sevtron

The difference is that sidechat is (or was) available in-game. You didn't have to download any other programs, or do anything at all. It was what the game had. If you can't figure out the difference between joining a server and having side chat, and having a host of other programs out-of-game, being used in-game... Well.. I've never demanded or felt entitled, to a PVP-free play experience. I'm not really sure what you're getting at with this. I've seen plenty of suggestions pro-PVP/banditry that are really bad. I'm not going to start hunting them down from various threads. They're available in various different threads, most of which are just poor troll attempts, I'm sure. A bad idea pro-banditry is just as bad as a pro-casual dumb idea. Do you disagree?

I think this mod can appeal to the single player as well as the multiplayer crowd, as well. So I don't necessarily track you on that comment. I'd say the same thing about read through the forums, and count how many players complain about PVE. Or carebear casuals, or whatever. There are shitty suggestions, shitty statements, and shitty attitudes from both sides of the spectrum. And finally - in regards to your statistics about how PVP isn't a big deal or whatever. Numbers can lie. Numbers games are about distortion and falsities. I'm not going to take some random numbers and take them at face value without putting any thought into it. I'd ask, out of all of those bandits and survivors and PVEs and PVPs, what do the numbers really mean? If there's 273k survivor characters... How many of them are actually active? Out of the 50k bandits, how many of them are active? What is "active" defined as? Logging in once per week? Per day? One hour of activity in-game per day? Those numbers don't answer a thing.

