking forever, but I expect we'll get experimental this week. Maybe. Possibly. Devs have hit a few snags in .59. I guess they could be a little more forthcoming about the progress of .59 given the considerable delay, but patience is key.

The new AI will be more streamlined and less resource intensive. As such you an't really compare Arma's AI with DayZ's AI as they will function quite differently. In regards to the OP, wandering hordes have been suggested before. I don't really get the fog thing, but weather systems (like fog) are planned.

Roadblocks, hills, cliffs, all suggested before. However, I really like the SAM site idea. It's an elegant way to stop aircraft rather than "radioactive... bio... fog?" It wouldn't stop people from bailing out, though. Maybe the off limits part of the map could prevent players from leaving vehicles? Seems like a simple but effective solution to that problem. Pilots should have fair warning before they're shot down. It'd suck to put one toe over the map boundary and just explode.

Hm. I can respect that. I suppose it comes down to notions of chivalry rather than fairness. If people are given an advantage then they're going to use it even if it's an advantage that is, I would argue, detrimental to gameplay. I think many people, like myself, would much rather not peek around corners - but we have to because everyone else does it. As I think I mentioned before, I'd very much be in favour of a system that maintains 3pp, but negates exploits inherent in 3pp. A system whereby things that cannot be seen by the player in 1pp are occluded in 3pp has been posted repeatedly on these forums (probably in this very thread, given the subject matter) and that sounds like a pretty great idea, provided it's reliable (not blocking the player's view when nothing is in the way, for example). This is also why (one of the reasons, anyway) there have been changes to the camera - an attempt to reduce the exploitability of 3pp. Its effectiveness is limited, but it's an attempt to address the issue, which I appreciate.

Yeah it's been a hell of a delay. Not their fault, of course. Maybe we'll see some features destined for .60 that have made it into .59 due to the delay? Or maybe .59 will just be a little more refined or something? .595. Looking forward to it, though. I've got a friend I play DayZ with from time to time, but we've stopped until zombies make a comeback since looting is boring as all hell. Going to try and convince him to give experimental a go if there are zombies.

Nonsense. I reiterated a previous point and elaborated for clarity as you had clearly either ignored or missed it. You adopted, and continue to adopt a condescending tone - something I'm sure you'll agree doesn't suit someone of your immeasurable wit. I just made the mistake of emulating it.

There were features from early versions of DayZ that are no longer in the game and may or may not be reintroduced. Just because 3pp has always been in that's no good reason for it to stay, especially given that the game in in alpha. Besides, my point was that just because everyone can do something that doesn't necessarily make it fair. Right. So reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. That's okay. People can play the game however they want. That's fine. If people want 3pp, that's fine. If people want Berezino deathmatch, that's fine. The devs also understand this, which is why there are minimal restrictions on gameplay. However, the devs have stated that 1pp is the way to go and as such may make efforts to steer people in that direction. If people don't want to play 1pp they don't have to, in the same way that if people would rather have a punch out in Elektro, they are free to. Turning official servers into 1pp servers would mean that newcomers are more likely to play 'vanilla' or how the devs like the game if they join an official server. I've no doubt that plenty of 3pp players have never even tried 1pp. Hell, I only played 1pp when I joined a hardcore server by accident and learned I quite like it. The rant about 3pp? Sure, I'll give you that one. I like to play the game in a certain way, as do a lot of other people. Finding a populated 1pp server is difficult, despite the fact that so many people prefer 1pp. There's plenty of low-pop 1pp servers but I rarely see high-pop. As a result I play 3pp and don't contribute to 1pp populations. Other people do the same, so 1pp servers never grow. Sure that's partly my fault, but I don't really want to play low pop 1pp. As a result I don't have a choice in what server I play on. If I want 1pp I have to play low pop. If I want high pop I have to play 3pp. As I said before, I daresay many 3pp players have never played 1pp, or found the inability to wallpeek claustrophobic. If their first experience of DayZ was 1pp, they might be more inclined to play 1pp, rather than sticking solely to 3pp. That's not to say I dislike 3pp, I just prefer 1pp. While I may have been obtuse I think I outlined the problems inherent in 3pp fairly well - problems recognised by the developers. I'd be in favour of some system that removes wall peeking while still allowing 3pp - that way everybody is happy. Being abrasive and dismissing it because 'the majority of players like to play that way' does nothing to solve the problem.

