Vattenlarv

If you take an area of 100 m², and add another 99 areas of the same size, the total area would be 1 km². Trust me. I am not very pedagogical, but the math is correct, haha. Edit; And yes, that is what I am saying. But I understand that it is not something that will ever happen with DayZ. For some reason I am thinking about the final mission in either Mafia or Mafia II when you make your way from building to building using scaffolding, planks, roof tops etc. Not like in Assassin's Creed, but the level design would make these places accessible. A 1 km² sandbox map, with detailed and very accessible buildings, alleyways, yards, cellars, attics, rooftops, tunnel systems, dense patches of forest and so on, and maybe the possibility to strategically block or alter these access points, would be an epic setting for a sandbox survival game. The sense of scale would be defined by the map's detail and accessibility, not by "horizontal size". A 1 km² map with most of this area covered in multi-story buildings, subterranean levels, that all intertwine and is highly accessible through clever level design (not by some lazy climb mechanic that was dated 5 years ago), would be a lot "bigger" than 1 km² in DayZ.

Just to clear this up. I did mean 100 x 100 m², which is exactly one 1 km². E.g. in Stockholm, which is one of the less dense major capital cities in the world, the population density is some 5000 people per 1 km² (this is on average, not in the inner city). So my "idea" was a highly detailed map of 1 km² (220 times smaller than Chernarus in DayZ), 80 players, never able to see more than 300 m. This is Södermalm in Stockholm, Sweden. The red quadrant is 1 km². Throw 300 players in there, with somewhat realistic accessibility to buildings, allies, cellars, attics, construction sites and so on, and you would have a harder time finding anyone than you currently have in DayZ. I am not saying Södermalm in Stockholm would be a good setting for a game. My point is that 1 km² of "realistic" environment could be a much grander setting than a 220 km² dead wasteland, if done right. Naples, Italy: Just do this to your own home town and realize how enormous 1 km² of a highly detailed, and brilliantly put together, map would be for 80+ players to muck around in. Hell, make it 2 km² if 1 km² is not enough. Still 110 times smaller than Chernarus. Get my drift? Still off-topic, I know.

Kind of off-topic: I have been thinking about this stuff a bit. However, I am by no means a game developer, nor do I have sufficient knowledge about anything really to back up a suggestion. Also, this loosely thought out "idea" of mine is not applicable on DayZ anyways, so yeah. I am thinking about level design. How a map, regardless of its scenery, never allows you to see further than e.g. 300 meters. Dense tree-lines, cliff faces, city skylines etc always obscures your vision at a maximum of 300 meters. Carefully thought out level design, that does not feel unnatural in any way, but just extremely well put together. So view distance would never be more than 300 meters. Wouldn't a new powerful game engine (and cpu) be able to deal with a ton of detail, foliage and environmental effects that did not have to de-render, other than beyond the player's line of sight? Ok, long distance sniping would be out of the picture, but I would prefer to not have to think about a game's graphical limitations when hiding in what I intuitively consider to be "cover". I kind of find the vast wastelands of sandbox games, that does not feel alive due to lack of detail and repetativeness in the environment, to be a bit of a downer. To give a player a real sense of scale could be done by making 100 m² of a map highly detailed and interesting, and then add another 99 of equally interesting areas (to make a 1 km² map, if my math is not failing me) to create a far more interesting world than a, 10 times that size, "dead" wasteland. Add foliage that does not de-render, and hiding in a 1 km² world with 80 players would not be more difficult than in Chernarus. A lot of different buildings with different interior, southern European type cities with narrow cobblestone streets and labyrinth-like "paths" between buildings made out of planks and scaffolding, unique ruins and ancient tunnel systems, dense forests with small creeks and oasis like glades, rock faces with caves / cave systems... your mom's bedroom... you know, whateva' Not shitting on DayZ or anything, just thinking out loud.

I just checked out the status report. They are once again addressing it. Ignore me and my rants, I am a psycho.. Peace and love, or whatnot

Queue the music Squeezorz! ...and people complain about gun smoke being too thick.. thinking a stamina system will drive people away.. "come on you boring hardcore advocates, it's a game, it's supposed to be fun", "I think the running speed is fine", "3rd person emulates peripheral view and situational awareness". Do you you want to know why the the game has mediocre reviews, why the player base is shrinking by the hour, why so many people outside the die hard DayZ fan club couldn't give less of a shit about .63, or has even heard about this upcoming patch? You have the answer above. The next patch can change 95% of the game down to it's absolute core, but if the new stamina system and added inertia does not eradicate the ability to do this Benny Hill bullshit, the game will die. This right here is what is driving people away. Please BI, recognize this major, crucial, fucking pivotal issue and slow things down. If this is not gone in .63, no player controller, breathing- or injured animation will change the game enough in the positive direction that is needed. If you can still erratically sprint like this, even if limited to 20-30 sec, when .63 is released (the short clip I have seen showing the new inertia has not fully convinced me), many potential and valuable long term players will lose faith, and might never regain it. I know I probably sound like an evangelical pastor, stating or preaching imaginary facts, but I wholeheartedly believe this. How, in the biggest of the worlds entire arsenal of fucks, this is not considered a fact and how the community has not been violently screaming for this to change for the last couple of years is stranger to me than Scientology, or pineapple on pizza. Also... DEATH TO 3PP!!!

