bastins

The problem with looking at Arma 3, though, is that it's not strictly a multiplayer game like DayZ, so it can get away with seemingly unbalanced DLC. If they were to release DLC for DayZ, they will almost certainly do so knowing that things need to remain balanced.

It's a shame more people don't have this mindset and approach; there are far too many people treating DayZ like the be-all and end-all DayZ experience, and then getting upset that it's "worse" than the mod. Of course it is, it's still young. Unless you enjoy the standalone, the mod should still be your first choice. Early access to the standalone is just something for you to jump into every once in a while to see how the game is progressing.

Prove him wrong.

Personally, I wouldn't like this system. For example, what if you're ultimately looking for an M4 with an ACOG and silencer. You come across one with an ACOG, and then later you find one with a silencer. With your proposed system, you'd now have to make a choice between the two static variations, neither of which will get you any closer to your goal; you'll still have a gun with only one of your desired attachments. With the attachment system, however, you can simply take the silencer off the extra M4, and put it on the one you have. Or better yet, if the extra M4 is in better condition than yours, then put your attachments on that one and take it.

Just a minor suggestion: be sure to note your timezone when you post your streaming hours.

As the others have said, money does not necessarily translate to progress. They can hire more talent, which I believe they have done, but the work itself still takes time, especially if you want to get it right. Second, I'm seeing a lot of people bringing up H1Z1 as a serious competitor, and killer of rival zombie games. While I, too, am looking forward to trying this game, can we please save the talk of "serious competition" until we've actually played the game? Again, I'm looking forward to trying H1Z1... it's just that gamers these days seem to have gotten really good at letting their imaginations and expectations run wild.

5. If you're going to loot someone you just killed, make sure he's actually dead. I can't remember if it was Goldy or Layne, but one of them got one-punched on stream a few days ago. The attacker, however, failed to realize that his target was only unconscious, and would be waking up fairly soon. Which leads to the next tip: 6. If you are going to loot an unconscious person, disarm him first. Continuing from the incident above, the attacker began looting the body, but ignored the gun. His target then woke up, gun still in his hands, and promptly shot the looter in the face.

Definitely not a terrible idea, but I think it's a bit too RPG-ish for DayZ. Especially with medicinal items like the ones you've listed, these are things that really should only be used in an emergency, rather than as desirable performance-enhancers.

Ha ha, same here. Although, I don't email it... I almost always take long enough to type things up, that by the time I'm ready to post it, the frustration is gone and I realize it shouldn't be posted.

Well, that's how software development traditionally works. First you create something, then you refine that something, then you release it. Alpha, beta, release. DayZ is still in alpha; it's under heavy construction. Major bug-fixing, beta, will come in due time.

It's unfortunately not that simple. This stuff requires time and effort, regardless of how much money they may have; you can't just sprinkle money around like pixie dust and end up with a finished product. In the end, it's a lose-lose for the developers. They hurry up and get the game done, and people bitch that the game is broken and rushed. They take their time to get things right, and people bitch that they aren't progressing fast enough.

I can't say you're necessarily wrong, however, I can say that you don't seem to be taking into account how early in development the standalone is. In particular, thinking they stripped a "shitload of things" from the mod and called it a standalone game, is way off the mark.

I agree. Leave that shit to Counter Strike.

I haven't been held up yet, but I'm never going to comply when I do. I'm here to play a video game, not waste my time dealing with some squeaky internet kids trying to be tough.

The way I see it is, if you want people to stay globbed together in a small action-packed area, then you should go play Battlefield or Call of Duty. DayZ is based in a large, open map, and should play-out accordingly, with people spawning and encountering others all over the map.

Well, if he is a hacker, he's not a very good one, getting killed twice.

It is indeed pretty unfortunate that so many dipshits out there need to hack their way to success. However, if you're looking to relax (mentally) after a long day of work, playing DayZ really isn't the best choice.

Same avatar, I'm assuming? ^_^ In my defense, though, I'm the newest of new, as I've only just bought the game on Monday, and still haven't gotten a chance to jump in and start playing! :blush: . But my plan is to try playing as a medic of sorts, hence the avatar.

Well, keep in mind that it's literally just a video game; no need to beat yourself up. Especially since you've only just started playing; you're trying different things out, and it turns out that randomly killing people isn't quite for you. It's all a part of the fun :thumbsup:

For someone wondering why the DayZ community is so "bad," you're not doing a very good job setting an example.

There is nothing more than than. It will stop being "alpha" when the game is feature-complete and can move on to "beta." It will stop being beta when the game is stable, polished, and ready for final release. These aren't excuses from "fanboys", or cop-outs from the developers. They're simple facts of software development; like any other line of work, there's a logical structure and workflow involved in getting the job done. As for whether it was the right choice to make the alpha available now... of course it was. Why not? Plenty of DayZ fans know they're absolutely going to buy the game, so why not let them pre-order it now? Better yet, why not let them play with development builds while they wait? Don't want to play the development builds?... Then don't play the development builds; just pre-order and wait for release. On the contrary, you must be really naive to think there's no way the game will increase in price. Bohemia themselves just used this model with Arma III. Arma 3 alpha, $32.99 Arma 3 beta, $44.99 Arma 3 final, $59.99 This is not an uncommon practice with early access; don't be surprised if/when it happens to DayZ.

I agree. If the intent is to add hunting, then we will undoubtedly see appropriate wildlife AI.

I have to agree with C.O. Wolf, you're way over-thinking things. Now, if you're having fun doing what you're doing, then by all means keep it up. In which case, I would say just basically go for more of a recreational outdoorsman look rather than an armored-up military look.

You can call it whatever you want; it's their blatant warnings that matter: "WARNING: THIS GAME IS EARLY ACCESS ALPHA. PLEASE DO NOT PURCHASE IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO ACTIVELY SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF THE GAME AND ARE PREPARED TO HANDLE WITH SERIOUS ISSUES AND POSSIBLE INTERRUPTIONS OF GAME FUNCTIONING." "...[DayZ] is a work in progress and therefore contains a variety of bugs. We strongly advise you not to buy and play the game at this stage unless you clearly understand what Early Access means and are interested in participating in the ongoing development cycle."

We'll never see anything like Beam.NG in DayZ. There's simply no need for that level of vehicle physics in a game like this. Besides, most people can't run more than a few vehicles on a Beam.NG map without serious performance issues.