DaveATR

On little fact that is rarely toted, is the card number. If you do upgrade be sure that you pay attention to the number. a 610 to a 710 is only going to be a very minor upgrade and almost a complete sidegrade, as the card structure doesn't change much. However, an upgrade to say a 750, or higher, there is a wealth of difference. When it comes to card numbers such as a 450, or 580, and the such, you want to pay attention to the 50, 60, 70, 80. Etc. Its very possible to have a 580 that outperforms a 610.

The video's great. It does a good job of outlining a wealth of the advantages that are garnered from 3rd person. Of course, the bottom line is its still a personal preference issue. Not everyone plays the game for the same exact reasons, and nor are they required to. Immersion is not the same across the board for everyone. What it means to one person, may be entirely different for the next. I find the world extremely immersive, regardless of the perspective used. As well, I'm not playing DayZ to constantly find myself in fire fights where perspective advantages are a problem for me. Another facet as well is that the advantage is for everyone across the board, using the perspective. And while positioning will give a huge advantage, it always gives a huge advantage. Regardless of perspective. Higher ground is always sought. Cover is always sought. This is all positioning that conveys advantage to the user. While the third person perspective will grant information that wouldn't be normally garnered without risk, in a lot of situations, its hardly game breaking to some. Whereas, to others its utter annoyance. But therein lies the rub, the general populace that dislike third person because of the advantages it conveys are looking for a much more realistic shooter, than those who don't.

I personally don't play hardcore, because I enjoy the third person option. I don't get into altercations with players very frequently, haven't seen one in weeks at this point. I play for the aesthetics, as much as the game play. I enjoy lookin at my toon, and his gear.

Humorous. And spot on in a lot of points. My only disagreeance being with attire. I just assume all players are going to want to kill me for my PHATLEWTZ and the LOLZSNIPERKILLERZxLOLZ. I run around in camo, with a gas mask and a beanie. I also avoid highly trafficked areas, and explore a wealth of the map, sticking to the wilderness generally. My goal isn't to kill people in the game. Lately I've been exploring it to see all the changes made to every city. I am quite impressed with the map.

As a fresh spawn in Berezino, I had come across a pick axe. I was making my way to some homes to find a backpack and maybe some clothes and food. Upon turning a corner, I ran into another fresh spawn. He had a crow bar. We both paused and said hello for a moment. I back away slowly, and in no hostile fashion. The pick axe was stowed over my back. Shortly thereafter, the player raised his crowbar and ran at me, fanatically. He met the business end of my pick axe. None the less, it began recementing the kill or be killed mentality I used to harbor from the mod. I've had several people shoot me, for kicks. I haven't had any gear worth anything on these occasions. If a player is unaware of my location, or that I'm in the area. I will probably let him live, assuming he isn't a bandit. But if for some reason, my position is compromised? I will certainly shoot first and ask questions later. The opposite has unfortunately never been afforded me. Its understandable why some people prefer to just kill outright.

I see what you're saying, and agree to an extent. Reloading, itself, isn't my main concern really. More or less its the numerous other functions in the game that could see a little more streamlining in order to line up with "realism", as it would be. There just seems to be quite a few things in this game that are unnecessarily overly complex. It could be due to the engine of the game itself not really being intended for this sort of interaction within the environment. That being said, the game is still in alpha. The UI will hopefully see a complete overhaul. And I still sink hours into the game, regardless of the nuanced approach to some of the game elements.

One of the things I've noticed with DayZ is that it assumes that everyone is simply just bad at everything. Period. Ive been shooting. Various hand guns and assault rifles. Reloading isn't a chore of any kind. Spend an afternoon at a range and swapping out a mag will become second nature. "Realism" is cute and quaint. But for some reason, in video games, its readily assumed that people are complete and utter morons wrapped in idiots. And while I agree, they generally are; when it comes to basic motor function, they really aren't. Some things in this game are exceptionally complex: ie, having to put a matchbox in your hands to light a fire. Yeah, no shit you have to do that in reality. However, it takes much longer in a video game than it seriously would take me to do in reality. Why? Videogame Realism.