Not sure if I have seen this one discussed in a while. Why not always leave the DayZ character, in the very state your character is in at the very moment you disconnect, left on the server in a "sleep state". Fully interactive, incapable to defend her/himself from being stolen from, or even killed. Not needing to drink or worry about being affected by outer factors like rain or the infected, but persistent on the server you last logged off from, like a vest or a back-pack with the properties of your DayZ survivor. If you choose to switch server, your character will despawn from the last played server, only when you physically log on to a new server. In short, your current character never leaves the DayZ universe. Thoughts? I would like to at least have tried it out for a month. Who knows, maybe there is enough room for all our profiles to simply hide somewhere in a wide amount of servers. Private hives would still be an awesome thing, I think! Maybe 200-300 players plays regularly on a very popular private hive server. If you have the right gear on, you can blend into any color bush or be fairly camouflaged under a low hanging pine branch. How often do you keep perfect track of the symmetry in all of the hundreds of pine trees you pass during your travels? Do not necessarily appreciate private hives? Chernarus is a pretty big place, there will be a fair amount of less played servers around if you want to rest easy. However, becoming a complete ghost at any point in time, is it needed? (These numbers are nothing but an unqualified guess from my part. I have no insight whatsoever in to how many servers are up and running, nor how many players are actively playing at a certain time. All I know is I see a lot of names I recognize when I play on my favorite servers, regardless of game with average server capacity 30-100 players) I have no preconceived opinions or judgement about any of this. I can just not recall having seen the discussion.

Would they tho? Tents do not always get raided, if you place them in a clever enough location. Tents are much harder to hide than a character. The chance that another player stops to take a closer look at the very bush you are hiding in should be fairly small, or? Is there really such a huge amount of players on each individual server that the game world would be cluttered with idling players, or that you'd find a player everytime you chop down a bush for sticks? It sounds highly improbable to me. It would at least solve problems like combat logging and spawning in behind characters, which is not very authentic or fun. Perhaps, if you do not spend that extra minute to make your way to a nearby patch of forest to hide, it's your loss?

Looks pretty accurate to me... If you did unload a full 30 round mag of any caliber indoors, in a 25 m2 room where the air stood still, you would not be able to see a god damn thing because of the gun smoke. I did a year of obligatory service when I was 19 yo, so I am not just pulling this out of my ass. The DayZ community need to make up its mind. Realistic or not. Alright, we shouldn't have to take a shit in the woods every now and then, and press keys in a particular order to grab a handful of leaves and wipe ourselves, but common... as soon as something is implemented that makes the "casual pvp fun" a little more difficult, a little less arcade-ish, there are complaints. If it's a windy day/night in Chernarus and the gun smoke reacts accordingly and blows out of your line of sight so you can see clear as crystal.. fine. If it's a calm day/night, no wind, and you can not see as clearly what you are aiming at after your first shot.. fine. God damn it, complaining about everything that makes an experience better in the long run, as so many forum lurkers are doing (whatever game, or franchise) just slows down the progression of this wonderful world. Do you want games to evolve? Then tell your ego to go stand in the corner, and man the fuck up. Edit; It is not all about you, dude. There is someone at the other end of that barrel as well. Try to think about the flip side of the coin for once, please. Sorry OP for the harsh tone, my rant is not only directed towards you.

I think this idea, even tho I am not 100% sure I understood it correctly, could work with the addition of the factor "where you decide to log out, and in what manner". If you crawl inside a tent and log out, you spawn at the tent location. If you crawl into a sleeping bag(which I am sure will be implemented one way or another), you will spawn in snug in your sleeping bag at the same location. If you log out inside a house, your character would be on the floor sleeping for the time you go to work, scratch your nuts, and spend much needed quality time with the mrs. Logging out in a bush somewhere, because your well-geared character have made you paranoid, could result in you spawning in at a close by, predetermined spawn point. As for combat-logging. Shots fired within 300-500 m, logging out within 3 minutes will leave your character a physical entity on the server... or something. However, I do think most of these ideas are nothing but wishful thinking as the amount of trigger zones or whatever the devs would use to implement such restrictions in this sand-box world, would be a whole new game development in itself, and we would have to wait until 2045 for 1.0 release.

