Katana67

I dunno, the interiors in ARMA 3 are horseshit and are unlikely to be improved. The ones in SA look amazing. Ultimately, BP is still a mod and beholden to the limits of the game which it is modifying. I'm sure there'll be pros and cons of both. BP has always really been about MOAR everything. Which is sort of silly. I like BP, but it's not really a lasting experience for me. It's just more weapons.

Agreed. I think that the approach is best left for a more flexible/malleable engine. I look forward to seeing what they've got in store for SA, given what they're working with and how they can pull it off.

I don't think we've seen a "ghillie" per-se, but we have certainly seen OD jackets and camouflage chest rigs. The big issue with the ghillie suit that bothered me in the mod is that the backpack did not show up. Would mitigate the benefit of a ghillie suit if you had a big tan Coyote Pack box on your back to give your position away, or could give the ghillie suit wearer a bit of incentive to go with a smaller pack or a smaller pack with a camo pattern. EDIT - That, and one should have to actually make/craft their ghillie suit. One could gather foliage from around and place it in the ghillie suit, or have to loot burlap and craft it that way. Rather than finding an in-tact ghillie suit at 100%, one should find the OD suit/mesh and have to craft/forage for the actual camouflage scheme.

I get that. But I'm really just basing this critique off of two things... 1) What I've seen 2) The excuses and/or reasons made/given by Rocket to justify why things aren't up-to-snuff or why things will never be so Now, I don't mean excuses as if he's being disingenuous. I mean it purely in the sense of "a reason for why X is/is not Y." I'm more concerned with the system paradigm itself (i.e. treatment of zombies as an all-encompassing ambient 'mechanic') versus a more granular treatment of zombies where they are regarded as individual actors. Animations lining up with actions, I get that it can be rectified (and said that this is one of the areas that I feel they've improved the most). But things like how damage is inflicted and how zombies actually interact with the environment/player are being treated in a manner that is certainly expedient and simple, but is not wholesome in my opinion.

His poor understanding of assertions (premises) in relation to argumentation was pretty hilarious. On-topic. Regarding zombie pathing, I think people might be a little too forgiving with this. This is something, that in my opinion, has to be rectified to the point of near-perfection. It's right up there with zombie hit detection and animations. I wouldn't even mind if this was a release-preventing issue to be honest (I'm quite sure it's not). In order to shift the focus back onto zombies, they have to be made well. We cannot simply accept a poorly depicted zombie if any semblance of legitimacy is to be maintained with regard to DayZ's genre. To disclaim, I'm not faulting Rocket or the developers when I say this. But, the zombies (as a group and as individuals) haven't even been aesthetically sorted out yet, much less had their technical back-end honed, and much less tweaked and balanced to actually be a threat. Now, I recognize that this is the purpose of the development process, but I think we're still a long way off (in my opinion from what I've seen) from having passable zombies. Of course, they've been markedly improved from both the mod and from the earlier SA footage we've seen. But they didn't start out in a good place to begin with. Now, one might then ask the question (given the improvements) "What more do you want?". I want zombies that are treated as parts of a whole, rather than as a blanket ambient system. I recognize that this might not be possible given the current restraints of the engine, which is why I think (way down the road) they'll have to look into either developing an engine from scratch or adapting a more flexible engine. I want decent animations, which the developers are certainly striving for and have improved in this regard. But they're still far from convincing. I want a visceral and intuitive zombie attack system that isn't reliant on zombies just magically outputting "damage". From what I gather, this is an area that has been improved, but to a much less significant degree than the changes in animations. The list could go on to include zombies with different levels of group communication, awareness, even going so far as to include zombies which carry objects on them rather than just being nebulous lootable containers. Now, again, I recognize that this treatment of zombies might not be possible with regard to the engine. But that doesn't mean we should be satisfied with a sub-par zombie.

Uh, what? I was saying it looks good! I want DayZ to look lived-in, rather than just the occasional randomly placed car wreck. This is one of the few screens of SA that has been fairly atmospheric.

There's some lived-in feel! All it took was some scraggly grass, a car wreck, a creaky old gate and some post-processing.

Sweet DDOS brah! Made a Reddit account just to whine about it... Well, now I'm one of those people with a Reddit account! DayZ forum is better...

Well, you have to consider that the zombies are really just infected people. They don't appear to want to "bite", so much as they just want to harm things aggressively (a la 28 Days Later infected). Now, granted, they do huddle around your corpse and munch on you a bit to feed. But I don't think biting is their primary form of interaction, and nor are they motivated by the Romero-esque evisceration which would leave piles of blood and guts everywhere. I think the mass graves are interesting. But, like I said in a post a while back about making DayZ feel a bit more "apocalyptic", it shouldn't be about adding more "gore" necessarily in that it should always have a context. A pile of dead zombies in front of a military blockade makes sense. Random splatters of blood on a house, don't necessarily make sense. Now, if you would put a few huddled corpses in an attic or something, that would have a tentative background. Or perhaps a line of uninfected human bodies around what was once an evacuation point. It's not about gore for me, it's about making the world feel "lived in" and that something actually went down in Chernarus prior to our characters spawning.

User "27 others" has returned! Quick hide your inflated egos! Oh wait, his punchline is pretty much the same and the joke is entirely hampered by the obviousness of "27"... /snore

Hopefully this means they've got a very aggressive development roadmap ahead. Once Alpha releases, I'd like to see a two-week update cycle.

Debbie Downer over here... sheesh...

Time wrap

Apples doth not amount to Oranges, sirrah.

Anybody notice the user named "27 others" beaning posts?

Standing alone confirmed in the standalone!

Chill folks.

Which happens with most releases now including the largest entertainment release to date, GTA V. DayZ mod is no exception. WarZ was dismissed not only because it had launch bugs, but because it's a poorly executed experience entirely. Likewise, he's saying that Dean is purposefully delaying as if it will be perfect on release, and that it's wholly unacceptable now. Not only is there zero evidence to support this, but Rocket has very clearly articulated what's going on with the game and what is preventing them from releasing (preventing, not delaying, as a delay would imply that there is a fixed date on which it was supposed to be released).

I'm not sure what WarZ has to do with anything right now, or your post, or delaying the game.

What does this even mean? "People are saying bad things about my game! Let me prove them right by delaying more! That will show... me!" - rocket2guns

ARMA 3's lighting does look better, yes. Let me put it this way, there have been times when I've played DayZ where I was unsure of whether my TV (I use a TV for my monitor) was on or off. It's that black, and is unplayable to me.

I never even used waypoints. It's curious, ARMA is such a "realistic" game with very unforgiving mechanics, but it also has these vague crutches and flaws that are in no way a reflection of reality. You don't even have to look at your map to see the waypoint! With nights, I think they need work from the mod. I get that they want to have nights be very dark and unforgiving, I do too. But the nights in DayZ are rarely playable. Night just doesn't look like that, even in areas where there is little manmade light. Your eyes adjust to the darkness and you can see where you're going. Sure, you can't see for miles, nor can you make out detail with black/grey contrast, but it's not a black hole. Even with full moon, night is problematic in DayZ.

That's not by virtue of it being a "franchise" though, that's mostly by virtue of a narrow development window. Likewise, there has been marked innovation in CoD and Battlefield. It only seems like there hasn't been when one looks at relatively recent datapoints. Compare BF3 to BF2, or even BC2. Compare CoD4 to CoD2/3, or CoD BO to WaW. They are very different games. DayZ's just starting out, it's at the BF1942 stage of its potential. Consider the evolutions we've seen from then to now.

Yes.

To each their own, that is all.