What if everyone starts with M4s and unlimited magazines? It's all equal, so don't worry. How about everyone gets wallhacks? It's all equal, so don't worry. You upset that somebody was hiding inside a wall killed you without you ever seeing them? It's perfectly fair because you could have been hiding inside that wall as well. Your reasoning is flawed. People play 3pp for the same reason "HIGH LOOT, 24/7 DAY, INCREASED VEHICLE SPAWNS" draw in the crowds - even though server owners have no control over spawn rates. It's easier. Why risk your neck leaning round a wall when you can use your clairvoyant powers to see the world from 3 feet above your head? Why pick a sniping position that is both concealed and provides a good field of view when you can just lie prone on a roof, use your powers to spot a target, crouch, shoot and go prone again? Because people want servers to have a ton of loot, does that mean houses should be overflowing with guns? What if you want a survival experience where resources are scarce, but the only populated servers are "M4 FOR FRESHIES, BEREZINO DEATHMATCH"? Imagine, then, that the devs proposed that official servers - and only the official servers - would provide the ideal DayZ experience with scarce loot, survival elements, all that jazz but then a swarm of 13-year-olds said "you're just appealing to the minority, the numbers speak for themselves - the survival crowd can play on their own servers if they want to." That'd be pretty shitty, right? It'd be kind of like buying Counter-Strike hoping for a competitive shooter, only to find that it's overrun with surf and deathrun. The devs want people to play in a certain way. They are designing the game in a certain way. They know that removing 3pp would cause a backlash (which is a shame) which is likely why they've said they'll never get rid of it. What they're trying to do is steer people towards the 'proper' way to play by effectively setting the 'default' settings to be 1pp. There are more than enough 3pp servers that I'm sure people will flock to if 1pp is forced on official servers. I fail to see the problem with the devs setting up their own servers to play how they want the game to play.

Oh. I thought they'd run away from each other.

I'd be in favour of this, even if it was only temporary. 3pp private servers would still exist for people who need to peek over walls - ah - I mean people who like the tactical awareness of their surroundings. Having said that, I'd rather see improvements to the movement system before having 1pp forced on official servers. I think one of the biggest non 'I need muh peekz" complains is that movement is pretty janky, and that gets amplified in 1pp. If people who play on official servers are forced to play with janky movement I suspect it'd turn them off 1pp permanently.

Huh. How about a petrol engine? I think they're adding spark plugs and stuff. Maybe it could only work in diesel engines (if that's the case in real life).

Hey, if a bunch of redneck yanks can make moonshine in bathtubs I see no reason why people shouldn't be able to make vodka in a zombie apocalypse. I think distilling small amounts should be relatively easy - something somebody could feasibly do alone, or maybe in a very small group to produce enough to sanitise bandages and stuff. Producing it in large amounts should be difficult to get going, but has a better conversion rate of raw items to alcohol. Fuel from fuel stations should be better than ethanol. A can of fuel should be more efficient than a can of ethanol. Perhaps fuel stations should be rarer or even contain a limited (though lowly self-replenishing) supply, encouraging the production of ethanol in large quantities. I don't know how viable ethanol is as a fuel - I suspect you can't just put vodka in a truck and expect to drive off - but a lapse in realism isn't a problem if it furthers gameplay. Isn't there a vodka factory near NWAF or somewhere? Maybe that could be a good source for supplies or, hell, already have all the vats and stuff required to make alcohol. Fortify it and you've got a ready-made alcohol factory.

A lot of these have been suggested before, some of it is planned. I'll address some of the more interesting ones. Slightly opening doors is a neat idea. I think slowly opening doors has been suggested in the past, but being able to open doors partially and then stop would be pretty cool. I like the idea of dizziness and concussion after crashing. Even just unconsciousness for a few seconds would be pretty cool, especially if vehicles could catch fire. It'd be neat if you crashed and were knocked unconscious and your passenger, concussed, had to drag your body out of the burning wreck. I could get behind that. Suppression to some extent exists already. Smells are an interesting one, though. I like that you've suggested how they could be displayed visually. Would they serve much of a practical purpose? Maybe not, but it's interesting nonetheless. Random spawn scenes are again interesting. Cool scenarios you've posed. Certainly I'd like to be more immersed at the very start. As it stands we just spawn in standing on a beach with pristine clothes. We should spawn prone, wet and with badly damaged clothing. First priority should be finding dry clothes or building a fire.

What next? AS50s? APCs? Tanks? Jets? Nukes? Particle beams powered by Dyson Spheres capable of wiping out entire planetary systems? Too far I say, for I am the slippery slope wanker. I put the phallus in fallacy. I'm good with RPGs. No doubt they'll be extremely rare (though they'll likely be relatively common in experimental). Hopefully there'll be things like humvees, or we'll able to armour civilian cars sufficiently so that the inhabitants can survive an RPG, even if the vehicle doesn't.

'Realism' is cited a lot, but it's a term that's cherry picked a lot. For example, it might not be realistic to keep a pistol in your pocket because it'd fall out or bounce around or get caught or whatever - but nobody complains that you can fit 4 cans of beans in your pockets. Nobody complains that you can fit 4 books in your pockets. An entire cooking pot. A bear trap. Only 4 pens. Sometimes realism has to take a back seat to videogame logic.