It is quite astonishing how all the DayZ "only want easy access to pvp" fans have missed BI's other and somewhat well known title Arma 3, that is constantly evolving with new maps, DLC's and game modes (and the game is primarily focused on straight up pvp action). Arma 3 is not only a far superior pvp-game, with a gazillion different stances, paces, weapons, vehicles (that work!!), ammunition types (all with different characteristics). It also contains various modding tools with which you can literally build a whole new game, if you wanted to. And all of this is already implemented!! Imagine that. Maybe the player controller in Arma 3 is too complicated for the DayZ pvp-fans... well, CS:GO, if they haven't heard of that game, is another fairly big and well known title. Maybe we can enlighten them of that?

Awesome dude! Now, dig extra garden plots so they form a perfectly symmetrical pentagram. Stack up with food and water (IRL), and wait for an animal or player to walk into the dead center of the pentragram. Kill said animal or player, skin and quarter, and humbly greet the unholy reincarnation of Lucifer.

I just felt like suggesting a few things I think is a necessity, and some stuff I think would be cool (maybe not practical). Probably been suggested before. - Knife holster. Only hunting- and combat knifes will fit in this holster that could clip in to your belt and save you inventory space. This must have been suggested before, right? - Ignition steel. Either a complete set with the metal scraping tool, or just the ignition steel that you need to attach to a knife while holding it, and then the combined items will work as a matchbox. - Pine branch. Cut from pines. Combine with logs and sticks to craft improvised bushcraft shelters. Similar properties as tent, with less slots, and continuous maintenance needed. - Tarp. Combine with rope and stick(s) to set up a temporary tarp shelter, under which you can light a small fire and keep dry in case of rain. You can keep the crafted tarp shelter as an item, that could take up four slots, if you do not wish to get new sticks every time you wish to pitch the shelter. - Sleeping bag. Can be placed indoors, inside tents or bushcraft shelters, and under tarp shelters. If you are freezing your nuts off, but you are at least dry and not suffering from hypothermia, you can find shelter, crawl into the sleeping bag, and even log out if you want to. 30 minutes - 60 minutes later, logged out or not, your character will no longer be freezing. You will remain a physical and interactive entity on the server, snug in your sleeping bag, if you decide to log out. - Sleeping mat. This should be needed to place a sleeping bag under a tarp shelter, or straight on the ground, to balance the pros of being able to pitch a tarp shelter in a hidden location and stay somewhat warm. - Shard of glass. How to find: Search windows with large visible shards of glass still in them. Combine with rag to craft improvised knife. It would be pretty cool if the new engine would allows for more complex crafting as well. Imagine being able to dismantle ammunition and extract the bullet, casing and gun powder. Use an empty shotgun shell, fill it up with gunpowder from a fist full of ammunition, for an example let's say 10 of the 9 mm, or 30 of the .22. Combine the gunpowder filled shotgun shell with duct tape, the bullets and led shots from the shotgun shell, maybe some crushed glass shards, and add a fuse which you crafted by combining matches with string. Voila, we have an improvised frag grenade! That's what I have for now...

First person perspective is not hardcore one bit. It is viewing a virtual world from a intuitive and natural perspective. He shouldn't be thinking about it. This should not even have to be up for discussion. 1pp is the only way a game like this should be played. If I see one more Crash Bandicoot video, of some guy tagging his video with "epic squad wipe shoot-out" and then he runs around like a full on tweeking crackhead, dodging zombies (oh god, the Benny Hill music is starting to play in my head) looking around corners and over obstacles while erratically Matrix-dodging sniper fire... that shit will burn in to my retina, and I will always hear the Benny Hill music when I boot up and see the DayZ logo. So I am trying to avoid all other contact with the game other than playing it myself, following development and lurking the forums. I know, I know, they are implementing a stamina system and addressing the erratic movement. Even if Hicks comes to the only reasonable conclusion there is to come to, 3pp will always be there somewhere, like a terminal illness, slowly sucking the life and fun out of everything that once was sacred when it came to online shooters. Even if DayZ is supposed to be much more than a shooter, with 3pp in place it will eventually deteriorate and be watered down to a modded, and poorly optimized GTA in a rural Russian environment. I am probably just a bitter old nerd who reminisce too much over a time when gamers were looking for a challange, and loved gritty, heart wrenching experiences. If anyone who has spent the last couple of years playing 3pp Dayz, or any other supposedly unforgiving games that is actually no more difficult then Doom 2 in normal mode, tried to get through the first world of Super Mario 3, they would cry and rage-quit 3 minutes in... then proceed to ask the developers to make the fall pits narrower, and give Mario a permanent tail. Death to 3pp... shame, shame, shame