Which is why they aren't welcome here. And this is why our community is laughable. They aren't welcome here because they play the game differently than you do? Beating your chest to show all those casuals that you're sooo much more awesome than them must feel really great. And this is why we get a million stupid ideas a day, is because everyone thinks they know what will fix this game, when infact it's not the game that's broken, 9/10 it's their method of thinking. Do I think casuals belong in a hardcore survival simulation on a milsim engine? No. If you think just because they got some publicity that the core audience of this mod somehow changed it towards the casual crowd, you're in for a rude awakening. The difference between us & them is, we play the game how it is. They play the game, and then come to the forums to tell us how it should be. That's where the friction comes in. Last night I got killed by a guy who logged out as I shot him, only to have him move into position behind me in the building on another server, log in, and shoot me dead, wasting hours of work that it took to get that gear and to that city. Did I run to the forums talking about how they should eliminate PvP? Nope. I respawned and went back at it again. To be fair, we get stupid ideas from BOTH sides of the argument. And the friction we get? It's because of people like you, man. You think your way of playing the game is correct and that anybody else doesn't deserve to be in the Dayz community. Do you know what that is? Arrogant and foolish. Do I think the debate is going to be settled by either the PVP or the PVE crowd winning, and everybody else going home? No. You keep adding in your own opinion to the matter of how the game is played. You kill players, I don't seek that out. You want a large clan to run with, I'd rather be solo or with a small group. Which of those two play styles is correct? You think you are, and that anybody else be damned. How does that solve anything? And how is it your decision of what is correct and what isn't? Again. If you don't think an idea is sound, or reasonable, or whatever... Don't respond to the thread? Don't be a dick. Don't be an arrogant fool who wants to win for the sake of winning. Look for the reasonable discussions, and add in your two cents in a meaningful manner. Don't run everyone else out of town. PS - The idea that all non-PVP-oriented players just come to the forums and whine and try to get Dayz tailor made for them is just ridiculous. Your side of the argument has all the lolz. You guys say "Oh PVP isn't as bad as you think it is, the stats don't lie!", and then your argument becomes, "Only like 5% of the players use the forums, it's not a fair representation!", and then, "PVE players just spend all their time on the forums trying to get rid of PVP!" You can't have it every way. Which, incidentally, is why this discussion exists in the first place. Great. Which is why they aren't welcome here. And this is why our community is laughable. They aren't welcome here because they play the game differently than you do? Beating your chest to show all those casuals that you're sooo much more awesome than them must feel really great. And this is why we get a million stupid ideas a day, is because everyone thinks they know what will fix this game, when infact it's not the game that's broken, 9/10 it's their method of thinking. Do I think casuals belong in a hardcore survival simulation on a milsim engine? No. If you think just because they got some publicity that the core audience of this mod somehow changed it towards the casual crowd, you're in for a rude awakening. The difference between us & them is, we play the game how it is. They play the game, and then come to the forums to tell us how it should be. That's where the friction comes in. Last night I got killed by a guy who logged out as I shot him, only to have him move into position behind me in the building on another server, log in, and shoot me dead, wasting hours of work that it took to get that gear and to that city. Did I run to the forums talking about how they should eliminate PvP? Nope. I respawned and went back at it again. I don't understand the stances some people are taking, just for the simple fact that they can be contrary. Players of ANY type should not have to resort to offline meta-gaming in order to survive amicably inside the game they play. If you want to meta-game to be a bandit or whatever, great, good for you. I think that's poor sportsmanship, and completely avoiding the entire point of the game, but good job. Forcing offline meta-gaming on other players is a shitty answer to a boorish question. It's not even really that legitimate, either. Players liked to use side chat as an IN GAME feature. You're suggesting that players try to actively circumvent the in-game features which are meant to instill a greater sense of high-stakes immersion, because that's what everybody else does... Play the game the way you like it, and allow others to play it the way they like, and make suggestions based on what -they- would like. At the end of the day, isn't that what this is all about? This is Dayz, not the great Crusades. We don't need to convert people or burn them down. Just let ideas slide, if you don't agree with them. This animosity and down-shouting is just so... Depressing. PVP is the symptom' date=' not the problem. The real problem is with PVPers who want to run all non-PVPers out of town. PVPers who think Dayz should not -ever- have a legitimate PVE population is the problem. Dicks are the problem. PVPers are not always dicks. :) [/quote'] Since when does everyone refer to using voice chat as "meta"? Sounds like another shitty buzzword to use like 'entitled' or 'casual'. Why should we let other people make suggestions based on what they like? We are alpha testers are we not? Has rocket not stated that he follows his own development path and cares little of what people suggest? And yeah he made that post blahblahblah, search his posts sometime, the only time he replies 99% of the time is in the actual patch threads, and that's usually to a bug report. This whole idea of 'just ignore the ideas if you don't like them' is what continues to allow these people to pollute the forums with their thinking, it's the same stupid ass mentality that has that thread about the nighttime being too dark still open even after they said they were testing a new lighting system cause guess what, it was too fucking dark, and yet you have the same retards who registered in June, arguing with other retards who registered in June, back and forth over whether it's realistic or not, or people cleverly stating how it's fine how it is, l2play, etc It's the same reason we have threads like this, and you can still look down and see 1297489173 other threads about how bandits hurt their feelings and they should implement {retarded idea here}. Saying we shouldn't look down on those people who play this for PVE, when its a game that centers (as it stands currently) on PvP, is stupid at best. This is NOT a PVE game, so stop trying to make it one. Does it contain PVE elements? Yep. Everytime you kill a zombie you are engaging in PVE, so unless you've never killed a zombie you can't call yourself a PVP'er. We don't need a pure PVE element, theres other zombie mods/games for that, they can go RP in those servers with the rest of the 12 year olds, but don't act like i'm the dick because i'm playing the game the way it was made to be played, i.e. with no restrictions. We aren't all on the same team. So you want only suggestions that cater to your play style. Rocket doesn't give a fuck about anybody but Rocket, and Player Vs Enviroment doesn't exist in a zombie survival mod where you have to eat, drink, be weary of environmental conditions such as rain and cold... But the game isn't about non-PVP elements at all. It sounds like you just want to stifle any voice that is not your own.