I like the idea, but not the idea. Being able to fix up damaged homes (there should be more, currently they're pretty much all pristine) should be feasible, but you should be able to choose specifically what you do. Is the roof caved in? Why not build a ladder to the remains of the roof and have a small viewing platform? Part of the wall blown out? Replace it with wooden boards and scrap, or just put a pile of sandbags there. I'm not mega keen on arbitrary "building has taken X amount of damage and therefore has no roof, place Y amount of materials into the structure to repair." While a Frostbite level of building destructibility would be awesome, it probably isn't feasible (though correct me if I'm wrong because that'd be awesome). It seems like it'd make more sense to have a number of pre-damaged buildings, and to allow buildings to be completely destroyed if they're hit with a few RPGs or something. The idea of house inventories decaying over time is interesting, but it seems to me that having objects inside these houses (cupboards, fridges) that decay makes more sense.

Well I'm not in favour of removing the player list. I've never used it to gain some advantage, and I think anybody would be hard pressed to gain any advantage. I was just contributing to the discussion, suggesting that if the list was removed, there's still information I'd like to have access to. The inventory thing is a little different. It's an abstract means of knowing what in real life you would already know. In real life I know if I've got a broken arm because it hurts, maybe I can see my arm doesn't look right, I can't move it properly, etc. Obviously you can't feel the pain of your character, so that information has to be displayed as an abstract. The same goes for inventory. Unless you want to have to actually look inside each of your pockets, you need an abstract system. Some games (I think the Forest is an example, there are probably others) have your inventory displayed as a sheet on the floor. No doubt other games have you actually look inside of your bag, and you can see each item. That is rarely practical, however, so -once again- something abstract is required. I think the issue that people have is that you can attain information that you could never have access to in real life. I can't walk around and know exactly how many people are within 5 miles of me. Now I don't have a problem with the player list, as I've already said, but that seems to be the problem that other people have. I think it's fairly unimportant, but then I'm sure that there are many people that thing the 1pp 3pp debate is unimportant, so that shows how much I know.

There'll be 'devastation passes' apparently, which I suspect means adding burnt out cars, rubble, stuff like that. Given that DayZ takes place in the weeks or months following the collapse of society, it's unlikely we'll see overgrown streets and stuff, cool as that'd be.

I don't think that's a very good argument. That's like saying "if you prefer 1pp but can only play on 3pp servers, just stay in 3rd person." There's no reason not to use an advantage if everyone else is using it. So long as I can see roughly how many people are on the server and I can see if my friends are on the server and I can see my ping, I'm happy. That's not to say that I'm against the player list at all, but if ever it was going to be removed I think that's the bare minimum amount of information I'd need.

I like it when games mix ragdoll physics with death animations. It looks really good when done right, like they fall to their knees and then when they're about to faceplant on the ground they ragdoll. Doesn't always look right, mind. I also like games (though I can't think of many) that make ragdolls quite rigid to begin with and then loosen the limbs so they fall more naturally rather than acting like some sort of dropped puppet... like some sort of... rag... doll? I have to agree that DayZ ragdolls are shit. They should have waited to implement them. It also affects gameplay, as some have already mentioned, in that corpses have a tendency to slide down hills. It also means it's very easy to see when you have killed (rather than knocked unconscious) a player as they tend to sort of collapse and flop rather than play an animation. Sort of makes double tapping and caution around corpses a bit redundant.

Yeah it seems like Gorka and raincoat are pretty much the only things you see people wearing. All clothes should be water resistant to some extent, but shouldn't be 100% waterproof. Would also be nice if hats, trousers and shoes contributed to dryness, since it doesn't make sense that a rain coat should keep you 100% dry. All clothes should have pros and cons, with higher-end clothing having fewer cons. Gorka could maybe be highly water resistant, but have a smaller carry capacity than other military gear. Rain coats could maybe only have 2 slots, or 4 horizontal slots like the rider's jacket. Would also be nice if hats/helmets were affected similarly. Currently there's no point - besides aesthetics - in not wearing a helmet. You can be knocked out in one punch, so why would you not wear a motorcycle helmet? I'd argue in favour of maybe reduced vision or some other drawback when wearing a motorcycle helmet, or maybe hats like beanies could be buffed to provide a lot of warmth while cowbow/boonie/whatever hats are buffed to provide water protection while helmets (with the exception of military helmets, and for the sake of balance) only provide damage protection and are not waterproof or warm. Being required to wear different clothes for different weather conditions would encourage players to carry spare sets of clothing. It'd also mean players would have to dry their clothes and take shelter more, rather than yoloing it because raincoats make them impervious to rain. Played DayZ a few days ago with a friend. We roleplayed as Slavs. Tracksuits, leather shoes and flat caps, saying cheeki breeki at every possible opportunity. My only regret is that we can't squat.