This is quite a read. I think I have kept it interesting and relevant, without too much bullshit, so give it a shot! From what I have gathered, browsing forums and commentaries, the main complaints and discussions about DayZ Standalone are; Killing on sight The infected Not enough content for PVE Weather hazards Loot economy The last three are IMO just frustration. Frustration because the environment is not compelling or challenging enough. The actual complaints about loot, weather and game content are just subconscious misinterpretations. Let me elaborate; If the act of looting itself does not excite you, the only reward for looting is finding good loot. This leads to boredom and frustration when loot is scarce or when you do not find the wanted, or needed items. DayZ should not be about the loot you expect or want to find, it should be about adapting to your situation - surviving. The act of looting, or as a true survivalist - crafting, which is a constantly ongoing necessity to survive, has to excite and offer more than just that. The hazards of rain and cold weather does play a part here. But after a while, players will only find "the know how and elbow grease" of staying dry, until you can continue looting, extremely tedious. Instead of bringing excitement to the task at hand, it only prolongs the inevitable and expected result of finding loot. Add more interesting loot, crafting, and ways of protecting yourself against the harsh climate of Chernarus, you say? More content would interest both seasoned and new players, but only for a limited amount of time. Once you have put up your first bush craft shelter, looked at it in admiration and shared the print screen, it will serve no more purpose than a camouflaged tent. It wouldn't take long until complaints about lack of content start pouring in again. This is why the infected is such a vital part of the game, right? They add that little extra excitement, fear and fun! No, they don't. Once you have figured them out, and you know how to use the mechanics of the game to not be particularly concerned about their presence, they are nothing more than a nuisance, just adding more frustration to the looting procedure. However, they do give away your position to other players. Which leads us to the big bad wolf; Killing on sight. I am going to take a little detour here, please stay with me. Since the invasion of Iraq back in 2003 I have been very interested in war. What has interested me the most has not been the advances in weaponry and strategy, but the psychology of war. Foremost why so many young soldiers in war zones are capable of purposeless killing. Simply put, judging by online lectures and articles I have read over the years, boredom and frustration is the main reason why e.g. a young soldier can shoot an innocent civilian on a bicycle in the back and not feel the least bit remorseful. These senseless killings often take place in less hostile areas. Young men (they are mostly men) have, since enlistment, been riled up about going to war. They expect, and want, war. When they don't get it (let's say they're put on guard in a relatively non-hostile area), they take their boredom and frustration out on civilians. Again, simply put (there is A LOT more to it of course, e.g. misguided retaliation). Back to the topic! To solve a problem, we first need to understand the problem. Why do so many players kill on sight? There isn't a simple answer to this question. Some probably just do it for fun. Some might be nervous by nature and very easily feel cornered and therefore kill on sight out of pure self-preservation. In these cases there is not much the game can do to encourage a different action. However, I do not think that most players that do kill on sight, at the current state of the game, (deep down) really want to kill everyone they encounter. I think they are experiencing the same boredom and frustration soldiers in real life sometimes do. They expected an exciting, exhilarating game where they would have to survive the elements, fight off "zombies", encounter groups of either bandits or heroes, and the occasional lone survivor where anything could happen. What they got was a 13 square kilometer big map that they could cross in less than 35 minutes. Effortlessly outrunning zombies, A-D-A-D themselves to safety when being shot at, server hopping to gear up faster etc. The one and only thing to do that is somewhat thrilling at this point is killing. - To all of you who have read my previous recent posts, I think you know where this is going, and some of you might even think; "This guy again with his stamina and weight system, and inertia. What a drag". I don't really care, because I am 100% convinced this is the only way to save this game and have it reach its full potential. I am not going to complain about 3rd person, even tho I think it is an absolute destroyer of games, because I know it is here to stay. If you are wondering what the hell I am talking about, have a look here and it will be explained to you in full detail; The Lonely Bandit's derailed thread Furthermore, movement- and wear & tear penalty when walking/jogging/sprinting on different surfaces is an absolute must. It should be less exhausting, faster and less wearing on footwear to travel by road, path or meadow than through the woods, up and down slopes and on rock formations. Predators could also be more prone to attack players moving around in woodland areas or high grass, but this aggression could be evaded by calm and collected movement. With a system like this implemented; - survivalists would have practical reason, out of a risk- and safety point of view, to stay in the woods. Only occasionally would a stealthy, high risk looting mission in the nearby village be necessary. Just crossing a big meadow could lead to disaster, so maybe a nearby tree-line is a better choice, even though it is an extra 300-400 meters to travel. Also, the probability of a wood dweller running into a like-minded fellow survivalist in the woods would be much greater than running into a psycho murderer. - psychos and degenerates would, just like in real life, congregate in urban environments and would probably feel very out of place in the woods, probably a little scared even. This would also give the larger cities a scary feel for survivalists, as they'd know there would probably be some messed up shit going on in there. - I think bandits would turn in to scavenger type players. Since bandits are not psychopathic murderers, but more role players giving their victims a frightening experience, they would need to travel in groups because on their own the risk of getting hurt when acting hostile, or trying to rob someone, would be much greater. They would also have to loot or craft to survive, just like everyone else, and as they are looking for interactions they can appear anywhere on the map, and their actions would be unpredictable. - anyone can be a hero. If you and a couple of friends run in to a friendly survivalist and he tells you he got robbed by a couple of bandits not more than 10 minutes ago, you could actually use your knowledge of the area, the map and your common sense to have an idea of where the bandits might have headed to (as the environment prevents them from being 4-5 kilometers away already). Hunt them down and return the stolen hunting rifle to the survivalist. Mission completed! - hardcore, military gear, combat tactical, seasoned players looking for an adrenaline rushing shoot-out would be able to take advantage of all these elements. At the same time, I do not think they would be as prone to instigate shoot-outs or kill on sight, as they understand the hardship everybody's going through. It would also be a feat and adventure to acquire full military gear, and someone who has taken his time doing so would not risk it all on killing bambis, giving away their position. The classic PVP areas of the map will still be their go to areas for combat, and the rest of us would know to stay the hell out of there. As much content the developers could ever muster to create, all the loot economy balancing they could ever care to spend time on, or all the updated graphics and real-time weather events they could code in a decade or two... all of that wouldn't even have "a fart in space"-significance to enhance game play and create a more genuine experience, compared to just making player movement and the environment's effect on player movement more true to real life. End; This is my last attempt to raise this idea of what I believe is absolutely pivotal to the success and survival of this game. I will bump this thread every now and then when it goes dead, as this will be my one and only domain here in the DayZ forum. If you read the whole thing, thank you for your time. If you didn't and decide to take one or two paragraphs out of context and comment on that alone, I will not bother to answer. My point is thoroughly expressed, and shouldn't require further explanation.

