Noctoras

1. regularly updated, but the time between updates can easily be around 2 months. 2. no pay to win elements included or planned. 3. currently there are no zombies at all (major game breaker in my opinion), so the game for the moment has become a dull casual PvP shooter with too big a map. Zeds will be back, but I do have doubts that the game will move away from the kill on sigh slugfest - most of the people who like interaction have left the game already, thus you might not find many of these on the forums anymore. 4. I am no mod player, so I leave this up to the people playing it. 5. Most likely the latter. There is currently absolutely nothing to do in the game apart from gear-kill-die-repeat. If you are new to the game, more often than not you will sooner or later just see a black screen telling you that you are dead. Interaction is pretty much non-existant and many people looking for the sandbox survival type of game have moved on to other games. That said, there are some left also on this board, so they might give you further insight there. Currently I would not recommend getting into DayZ and I doubt the game will ever be a sandbox or survival game in its meaning. But you will hear people telling you to buy it as well for sure. Take your time and also look up the steam player numbers, though - they might give you an indcation about how many people left or remain.

Generally speaking, I am in the same boat. Pondering on whether giving it up entirely. Passed my exams, had a wonderful vacation, so maybe this break should become a quit. There are good alternatives out there, as pointed out multiple times. Time will tell, if a return to dayZ makes sense one day.

true. I think zombies roaming around would add a lot more to the experience than static zombies. I wonder, if zombies will roam around all the map? Whether I might face them on sniper hill or at a forest lake just like I might face them in Electro? I think this might take the game to a new level. No more careless sprinting multiple towns. No more comfort on sniper hill. You'd need to be alert everywhere. So yes, scattering or specific spawnpoints definitely are less fun than not knowing where to encounter zeds. Maybe you could loot a town without seeing a zombie just to get killed by a horde 3 minutes after leaving town? Hordes do sound promising - there is no real reason zombies should be tied to a specific city structure or quater.

True, this is the biggest drawback at present - nothing to do and nothing to fear apart from PvP at present.

none of the above. An apocalypse shouldn't feel like walking around in a supermarket. It needs to be a challenging environment - not only because of other players.

Actually, I think a more interesting approach would be roaming hoardes, not tied to any specific places. You shouldn't be safe when walking into the woods 200 meter out of town. Zombies should roam instead of spawn at a fixed location and remain there. They should be less predictable so to speak. I want the sniper on sniper hill to be in danger just like the town looter. I don't see why zombies should be stuck to a 200 meter perimeter around a specific building. Let them roam, just like animals are planned to roam.

I hear you ... I have no idea how anyone thinks "more guns" are what the game needs most at the moment. :rolleyes: Talk about priorities ...

Now that is a status report with substance - rather a report like this once or - as planned - twice a month than status reports with no news - the latter take time to create and don't really offer a lot of insights. Zombies making a comeback also is great news - now if there are some more survival elements to come, things are really looking brighter, Thanks for the report!

aah, you have already learnt about the various different approaches to human interaction a sandbox game like DayZ has to offer. Neat :) Have fun playing ;)

almost as amazing and outstanding as "squadwipe in [insert irrelevant location here]". ;)

not necessarily. Much more like "till a drone makes your screen go black" these days. Not much fighting back there ;)

Much to your advantag / disadvantage - depending on your POV, it won't be dragged on forever. Developers are resources of an IT business and can and will be used elsewhere. So the core will be worked out, but additions to the game which have not been announced will likely be scrapped / not developed, since the devs are a resource better used on a new project than on a project, which has sold 85%-90% of the copies it will ever sell. Just regular company thinking and a drawback of ANY early access game, no matter the company. So you will see an end of Alpha / Beta in time, no worries about that B)

Nope, the loot explosions were a result of the 0.55 hotfix (i.e. the "second version" of 0.55), which again was the result of a lot of crying about "where is the loot" of some people - and much to my dismay, the devs listened and gave us lootexplosions. Ever since loot is abundant, as you can easily tell by the number of full mil equiped guys (like abaout everyone, who isn't exactly a freshspawn). Add "no zombies" to the mix and the game currently gives me no reason at all to play.