I don't understand the stances some people are taking, just for the simple fact that they can be contrary. Players of ANY type should not have to resort to offline meta-gaming in order to survive amicably inside the game they play. If you want to meta-game to be a bandit or whatever, great, good for you. I think that's poor sportsmanship, and completely avoiding the entire point of the game, but good job. Forcing offline meta-gaming on other players is a shitty answer to a boorish question. It's not even really that legitimate, either. Players liked to use side chat as an IN GAME feature. You're suggesting that players try to actively circumvent the in-game features which are meant to instill a greater sense of high-stakes immersion, because that's what everybody else does... Play the game the way you like it, and allow others to play it the way they like, and make suggestions based on what -they- would like. At the end of the day, isn't that what this is all about? This is Dayz, not the great Crusades. We don't need to convert people or burn them down. Just let ideas slide, if you don't agree with them. This animosity and down-shouting is just so... Depressing. PVP is the symptom, not the problem. The real problem is with PVPers who want to run all non-PVPers out of town. PVPers who think Dayz should not -ever- have a legitimate PVE population is the problem. Dicks are the problem. PVPers are not always dicks. :)

Which is why they aren't welcome here. And this is why our community is laughable. They aren't welcome here because they play the game differently than you do? Beating your chest to show all those casuals that you're sooo much more awesome than them must feel really great.

I've read those previously, and just re-read them again for clarification on certain issues. Thanks for the links, no sarcasm for once. :) That being said -- My chief concern with the quotes are... Well... I in no means say this with any ill regard towards Rocket; but I think he's a bit naive in what he's saying there. Or at least, he should update the statements now, in regards to BIS' interest in Dayz, and his subsequent appointment to Dayz as his project (was currently Arma3?). That means this may be, in thought, an experiment and an anti-game (which I don't actually disagree with, btw.), but it is in reality a venture by a video game company, into the viability of making this a commercial project. I stress the commercial part of the deal. If this becomes a commercial project in the future, the course for Dayz could change. And if you're not ready for it, it could change in a dramatic fashion. Because of that, what I am suggesting, and will continue suggest in the near-future, are ideas to help develop that in a more sound and unobtrusive manner for players of all inclinations. I would like to see a friendly and seamless transition from Dayz as a niche mod, to a niche commercially viable project. PS - I just think it is kind of a misrepresentation to still cling to the belief that Dayz is a little mod on the internet, and not being co-developed by BIS, or at least, heavily influenced and assisted non-commercially by BIS. This isn't a little side-project on the internet. This is a professional development, and Rocket himself is being paid TO work on this project, if what I am reading is correct. That being said, maybe there will be absolutely NO change in the course of Dayz, and Rocket will have complete direction to do what he pleases, and he will continue to have no desire to implement anything to "make it easier", lol.

It's a slippery slope though, and personally I think purifying water is going a bit too far in terms of 'realism', next thing you know someone is gonna want food poisoning from the 20 year old sardines you just consumed, faulty primers on any ammo left out in the open, stopping to take a shit/piss, required sleeping, damage hearing from firing a weapon indoors, etc Survival is about difficulty, and unfortunately for some, this is a survival sim set in a realistic environment It most certainly is a slippery slope. :)

I love the fact that the "hardcore" gamers are telling the "casual" gamers that Dayz needs to get more difficult to appease a -few- players, rather than get more "mainstream" to appease -more- players. At the end of day all they really sound like to me are children who want their toy from the store, and are willing to throw the mightiest of tantrums in the middle of the isle so that they can blackmail their parents into buying it despite the fact that it's junk. Not only that, but they circumvent any talk about how "mainstreaming" Dayz doesn't even have to involve removing the features they love. And can we -please- stop using the "realism" excuse? I have an idea for the super hardcore elite players. Let's make it even too hard for -you- guys. Idea: Make weapon respawn once per month, to properly simulate how "looting" works in real life. Do you think weapons will be at all easy to find? I guarantee you won't be finding silenced M4 carbines forgotten in a little deer hunter's stand. See? Realism for the sake of realism on a -video game- doesn't necessarily work out all the time. We can have both realism, and a valid sense of gameplay. Because, whether or not you guys like it, this is a -game-. Not an anti-game. Not a thought experiment. It's a game. If I remember correctly, Rocket is an actual BI employee, who was working on the development of Arma3, and has now been reassigned to work on Dayz full-time by BI, for potential implementation as a stand-alone product, or a BI-assisted full mod for Arma3? Who knows, but that unequivocally means that Dayz has gone post-indie mod on the internet, and has become a potential commercial product. A game. If you don't like that, why don't -you- leave? :)