I have gone and bought myself a new gaming rig. I could not contain myself. Winter is coming. I have been playing Arma 3, Squad, some War Thunder, a couple of matches in Company of Heroes, a few raids in Darkest Dungeon... good fun. I logged on to DayZ randomly a few weeks ago and looted a little bit, just to look at the new graphics, and did not pay much attention to anything really. Yesterday I decided to finally check out the "new" world of Chernarus for real. I did, as I usually do when playing DayZ, try to immerse myself as much as possible in this barren wasteland. I set "walking" as toggle, and only jogged longer stretches between clusters of buildings in the Berezino area. Did not sprint once. It was amazing. I had full control. I got close and personal with the infected before I split their heads open with my trusty axe. As I was walking silently and patiently I had full situational awareness and was never caught by surprise, and felt like an eventual hostile survivor would be in big trouble, even though I only had one round loaded in my 1911. During my 2 hour stroll through the greater Berezino area I found a new appreciation for the game. The atmosphere was awesome, the environment felt eerie and hostile. I could almost feel the strong winds cooling me down, the urge to take shelter. I only had two Pipsis to drink, that I looted off of the infected, but never got hungrier than I was when I logged on. So I guess more movement = higher metabolism, less movement = conserving energy, which I liked a lot! I met one other survivor. He looked like a fresh spawn, running past me with an infected on his tail, and we only exchanged a "hey dude" before he disappeared further down the road. I had been thinking, just before this encounter, that a little more dense population would be great, so the timing was perfect. I still hope for 100 slot servers though. With the later dev updates in mind, how they are about to implement a stamina system, addressing the "erratic movement", smoother and more intuitive player controller, etc. Damn, I am hopeful and excited about this title again! Side note; I saw a thread about walking in the game to appreciate it more, or something like that, some time ago. I could not agree more. Less stressful, more situational awareness, less likely to get jumped by another player, or the infected, and if my metabolism theory is accurate there are even more reasons to slow it down. The world becomes alive in a whole new way. If you are NOT looking for automatic assault rifle PvP action only, it felt like walking and keeping full situational awareness while conserving energy is a good survival strategy in DayZ.

I hope you are right. I hope they have set the standards of the finished product so god damn high, they are undoubtedly confident that the entire modernized world is going to forget about Half-Life 3 for all eternity, shit bricks for weeks, call in sick and spend their entire yearly vacation in Chernarus, when DayZ 1.00 finally hits the market.

