Aimlessone

Sure they do, but at this rate DayZ will be a 10 year development and not even that good of a release. Fallout 4 took 5 years to develop on multiple consoles, DayZ is entering its what, fourth year now? And It's not even close to out of pre-alpha on a single gaming platform. If you begin to argue that Bethseda is a better company then you'll begin to prove my point.

Been hearing this same argument for near 2 years, still not even close to implementation. Much yet fully fleshed out fun base building and zombie hordes. Imagine a horde of glitchy clipping zombies running your way, you get magically hit from beneath the surface. That's what you can expect a year from now.

He's just mad cause the game isn't and never will be what was promised. EDIT: The game has had a lot of additions, but for me it just plays like garbage. Controls don't feel smooth, and just overall it doesn't feel professional or polished. The only two reasons I keep an eye on it was because I foolishly bought early access and now want my investment worth. Secondly, the exhilaration and adrenaline rush of an ensuing gunfight when you're fully decked out and may lose your gear is unmatched.

This is exactly how I play, I don't go running around looking for people to kill (usually mwahhaha); however if I see someone that isn't a friend I will shoot them. For the reasons I stated before, I value my life. Which is why all the post saying they need to increase the value of life in this game confuses me, I kill because I value...anyway I digress.

I agree with both Bullet and John, decreasing guns and ammo favors KOS players and the only true way to make the game better is to be better than those people. What I fail to understand is the complaints. I never get killed by other players unless I'm in a city (which is asking for it), whether I am shooting first, or doing something stupid. People keep clamoring for "realism" and "this isn't what it would be like in an actual apocalypse" Yet these same people are sprinting through towns, bashing doors in going house to house looking for loot. This ISN'T what you would be doing in an actual apocalypse, so you have only yourself to blame. If you want to survive and not be shot then PLAY LIKE IT! The first time I played this game I broke my legs and spent forever trying to find someone to kill me. I eventually starved to death. Then I survived for almost 10 hours because I played like it was an actual apocalypse. I stayed out of sight, away from large cities and watched little towns from the tree line for movement before going in for loot. When crossing large open plains I scouted with binocs or mosin scope and made sure the treeline was clear and moved quickly. I wore clothing that helped me blend in and kept a green child's briefcase over a bright red backpack. With the advent of "living off the land" and other survival aspects being implemented, if your consistently being killed by other players when you don't want to be in gunfights, YOU'RE PLAYING WRONG! Stop trying to limit the game because you fail to grasp how to survive a hostile world. That said there needs to be a balance between realism and a game, games are supposed to be fun, real apocalypse would NOT be fun. The more you push for your "realism" the less fun the game becomes. Truth be told, if a real apocalypse happened and there were no laws or consequences other than vigilante justice. You'd have a lot more people killing other people for pure sport than you think. TLDR: Don't touch the guns and ammo!

Can we cook meat on the fire now? Or do we still need a cooking tripod, pot and water?

Do those of you campaigning for less guns and ammo not realize that it will widen the gap of bambis and KOS players? Think about it for one second, if they make guns and ammo rare, those that wish to KOS are going to play safe UNTIL they get their hands on guns and ammo. Then they are going to go hunting, hunting a larger population of players with no means to defend themselves. It's like a madman with a gun in a gun-free zone. IMHO less guns and ammo will INCREASE the problem because those that have them will rule the land. I shoot anyone I see with a weapon BECAUSE I value my life, I kill bambis when I need to eat them BECAUSE I value my life. I haven't played a game where I value my life more than I do in DayZ, all the references to Battlefield are illogical because death in that game has ZERO consequences. You respawn in seconds will full gear, it aint that way in DayZ. Is it easy to gear? In relative terms to this style of game yes, does that time taken to gear and make your character healthy make dying a much larger consequence, YES. Increasing the value of staying alive will only increase the want for grievers to grief - killing a fresh spawn isn't as rewarding to them as killing a fully geared person. Now add skill and abilities to to the mix and it only increases the rage from a death thus increasing the incentive for those who like to grief. P.S. I don't disagree with adding skills, on the contrary I find it to be a fantastic idea. However viewing it as a deterrent to KOS is invalid. Bottom line, I kill to survive in a survival game...I don't understand the complaints.....