jovial

Arma 2 has features which go very nicely with DayZ, but I never would have got it if it weren't for DayZ. Doesn't mean that it sucks or that I can't now enjoy Arma 2 at some point since I got it anyway. But I look forward to when DayZ takes the step over to stand alone game.

At first I lol'd, a lot, then I kinda symphatized with the guy, but then I lol'd some more.

Looks very good, had me at server time. Dunno if its been mentioned, make it so that joining a server through your launcher doesn't start another client, like Six does. I don't really use the Six browser, partly for that reason.

Going prone at road near large building I was thinking just run in, you'll have plenty of time to run back out and lose aggro once they come in. :D

+1 base building or power generators or just general buildings that you can hold for some sort of advantage, vehicle, a machine gun nest, loot spawns without zombies. Clans and groups doing this stuff is where the endgame should be at. And of course it should require more than actually just camping the building, like requiring supplies to man/fortify/maintain that has to be found in high risk locations, urban centers, etc.

@OP You'll be back. :)

While its true there are a few entitled people, a few hipsters in this thread, I think what most of us have a problem with is the way the mod is depicted. Sure you can look at it as publicity, any such being a good thing depending on your viewpoint, but the fact of the matter is they're falsely representing the game for new players. I think its a shame, DayZ deserved a better LP. Still, if this just ends up getting a tiny fraction of their subscribers genuinely hooked on the DayZ experience, its a win.

I support this. Let it be a nice surprise for the combat loggers.

+1. Ideally, tents and vehicles should simply not save off map. Failing that, a 30 second kill timer if you cross the map threshold.

Didn't Rocket say something about not fixing running zombies indoors until the pathing and other issues was fixed (ie, they don't zig zag and move retard fast with broken animations, wall hacks, floor hacks, etc). Because as it is, the only thing to balance the zombies moving and acting this way is the ability to lose or kill them indoors. If they're gonna run indoors, it obviously can't be like this, a zig zag through walls at breakneck speed.

As long as Rocket sticks to his guns, keeps to the basic concept of this mod, and doesn't sell out, we have nothing to fear. From what I've seen in Rockets posts, that doesn't seem likely to happen. He seems like a guy with a vision and integrity. However I gotta agree that the way they depict the mod in the LP is awful, and makes no sense. I don't think they're retarded, its just they're busy. Their community wanted them to make a DayZ LP, so they looked at the game and saw what it was. And realized to make a decent LP would require a lot of time, compared to getting on a private server and just messing around. I mean, DayZ, any MMO really, but especially a sandbox one is particularly like live television. Unpredictable. Especially in alpha. They might get on a server, get killed, respawn, witness parachuting cows, get killed by a nuke, get kicked off server, spend ten minutes finding a day server with people on it, die five horrible zombie deaths before they figure out how to gear up and move on north and get killed by a hatchet murderer who said he was friendly. Still, for a good LP, this is the process they should have gone through.

This is actually good. Of course we should all want more people playing the mod. Rocket has said that the game we enjoy is nothing that will go away no matter how many people cry about unbalanced PvP, psychological analysis of motives in social interaction aka "wah KoS wah wah" or whatever the fuck the hordes of Yogcast subscribers will bring with them. In the end, more players, more fun. Those who don't like it will indeed whine on the forums, but luckily we have devs who don't give a fuck. Hopefully. :) Unless someone, due to the massive interest, makes him an offer he can't refuse. :D

I don't want to see any debuff for killing people. If anything, give us incentives to not shoot that guy we have in our sights, because the shot might attract 10 times more zombies, or roaming hordes. More and better zombies (ie, not glitchy motherfuckers you can however lose in builds, just killing machines with proper pathfinding and no wallhacks) will also have the effect of deterring solo PvP and encouraging, if not more teamwork, a bit more restraint. Don't increase zombie numbers to the point where we have to counterzerg them with large groups though. Small scale PvP is where its at, we don't want to discourage that.

Good stuff. This is really the stuff that keeps us playing this game. :)

Oh yeah, obviously it should be running hordes. Not walking. But come to think of it, it really shouldn't be implemented until their animation and pathing is fixed.

I like this idea, right now zombies are a nuisance at best, only really made dangerous by being glitchy as fuck, and ceasing to be so as soon as you lead them indoors. When zombie fucked up pathing and animations are fixed, I would like to see multiple hordes roaming the map, randomly, investigating gunshots over something like above suggestion of 1-2 kilometers. Suddenly nowhere would be actually safe. Might even be a good addition in the current zombie state, just to make the world a bit more dangerous. At the moment its a bit too easy to survive in the woods once you have the gear necessary for it. Even with a roaming horde mechanic the woods would be pretty safe, but not as safe as they are now.

At first I thought it would be corny. But it was actually good. Cash would absolutely smile, at least if he got into DayZ. :D

Bump. Wtb cannibalism with a hefty debuff.

Great story. 5/5.

We may be latent sociopaths or some shit, but the satisfaction from a kill in this and similar games is not comparable to a "e-sport" type game. A kill doesn't mean a thing there, its just a number. Many bandits will be able to tell you stories about a lot of their kills. But survivors also get some of that satisfaction too, from just surviving in this world. In short.

I think what the carebears get hung up on is the zombie survival bit of zombie survival simulator. What you should consider is what is implied in a zombie survival scenario. A post apocalyptic world devoid of laws or society. This is the setting. As for the realism of a consistent shoot on sight policy, its perfectly realistic if you really think about it. Some of you may have noble ideas in your head, but the fact is in reality, you would do what it takes to survive, or you would not. And in a world with scarce supplies, already full of danger, would you take your chances on a armed stranger? I think not. You would shoot them, take their can of beans, and get the fuck out of dodge before a zombie heard you. Or they would shoot you. This is human nature at its very basic level. Survival. Fear and paranoia can make us do things we never thought we would. But I'm not a complete cynic, and I think there needs to be a little more to this game. In reality, strangers might very well band up, if they faced immediate danger which they stood a better chance of facing together. This game could use a mechanic to give us a chance at that interaction, at least sometimes. But it should not be anything limiting bandits, debuffs, longer respawn, etc. Where is the realism in that I ask you, if realism is your argument versus the shoot on sight mentality? Quick sidenote, if we get more skins, clans will become more established, and a certain kind of society will emerge. It will still be a very violent and primitive society of course, but still. :D