@emuthreat I am not saying YOU are against such a system. I am more "screaming" at the world. But I think you look at it from a different angle than I do. You question the actual impact it will have on player behavior. I don't really care how people behave. DayZ is not a Pulitzer Prize dinner, and whether people are complete assholes or not does not concern me. What does concern me is that players that look for a "gritty survival experience" has that experience ruined. Not by other player's behavior per se, but by the sense of hopelessness when the A-D-A-D twitcher shows up and plays Mario 64 with his ass (while being an annoying little shit). This game- and immersion breaking event could be reduced to an absolute minimum by realistically limiting the way a player moves. A physical altercation would greatly increase the risk of taking a serious beating yourself, as you would no longer be able to, inertia-less and full speed, twitch your character out of harms way. Players can be as annoying as they want. If they would suffer a much greater risk of having their asses handed to them, they would probably even consider a different play style. Why should the DayZ developers listen to whiny complaints about not being able to PvP on the coast, when they have been clear from the beginning that they want to create a different experience. There are literally hundreds of fast paced shooters, even in similar environments as DayZ, that cater to that specific crowd. DayZ Standalone had a revenue of over €100,000,000, some 3 million copies sold, like two years ago. There is absolutely no reason for them to NOT create the ultimate experience. About getting shot by bambi snipers. This is not something I would even take in to the equation. I'd much rather be shot by a bambi sniper on the coast every once in a while, which would most likely be a result of my carelessness rather than the stamina system, than not being able to hit a A-D-A-D twitcher when emptying a fully loaded Python at point blank range due to highly unrealistic movement, and I guess the added complications with rubber banding that becomes more of an issue because of this. There are endless ways to counter bambi snipers other than keeping a ridiculously unrealistic movement model. Like I have briefly mentioned before; Not being able to sprint out of dodge like a god damn go-cart is going to make one think twice before pulling the trigger. A lot of infected nearby, the new meaning- and risk of attracting unwanted attention, a re-worked loot economy with less ammunition, etc. The vision of a suspenseful and beautifully played game should not suffer due to a couple of short-attention-span-players that wish to spawn and die on the coast within an hour and call it a night. That is giving up way to easy. I dare anyone reading this to find a clip of e.g. Squad, EFT or even Insurgency (a very fast paced shooter) where someone is A-D-A-D twitching around another player slicing them up with a knife while dodging bullets, like many players do in DayZ. You know what, don't bother. You will not find a single clip throughout the whole of the internetsis. Still, combat in each one of these games is intense and exhilarating. Why shouldn't we ask (even demand or cry viciously) for an equally awesome experience within DayZ?

Not only will interactions be more smooth and believable. Your own approach to any potential interaction would be crucial to the outcome, as your intentions would be identifiable by your movement and overall behavior. With the lack of inertia and a stamina system everybody moves in an unrealistic manner, so you can only guess by whether or not the other player has a clown mask or a weapon drawn if he/she is hostile or not. Also, it doesn't really matter what conclusion you come to as the outcome of the interaction / altercation / fight / shoot-out will solely be a result of who has got the most rounds, semi- or fully automatic fire mode, or simply who is best at A-D-A-D twitching. With a system like this, the overall quality of- and skill required to do anything from planning the route of your next 2 km travel, how you tactically advance toward a popular loot spawn area, how you cautiously approach another player due to the high risk of him/her and the infected, hunting etc, will be raised to a rooftop bar standard. This will make you care about your character more, it will make you care about others more. It is the one and only pure and unconditional change the developers can make to DayZ that does not limit people's intentions, that does not turn DayZ in to a grind, that is fair and equal to everybody and would make the overall experience better for EVERYBODY. The only argument against the implementation of such a system I can appreciate is the increased time it would take to travel. However, this is a matter of patience on each player's behalf (I don't see how anyone with a short attention span can play DayZ, not even at its current state), and something that will not be an issue when vehicles, especially bicycles, are in. Then it would make even more sense to have such a system in place as the conscious decision of speeding up your travel by getting on a bicycle, or getting in to a car, would have to be weighed against the risk of giving away your position and having to stick to the main roads. Do you really believe that a stamina system would deter players from traveling long distances in Chernarus? I think it would do the complete opposite due to the fact that it would be a greater challenge, with greater rewards. When I last played, Cherno and Elektro was always full of players, while the rest of Chernarus was a barren wasteland. It seems like the supernatural ability to cover tremendous distances in no time at all by simply jamming down W with a toothpick, does not encourage players to do so. Maybe the developers should try something different? It seems like we do want the same thing, to some extent. I just do not see why seasoned DayZ players would have any reason to oppose (more) realistic movement in a game like DayZ. It is a conundrum, I tell you that. Edit; Maybe it is the classic fear of change that is such an uncomfortable thought for so many DayZ players. They have played this alpha for three years, and have become very good at it, and a change that would have them learn it all over again, and after all this time become equal to new players with hardcore "milsim" experience in other games such as EFT or Squad, would be a blow to their self-esteem... or something. I seriously can not figure this one out, it is just a mind-boggler.