They use the same server designations "Rick". Of course, its theoretically impossible to change a server designation I guess. And servers are notoriously a multi-connection of "sub" computers running routines and prediction software. You're absolutely right about WoW's servers being a mainframe of interconnected servers. And I certainly wasn't insinuating that DayZ had that going on. I was only making the shallow comparison equivalent to yours. Once again, the lag may very well have been the same on the 100 capacity server as it is on the 40. I cannot debate that, as I never played on the 100. Im not arguing a difference there. I'm actually fairly confident that you are right in that regard, 100%. I am saying, that though the designations remained the same, the server make up themselves changed. Scenario: You're a gaming company renting server space from a third party. You opt to run a higher capacity server, for experimental testing as to loads and requirements that will be needed for your game. You finish with said testing, and reduce the normal server allowance to thusly accommodate the new models you have arranged with your now acquired data. You downstep those servers to adjust for a smaller player base. You're now running a smaller load, thus requiring a smaller server capacity. So to save money, you rent the smaller servers. The lag has changed, though it may generally be unnoticeable to general human perception. All looks similar on the surface, though the entire networking backbone has completely changed. This actually happens quite frequently in gaming. Its a relatively sound business model, if anything.

Not all servers are created equally. Equal logic: WoW has servers that run tens of thousands of players at a time. Zomg DayZ, WTF is your problem? To Add: Yes, its very plausible that those 100 capacity servers were much better servers than the 40 capacity ones currently in use. This shouldn't have to be explained, but for brevity's sake I will go ahead and cover this base. And to add even further, lag is determined by more than just the server in use. The number of access points required to reach said server plays a huge part, as well as behind which backbone is being ridden to the server site. Some companies who control regional backbones are very strict with the way data is routed through said backbones. That delves more into information delivery, and an entirely different avenue of packet loss than is normally discussed.

I see what you did there.

It depends on the desire, ultimately. Do you want a 100 server max so that you can run into more players, and thusly have more shootouts? To my understanding, not the goal of the game. Please see next Deathmatch shootout FPS to come out. Or plenty of previous ones of good quality. Do you want a higher server max so you at least run into more players for multiplayer experience that leads to interacting with more people, in a survival setting? Understandable; of course, there isn't much in the game that requires you to truly work with other players via raiding for goods, trading, or handling any type of contextual situation that you really can already handle solo. It sounds to me more like people want to be able to kill other players, on a more regular basis. Is this a deathmatch game with zombies in the background, or is it a survival game with zombies as the catalyst for apocalypse?

Its no coincidence that they chose the same engine that the Mod was based off of. As well, the gameplay seems to be a strong selling point as they recently struck over 2 million copies sold. So, either its not the game you envision it should be and they're entirely wrong in their endeavor, or they're doing what attracted people to it in the first place on the platform it was originally built on.

The gameplay is fairly reminiscent of the mod. I run into douche bags all the time exercising douchebaggery constantly. Its still a "lewt" grind, until you're armed enough to go and rain misery on players. I'm not really seeing where the SA falls short of the mod. It has about the same amount of content, unless you compare it to something like Epoch. Its really only missing automobiles, helicopters, and tents. Of which, I'd only actually like to see 2 of the 3 implemented. Theres no real content beyond "find stuff". At that point its player driven as to whats done after you "find stuff". And this was all meant as a rant, as to the unmentioned(seriously, anywhere in any of the patches notes), change in size to the bow. The relevance lies in the fact that as a player of the game I was hoping to run around with a bow and take things out. Irrelevant to the usual CoD fest the game generally becomes. And yes, aesthetics in a game are pretty important to me. If not most gamers entirely.

we are sidetracking! The visual size... that's the problem.. it looks like a toy bow. its pathetic.it dwarfs even true shortbows, which were made smaller only so they could be shot from horseback... Seriously.. it looks like a truck stop, backwoods toy. CHANGE IT BACK.

I managed to secure 9 arrows. I had wanted to just skirt cities and avoid as much contact as possible. living off the land, etc... I was looking forward to the bow. I was extremely disappointed to see the model had been changed, and shrunk down.. Hopefully though, its a sign to implement another bow in the near future.