to me' date=' communication and being able to communicate is an important commodity in game. having the option or ability to global chat makes it less scarce, less significant, and less valuable. you asserting that it should be available, even as an option, is just as talibanish as my saying it shouldn't be there. it's not a particularly constructive element to this discussion to label others of differing opinions as taliban, even if in playful jest. [/quote'] Lol, it's talibanish of me to suggest middle ground? Joking aside, however. I think it's kind of a disingenuous argument to claim communication is a commodity in game, when it is 100% acceptable to use out-of-game programs for communication, bypassing any and all in-game need for communication. It's a commodity or it isn't. If it's a commodity, it must be regulated somehow. Having it be a commodity, but turning a blind eye to the abuse of that commodity isn't exactly solving the problem. You can't have it both ways, while at the same time alienating with a poor excuse, one particular sub-sect of that communication... That presents only a rigged system.

qq i can't stand constructive feedback and suggestions meant to further the games success in the future PS - Deltron would be ashamed of you using that screenname while being a tool. You tool.

And all of them are gamey and fake. As far as TS etc go' date=' I have no problem with those because people are going to use them anyway, especially people who play together in other games. I rationalise that as them having radios from somewhere. Whatever, it's not that important. What is important is that TS and other external chat clients aren't the default. People won't log onto DayZ, see there's a global chat and start the usual kinds of global chat babble that happens in other games. That's exactly the sort of thing that DayZ totally isn't about. I would like to see text direct communication though, not sure if it works at the moment but it should be an option for those who don't have a headset/mic. [/quote'] So one thing is gamey and fake, but the same thing using an out of game voice chat program is cool because you subjectively rationalise its use in-game? What? No, it's OK because it's not the default. There's a world of difference between TS and on-tap global chat, and their effects on the game world. And as I said, there is no way to stop people using TS so sure, I'll rationalise it. Global chat is a totally different thing. It exists for one purpose only and that is immediate, easy and universal convenience. You know this as well as I do, right? And you should know that that's not what DayZ is about, because it's been said enough times in enough places for plenty long enough. And let me say, I totally understand what you're saying in favour of global chat and I don't even disagree with a lot of it. But one of the things I love about DayZ is that its doing things differently. I *want* something new, and I'm sure a great many of those 260,000 DayZ players do too. I *want* to see what happens when there's no global chat. I *want* to see how players adapt to gameplay that is outside their comfort zone. This is all good stuff, its the sort of experimentation and innovation that has been dead in gaming since the 90's. Possibly even the 80's. Please, try to understand that. DayZ isn't supposed to be like all those other games. Saying it needs global chat is like saying the Sex Pistols needed sensible haircuts. Do you get what I'm saying? I definitely get what you're saying, which is why I won't lump you in with the video game Taliban. We just happen to diverge where we think the 'new' should come and the 'old' should be rejected. I think there are some characteristics that exist because they're a foundation. Side chat, to me, is kind of one of those things. To remove it for the sake of 'being new' isn't really going to result in anything positive. We either figure that out now, and it comes back later. Or hey, maybe it will actually be kind of cool and we'll all get used to it and enjoy it immensely and nobody will be willing to dissent. But that's speculative for future events. Right now, I just want to present a secondary opinion based on what I know I have experienced, and extrapolate might experience in the future based on that previously mentioned experience. I don't want to toy with hypothetical experiences per-experiencing them, you know what I mean? That aside. We should be having this discussion right in the here and now. If we go with the flow, it may result in something that sucks and needs to be replaced later. If we discuss our viewpoints from all angles, and discuss the viewpoints of others, we might be able to steer things in a better direction. And while this direction is ultimately up to Rocket, and his team of do-gooders, I think it is ultimate -our- responsibility to provide rocket with sound advice and suggestions, so that he may have a well rounded idea of what works on the player-scale. And that means not immediately damning other peoples points of views, like some people around here have a great passion for. We have to be willing to hear each other out, because it's our duty and privilege! Global chat ruins the feeling for -you-, not -everyone-. Removing it from -everyone- so that -you- feel better is, to me, not the best answer. The capability for each of us to remove it ourselves if we so desire, is what I'm suggesting. Is that simple enough and engaging enough for you? Simple yes, engaging no. If you want an advantage over other players you can whistle for it mate. stop fucking with the immersion of a rather unique mod. GLOBAL CHAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IN A MOD ABOUT BEING ISOLATED AND TRYING TO SURVIVE. Thats the fundamental hardcore fact of it. If you want global coms go install teamspeak you lazy fuck. Teamspeak sucks, but just cos its there doesn't mean we should kill the atmosphere of the mod. But anyhow, your only going to brand me an extremist and trundle on with your weak bullshit argument so i'm out. You're out? But I'm just getting warmed up.