I think many of us, especially in the forums, have a distorted idea of what DayZ is, and what it can become. We have been playing the game, followed the development, fantasized and argued over the future of DayZ for so long, we can no longer truly empathize with what a new player, who is brand new to the entire concept of this "gritty and authentic, horror survival hybrid experience", actually experiences when he/she first spawns on the coast of Chernarus. Just look at how beautiful this game is now. Screenshots are at times worth printing and framing above your bed, and a gamer oblivious of DayZ (the do exist believe it or not) wouldn't think twice of it. We are concerned about lack of content. I am not sure when I actually played last, but it was a long time ago. Back then I had still not had the pleasure of experimenting with all of the content. There were many weapons I had not yet fired, and many places I had not visited. Barrels were fairly new and I did not even get around to dye any clothes before I decided to not contaminate myself further, and wait for the finished product. This is after a couple hundred hours of game play. Many could possibly sprint themselves everywhere on the map, server hop and try out all the gear etc within a week, but that is not my play style. Imagine installing DayZ for the first time today, without any or much knowledge of what you are getting yourself in to. It would take a very long time before game content would be your main complaint. It would take a very long time before you would find your way around, or instantly realize where you are when you spawn. I think with the new update, it would even take a long time before you felt the world of Chernarus was repetitive. However, it would not take more than 30 minutes, on a full pop server, before the first erratic sprinter would show up, flying around like a whirlwind, not at all interested in your bambi ass, looting the first little village dry in 3 minutes blank, a village you cautiously approached out of fear of not knowing what to expect, and leaves you with a pink dress and a horde of aggro infected. If the whirlwind does not decide to circle you, like an annoying wasp on a hot summer day, screeching some annoying song on VOIP, slashing you once with a sickle and then leave your ass to die with a fading "noooooooooooooooooob" as he disappears in the horizon. I am not trying to be rude, emuthreat, but I think you are dead wrong. I do like your idea of a morale system, and I think it would complement the idea of a more realistic stamina, weight and movement system beautifully. But to say that (more) realistic movement would drive players away, instead of enhancing the overall experience, is just wrong. The only players it would drive away, if any (because I am confident such changes would make it a better experience for everybody), would be loud and obnoxious Pewdiepie type players and tea bagging teens. Of course they would be welcome to stick around, but they would not be able to break immersion for anyone, as the game itself would "force" them to conduct themselves in a more realistic manner. I am not saying elite forces survival simulator 2.0 here, where you have to spam keys in a particular order to lick the bottom of your tuna can. Simply slow game play down, add some inertia. That's it! Well, also completely remove 3rd person, this affront to everything that has ever been holy and sacred in video game shooters until console gamers decided to buy PC's... but I guess that's a completely different discussion.

In my utopian vision of what I believe the suggested changes would do to DayZ, RP servers would not be necessary, server hopping would be more hazardous than rewarding, friendly samaritans would be considered legends, and true adventures would take place in Chernarus. Well administrated servers like, my one and only go to server when I still played, Oldschool DayZ Hardcore would have a world order, where Kunthammer and his raving lunatics would control the southern cities, and the peacekeepers would have to intervene when bambies report sinister laughter throughout the area, etc. This is what I am hoping for in DayZ. Not GTA 5 style combat or Pewdiepie type players everywhere. But that's me, my wishes. I am not expecting anyone else to share them, even tho I wish I could convert a couple of non-beliebers out there.

