sea

There's no point in buying a server. No, mine was not shut down; I abide by the rules. I'm just saying, if I am paying that much, I should have control of my own server. If players don't like it, there are others. All server owners from Vilayer were just given 10-20 minutes warning via email that if their servers do not fit the rules exactly, every violator's server will be shut down. 10-20 minutes warning on enforcement of something they have left alone until this moment! This game is being driven into the ground by overpriced hosting and stupid strict rules. Bohemia needs to host ALL servers themselves if these rules are going to be this strict. I simply wanted to host a server and have my team help noobs learn how to play. It's not worth the hassle. My money would be way better spent doing other things; and that's what's happening with a lot of admins. They are finally realizing they are only paying extra money to play; these stringent server rules eliminate the draw to host your own. Instead of cracking down on server admins, how about you fix the gameplay issues; put your focus on the physics so zombies can't run through walls, spawn on top of you? So we don't fall off of things that we should be fine with? 2,000,000 players means $60,000,000. That's a load of change, especially for a company that only has to host 1-2 servers for hive information. Obviously not much is being spent on development; these simple physics issues should have been fixed immediately. The problem is the game was built on an unstable platform. Physics are so screwed up, it would take a total rewrite to repair it at this point. I'm a retired software developer, and am frankly disgusted with the lack of dev progress while this game pockets so much money. The updates that were listed as added, including the new town up North... They are not there. The blog says they were released, but for some reason someone can't simply take $1 out of that $60,000,000 to realize they posted false information. It's a mess! I will spend my time working with other, promising projects. DayZ is a blast, but the corporate end has ruined it. Too bad, so sad. Just wait until Steam files a lawsuit against Bohemia because this game has not abided by Steam's rules.

Heeeeere's the problem with the current system: Any shooter knows you gently squeeze trigger on exhale; you NEVER hold your breath when shooting. You even keep both eyes open, even though only one is lining up sights. This is an aspect of realism that has been ignored for too long in gaming. Maybe have pulse affect aim; if you were just sprinting, you are jittery but if you have relaxed for a few minutes, your aim is much more accurate? Instead of some Zen-like meditation....

Hello. I have a quad core Xeon(3.2ghz) with 5 GB RAM(expandable to 128) and 1TB storage, on an unmetered GigE connection. I ALWAYS have the full gigabit available, up and down. This would make for an awesome server, where it has the ability to test higher user counts even! The problem is only huge gameservice companies can host DayZ. These servers are a total ripoff at $~80 a month. My server lease is only $59 a month, and I could probably host 2-3 DayZ standalone public hive servers on it, lag-free, simply. But, you guys don't allow it. Please, PLEASE allow people to host game instances from datacentre servers. I understand many DC's have capped bandwidth or there's a 100 meg port supplying several servers. I have a dedicated IP, dedicated Gigabit up and down, and unlimited data transfer. This would make for a great server! HEEEELLP! I'm not about to be ripped off by one of two companies with a monopoly, and think this limitation will ultimately cause DayZ to fall. These game service companies have terrible bandwidth and constant lag issues, because they cluster so many servers into one connection; which may be limited at 1/50th of what I can push in my datacentre. We have 5 GBPS going to each cluster, with guaranteed constant gigE Internet at every node. Full DDoS mitigation, and we don't allow IRC or other potentially malicious traffic on our servers. We have DCs in Seattle and the Netherlands. Could easily follow the rules for a major game service provider. We just don't want to be running 200 servers. We enjoy playing and would like to host our instance from OUR datacentre because we know the quality of our service far surpasses anything currently available to DayZ players. I would personally enjoy testing higher capacity servers on my crazy fast connection at my personal expense. Can I possibly have someone personally contact me on this issue? --SeaSharp

I understand, Mike. And I do understand capitalism; these companies are turning a profit. The profit margin is well over what's commonly considered appropriate pricing for the specified server resources, and that's what really bothers me. I'd be happy to open up a scalable service charging 50% of the competition, but am not about to invest in 50x the resources needed at that moment when I can add servers within minutes of orders placed. I have no problem following the rules when it comes to 25% of the servers being public, self-sponsored servers, but am not about to dedicate 50 boxes to server rental unless I have the renters to actually use that equipment. It's unfair, as that's essentially what's required to host servers; it's stated in the rules. While limiting the size of a company hosting servers the community is being forced to connect to bargain wholesale servers for the most part. Why not allow real quality that's infinitely scalable at half the price?

My error, 3-4 companies hosting DayZ public hive servers. I can understand not wanting to leak server code to protect against exploits, but there are anti-cheat scripts that are simple to maintain that handle that situation much more efficiently and effectively. DayZ server rental is priced off the charts. It is ridiculously expensive to host a server through one of these greedy companies. The resources are quite inexpensive, but they are charging over 10x their cost. It's unfair to charge so much for so little resources. I can put up a server with 16 cores that will easily run 8-10 instances for only around 1-150 per month. DO that math. I can get my DayZ servers for $10-$20 per month, that's on straight unmetered Gigabit. These greedy folks are charging $80+ for mediocre server architecture.

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not making threats; that's not my intention. As game growth has progressed to a much larger client base, more responsibility has landed at the feet of the team running this awesome experience. I love playing, and am relatively new to DayZ. I just don't find it fair that 2 companies are approved for public hive when so many more resources could be added to the game's pool. I would love to offer those resources, and honestly could care less about profit. I have my profit-generating businesses and just want this game to be less about lining someone's pocketbooks and more about having an awesome gaming experience.

What's funny is the exact same server files are available for private hives. At least as far as I currently understand. If any game hosting company can host/rent out servers, that means those server files are already in the public's hands, so limiting who can host while providing a huge profit for specific companies potentially violates federal antitrust law.

The kicker is *any* game hosting company can host it, so why not folks with real servers who can improve the quality of DayZ? A simple app checking bandwidth available and system configuration could weed out the folks trying to host from home while giving DayZ more exposure and helping this community. The server files are available. I can host a PRIVATE hive myself. Why I can't host a PUBLIC one without hosting ~100 servers at a time? Therein lies my issue. It's discrimination!

If I am required to host a game server company, I will follow your rules and lease DayZ servers to customers for $30-$40 per month, cutting the competition in half and gaining my own monopoly. These con artists currently hosting DayZ servers are only paying around $8 per month per server, but charging us $85. They need to stop profiting ridiculous amounts and come down to a reasonable level. I sense(the potential for) an antitrust lawsuit brewing in the near future.