Global chat ruins the feeling for -you-, not -everyone-. Removing it from -everyone- so that -you- feel better is, to me, not the best answer. The capability for each of us to remove it ourselves if we so desire, is what I'm suggesting. Is that simple enough and engaging enough for you?

Yes, yes I did. And you sir, need to lighten up.

And all of them are gamey and fake. As far as TS etc go' date=' I have no problem with those because people are going to use them anyway, especially people who play together in other games. I rationalise that as them having radios from somewhere. Whatever, it's not that important. What is important is that TS and other external chat clients aren't the default. People won't log onto DayZ, see there's a global chat and start the usual kinds of global chat babble that happens in other games. That's exactly the sort of thing that DayZ totally isn't about. I would like to see text direct communication though, not sure if it works at the moment but it should be an option for those who don't have a headset/mic. [/quote'] So one thing is gamey and fake, but the same thing using an out of game voice chat program is cool because you subjectively rationalise its use in-game? What? This is probably going to sound more trollish than intended' date=' but that cuts both ways. DayZ is going in different directions to other games, it's a deliberate, considered design decision to cut global chat out altogether and has been from before the start. Given this, I would urge you to try to appreciate this "other point of video game ideology" - because it is what it is. We already know the other side of the story because we've been playing it for years. This is new and has only been so for a very short time. [/quote'] If that's the ultimate design decision that they take in the end, I'll be okay with it and adapt with it. However, at this stage of the design, the decision has NOT been ultimately made. These are tweaks and suggestions, as with the current portion of the game design -- so no, I'm not just going to deal with it and take it as it is. I'm going to offer up what I consider to be valid critiques and suggestions as to how to better accommodate the player base in the future. Stifling suggestions and creative ideas is not the answer here, right?

Side chat tends to be a barren wasteland of 'FRIENDLY IN CHERNO?' and 'F U BANDIT GO BACK TO COD', there really aren't any positives to keep it. As far as helping new players learn, isn't that what wiki's & websites are for? Also what better way to learn that to throw yourself into the game? I agree, the best way to learn would be checking out the Dayz wiki, etc, and questions in-game like, "How do I chop wood?" do get annoying after the 50th time in 30 minutes. However, that's not the kind of communication I'm aspiring to, nor what I participate in. That's just the price I have to pay, to have good occasional chat opportunities. As for the insulting portion of the chat, I think that will taper off eventually. That stuff is all reactionary, and once it dies off, it'll stay dead. Just, hopefully not along with chat, lol.

The video game Taliban. I'm pretty sure I read a news report about the Taliban banning the polio vaccine from Pakistani children in areas they control, as a way to get the US to stop drone attacks. And now they're trying to take away our side-chat. When does it end?

Your solution for griefing is being a griefer/troll on chat? Congratulations on being the downward spiral part of the community.