Woah, I was not expecting this much action. Just a tad bit derailed here and there, but I have been guilty of doing the same to other threads, so fair play I guess. I understand how I can come off as an elitist cunt at times, as I am very strong in my convictions. But please trust me when I say that I do not wish to force players out of the game, so only me and people like me can play the game in peace. That is not at all what I am trying to say. My rhetoric can at times be very fingerpointing, I know. I shouldn't have used those exact words, and I am glad someone corrected me for doing so. I have made attempts to convince the masses of my beliefs in the past. Not only in the DayZ forums, but also in other early access games forums where I have felt a slower paced game, with an "everything is OP"-model in place, and more realistic player movement, would've enhanced the experience for everybody. When I do so, I am often met and "downvoted into oblivion" with similar arguments as yours, Lexman61. No one wants to be told how to play a game, and the game shouldn't restrict you from playing the game your way. Especially not DayZ. Slowing down player movement, plus a fair amount of inertia, weight penalty and a somewhat realistic stamina system would not restrict anyone from playing the game the way they want to. IMO it would only add more suspense and tension, appreciation for the world of Chernarus (as you would not be able to just sprint past everything), and more justifiable kills and deaths whether you are the psycho screwdriver bambi or not. In a slowed down DayZ a psycho screwdriver killer would actually be a terrifying idea, as it would be much more unlikely. It would be so humiliating to be mauled by a screwdriver, when you're carrying a repeater and a side arm, that the idea of such a thing would haunt you as you're making your way through Elektro. At the current state of the game, the probability of death by screwdriver is unrealistically high, and therefore nothing but frustrating (what I think Kirov was trying to point out with his tea bagging metaphor). I know it's a game, and I don't want it to be anything else. I just want it to be the best game it can be, and I think player movement is the missing ingredient that would turn the cheese and ham sandwich in to a 5 course dinner. That is all I am trying to say really, but it feels like sometimes one has to go in to subatomic detail to get the point across. That is frustrating, and when I am frustrated I sometimes say stupid shit. I apologize.

Pilgrim, I do appreciate your post. It was a good read! This! If DayZ players were forced, by the game itself, to do everything more cautiously and tactically due to increased "realism" and "difficulty" (increased in the way this thread is suggesting), the short attention span teenagers and other players that do not fit into the supposedly gritty world of Dayz would stop playing the game. They would neither have the patience or cognitive skill to survive as they could no longer sprint all over the map looking for tactical bacon, or make favorable tactical decisions in a game that does not allow them to use the same combat tactics as they do in GTA 5 online. Edit; If the scenario of DayZ would take place in the real world, intelligent, perceptive and knowledgeable people would be the ones surviving in the long run. Hostility and brawn would only get you so far before you'd be outsmarted by another survivor, or just ruthlessly killed by nature. In DayZ, at its current state, knowing how to manipulate and abuse gameplay mechanics in your favor to get the upper hand in a combat situation is the one and only tool you need.

Gritty in the same way a movie would be gritty, I suppose. Urban Dictionary; "harsh, coarse, rough and unrefined, as in film depictions that portray life as it truly is, without false distortions, stylizations, or idealizations. Often, the realism is exaggerated such that the culture or society being portrayed appears more coarse than it really is." Gritty? Far from it. Authentic how, I wonder. There are so many meanings to the word, and what the author of this description does mean is unclear. Free Dictionary; adj.1. genuine; real. Google; "based on facts; accurate or reliable. an authentic depiction of the situation". Definitely not one of these examples, which are the only ones I could find that could possibly be used to describe a video game. Survival horror hybrid. Hmm.. Survival according to Google; "the state or fact of continuing to live or exist, typically in spite of an accident, ordeal, or difficult circumstances." Dictionary.com; "the act or fact of surviving, especially under adverse or unusual circumstances." This one I can not take away from DayZ. Not getting shot, try not to glitch out of a staircase and fall to your death, hope that your vehicle does not randomly lose all gravitational properties or that an infected beats you to death while spawning and waiting for the game-world to load, run full speed for 30 minutes through a rural Russian landscape to not die from hypothermia, while looting and avoiding death by other survivors, infected and wolves (all at the same time)... all of these do technically qualify as "surviving". Horror? Oh, they mean the horror of dodging hordes of infected like your playing Space Invaders? Maybe they are referring to the most aggressive packs of wolfs of all time? We have all seen how poorly wildlife is thriving in areas where human activity is minimal, right? I mean the lack of natural prey must be really strenuous on the poor wolves, and that is why they're attacking humans like it's in their everyday routine. Authenticity at its finest. "Players can live through powerful events and emotions arising from the ever-evolving emergent gameplay." This right here is the main problem. Gameplay does not evolve whatsoever. More content is added, graphics are updated, animations and sounds are improved. Gameplay does not evolve, it is merely spiced up. It is the same run n gun game it has been since day one of alpha release. The concern here is whether or not the devs will make the necessary changes to turn this game in to what they claim it is (or going to be at release). It is not an impossible task. They have a really good foundation of a beautiful landscape, a fair amount of content and a large player base.

I said I wasn't going to respond to out of context quoted paragraphs, but I have to on this one. Mate... "Again, simply put (there is A LOT more to it of course, e.g. misguided retaliation)." I have not done nothing other than putting a clear disclaimer on my statement; "judging by online lectures and articles I have read over the years", and then expressed my conclusion. I think you should go flaming at e.g. Veterans Against The War, Sebastian Junger and BBC among many others. That'd be all.