The original schedule was massively changed for 0.56 (skipped, resulting in 0.57), for 0.58 incl hotfix and now we have it for 0.59 as well. How can I tell someone to check back in 4 weeks given the current process? ;)

I'm just for fun keeping track of this. With 4 weeks from 4 Oct, you reckoned with 0.60 on 1 November :-) So according to you ~6 weeks till 0.60 stable (being fair, not taking .61 :P). Just curious how far this timeline will be stretched - and we have to get a 0.59 on stable before, oh, and on exp.

that!! and I mean the early (bugged) version, not the loot exploded one :-)

poor guy :P

It's not the KOS culture. This "culture" is the direct result of the game offering nothing else to do. This has got nothing to do with aggressiveness. Let's see, if these coolio gangs will still be around sniping freshspawns in 6 months to come. I doubt motivation will last that long. You are right on this game lacking content and incentives - There is no point in anything but PvP and a can of beans inbetween. Should I go farming for the sake of it, if I need to walk roughly 45 seconds for the next can of bacon? And since zombies are gone, what are you supposed to do?

yep, numbers dwindled only by a rough 2/3 and the above mentioned ARK peaked double the number DayZ ever had. Time will tell, Server pops will show. I will get back to you with that argument at a later stage.

No, they are the reason that there are ever less populated servers in the list and you will see this trend continue. A walking simulator with attached boomboom will only get you so far.

we'll just wait and see. Many people left the game already, if gun after gun is added, this will continue for a lack of things to do. As a PvP shooter it isn't needed. We have Arma. We have CoD. No need for a shooter where it takes 30 minutes to start shooting. If we go down this road the player numbers will slowly, but surely dwindle and with the introduction of modding, the game will most likely not be revived, but splinter into mini fractions not worth mentioning. Kandy is right, it has been tagged as survival or sandbox, but currently it is none of it. The latest "community scrum" basically was a PvP session as well, so I remain sceptical. Actually, I think Schlake might be right on this game remaining a PvP shooter. He probably is wrong in it having a bright future, though.

One the one hand sacrificing realism for fun. On the other hand making people spend 30 minutes to get to the fun - and if things go bad 30 minutes till having fun again. There is either something really not adding up, or the game's target group is people with either severe masochism or with nothing to do at all in their rest lives. As you said, the survival part is simply pointless at present, it's a deathmatch on a map too huge with too small a player count combined with ridiculous respawn times. Oh, and last but not least, a perma death which isn't perma if you have a buddy around. That's asinine.

This is making the concept of permadeath obsolete anyway. Get someone to protect your gear for some minutes, take it back. Pointless. About as much perma as snow in the desert.

Well, it's the same bullcrap (sorry) for PvP. No point in a shooter, where it takes you 20 minutes to get to a firefight as a freshspawn (ans that's optimistic) - or camp on a hill for 20 minutes. in its current state its not viable as a shooter either.

None. Noone needs a farming simulator. It should be a sandbox, give you the opportunity to go alernative paths. Right now the only game element developed sufficiently is PvP. No incentive to do anything else and all I hear about new updates are new vehicles, camo pants and guns to kill each other. Killing should be an alternative. Needs to be an alternative. But we have a game where the former inhabitants apparently had more guns than water bottles (must have lead poisoning), you feel like rummaging through a supermarket and have no challenge at all besides PvP. That's my beef, not that people are indeed able to kill each other. Later on the road there will be more to do? What will that be? Base building, okay, I got that, yet this is just another extension of PvP. Base building is needed (basically I would also love the idea of being able to modify existing houses). PvP is needed. But if I don't feel like jogging simulator waiting for someone to kill, I want my char to also have another challenge. Doesn't need to be crops. Let's put it this way: I am not opposed to PvP, I want more and I want incentives to do things other than PvP as well. Mechanics which make other stuff than PvP fun.