Swineflew

It's been a long while since I played too, I think I'll reinstall arma when I get home. I don't remember what I had on me when I last played. I think I'd prefer starting fresh.

Uh, I....... Ok.

My problem is that since you don't see the point or enjoyment that its unintelligent or cowardly or any of the other negative descriptions that you've attached to it.

I actually don't mind being hated in a video game, I think you underestimate the ability to separate an online persona and someone's "real" life. I'm more curious as to why you need the attention and validation that you're style of gameplay is more honorable or intelligent.

A lot of people voice their concerns because they care what happens to the game. I personally feel like the ball was dropped. This game had insane hype, and warZ jumped in and pushed a game out quicker and like it or not a lot of people don't care about the warZ/dayZ conflict. WarZ filled a market that DayZ created and the people craving the zombie survival game either bought warZ or tried to keep waiting for dayZ. Well, a lot of people got tired of waiting. I haven't been to the forum in months, I come back and see pretty much no hint of any type of progress, that is frustrating for someone who is anxious to see what's going to happen with the SA.

I had high hopes for the game, but at the end of the day I doubt I will be getting very serious into the standalone like I was the mod. The ball was dropped with standalone, and I believe that there are development choices that rocket could have made that would put out a better final product. IMO the engine choice was a bad one, choosing to abandon above ground bases was also a bad one, abandoning the mod community was a bad one. This game was huge for a bit, and instead of capturing the audience he let them slip away. So I trust rocket to make the game the way he wants, but I don't trust that he'll make it very good. There is no long term "staying power" for players and I think that's a mistake.

It pains me greatly that even the fucking mods of this forum didn't understand the OP.

This is actually an interesting question and I'm a little bit saddened by the "I wouldn't play it" crowd. Now, the real philosophy behind the question is how would you play if there was an actual penalty for dying ingame and it's something I wish we were actually able to simulate. I was always infatuated with the DOThack series, mostly because "the world" was a game with almost complete immersion. People were scared to die, they felt actual fear at the sight of a PKer so much that people dedicated themselves to becoming a PKKer. I'm getting off topic, but introducing a real emotional response from dying ingame, or a fear of dying, would be a phenomenal leap of immersion that I don't think any game has quite perfected yet. Aside from anger or frustration when dying, and that's not really a good form of immersion. All IMO of course.

The pros outweigh the cons. I've written on this and side chat multiple times, so I won't get into it too much. Building a community > immersion. Anonymous killing anonymous watched by anonymous, looting anonymous , while anonymous raids anonymous' tent. That leaves absolutely no room for any type of meaningful long term gameplay or drives gameplay in any way whatsoever.

When I think of post apocalyptic survival I immediately think of waterworld and mad max type of worlds. Many small colonies and scavengers or loners coming in to trade to survive or to get things they couldn't alone. I think that when people play zombie games their instinct is to build a base and fortify, at least mine is. So my idea revolves around this idea. I will be referencing Eve for probably 90% of these ideas also. It's a great and fantastic game, but playing spreadsheets in space is what kills it for me. I digress though. Essential things DayZ needs. - End Game content, some type of progression to keep you playing. - Carrot on a stick, you need something players can work towards over a longer period of time. My idea would be Bases. Building, maintaining, capturing, defending bases would be an ideal endgame. Scatter bases through the land and allow clans to fortify them, maintain fuel for generators etc. Bases can hold benifits, fuel manufacturing, electrical plants, water purifying, etc. This gives a base a reason to hold and defend, and a reason to attack them or trade. A clan that can manufacture fuel can trade with a clan that can manufacture tools or weapons using their bases perk. Scavengers or lone wolf players can come in and trade things they've looted for fuel or whatever they may need to survive. Bandits can attack an ambush people traveling between different bases to steal their goodies. Attacking bases can work like POS attacking in eve. As an example you get into the base and hack a computer or something and (like stront) the base becomes open to attack depending on how the base owners set it up, this allows defenders and attackers to mobilize their forces to attack/defend so players don't have to be logged in 24/7. - Now currently the game operates on too small of a scale to make this work. The map is too small and player caps are too small. This is where the eve model comes into play (again). Everyone is in the same universe in eve, but zones are separated into systems, so people are all in the same world, but they are always in different zones. If DayZ could link servers through a train system we could all share a "world" and different servers could be different "zones". This would potentially link all the players similar to eve. - Zombonies. I think that inside of the bases walls it is ok to be semi safe from zombies (assuming people don't leave the gates open). Walls and gates should keep people safe from zombies, it always has in zombie series. The problem is you can't hide behind them forever, you have to go look or food to eat, water to drink, batteries, ammo, weapons, vehicles, etc. Maybe your base can make food, well you still have to search for water, or travel and trade with a base that can purify water. The idea is that a base can't operate on its own, but it gives players something to work for, a long term goal, and a reason to trade, etc. This means people can't huddle in their base 24/7. It means people have to go out and trade or scavenge which opens them up to zombies and bandits. Zombies should be EVERYWHERE. - Player progression. Players should have skills that they can build up over time for crafting tools, upgrading weapons, being a better hunter, driver, mechanic, etc. allow them to choose talents that benifit their gameplay, a talent tree that branches towards group or lone wolf gameplay. - Death. You lose your skills, loot, talents when you die. Death sucks, and it always should. Basically I want an FPS Zombie version of eve. I could go on for days spouting ideas, but I figured this wall of text is good for now.

Nothing game changing happened.

Vehicles shouldn't be rare, why would they be? Fuel, now that needs manufactured and refined, so that being rare makes sense.

Something to do that isn't frustratingly repetitive.

Standalone needs released as soon as possible. Lack of things to do in the current game caused the momentum the mod created to disappear. I'm actually saddened by the need for it to be rushed out, and I'm sad that even with the rush the popularity of the game is waning fast.

I doubt that.