Katana67

There's no problem with them promoting a game. I don't fault them for that, nor do I fault them for recording their experience and posting it on the internet. It's not an issue of them doing harm, it's merely preferential treatment for doing nothing special (while most act like jackasses, which is beside the point). The issue is nicely summed up in a Braveheart quote, "... and the commoner who bleeds on the battlefield? Does he risk less?". It's all fine and dandy that they bring attention, but I don't think they should be granted special treatment for doing something that traditional news outlets and word-of-mouth does as well without receiving anything in return. Nobody freaks out over a nameless marketing firm getting the word out about the hottest new product, they freak out over the product and the people making said product. Sure, you can offer the argument that Youtubers/streamers played a large part in making DayZ popular. I personally found out about DayZ through a Kotaku article last April. But I don't care who tells me, I care that it's a mod/game/whatever that I've been fantasizing about since I was ten. I'm not here saying "Thanks Kotaku! You should totally report on the Alpha for us! Talk to Rocket and Matt!". Plus, I don't see the draw in it anyhow. Not that it's wrong, I just don't care for it (or 90% of the Youtubers/streamers themselves). It's an issue of putting the pussy on a pedestal, so to speak. Yes... I went there.

"Famous" I loled. I never understood why Youtubers get so much respect. They just... record their play... and often don't even do anything special or offer any insight. I really don't understand the draw that streamers and Youtubers attract. Just play the effing game. It's not like you have to call Jimmy down the street and get the gang together to go play stickball... just turn on your computer and play the game. I can understand turning around and recording your time in DayZ, I really can. But what I cannot understand is how that translates into gaining clout in the gaming community and with developers. Cool! You managed to get people to play DayZ (debatable) by recording your own experience coupled with your weak personality that people think is hilarious for some reason. I'm willing to bet that a sizable portion of DayZ's following was also garnered through things like reddit discussions, forum discussions, traditional gaming media outlets, and just friends telling their friends about how awesome DayZ is. Maybe I just don't get it. I never have seen reason to give Youtubers and streamers any additional respect than I would bestow upon the average joe. I get the attraction to recording your experience, and posting it. It's not that, it's the fact that people seemingly gain clout by doing so... vice just doing so. Rant over.

Thanks, all I knew is that it made my trees look fluffy. Now I know what everything does! Would be nice if they'd at least make an effort, but I'd bet it's a pretty low priority. It's pretty infrequent that it's a detriment, and with the SA looking to have a more flexible draw distance... perhaps that alone will mitigate a lot of people's problems.

Paying attention to general development timelines over the past decade, supplemented by pre-disposing factors (developed engine, support staff, large base mod to work off of, etc.) > Having a brother who works at Ubisoft We all know the inventory needs to be worked on, vehicles need work, and cheating needs to be minimized... We also know that they're working on these, as well as the above. Simply because information doesn't confirm EVERY expectation of yours, doesn't mean it's not an update.

Have they elaborated at all on whether they're going to try and mitigate the problems with grass rendering at distance or ATOC? I have no idea what it stands for, I just know it makes my trees look fluffier and I have a hard time seeing people hiding in trees at the cost of a better looking game.

Totally joking Matt. :D

Haha, I posted a while back about how Rocket gets a little snippy with Matt in almost every devblog. But I was being sarcastic regardless.

Solid. I still think Rocket hates Matt with a fiery passion and the prerecorded Devblog included too much of this so they had to scrap it.

Doesn't really bother me that they're not saying anything, just bothers me that they said they would say something and didn't say anything... or something...

Can only play so much DayZ before I come back to the forums to check on SA... Then I get bored... and post about it. Devblog or bust!

Vaginaboob... God I'm bored

Any forum where the word "assassin" doesn't get censored to "******in" or "********" is a good one.

Rocket said devblog whilst en-route to Everest.

One thing that needs to be worked on before they re-implement vehicles in Standalone... There needs to be more than one way for a vehicle to meet its ultimate demise... Tires can be replaced, sure. But for god's sake... whenever a vehicle is knocked out... it doesn't ALWAYS or even most of the time... EXPLODE in a massive fireball killing all of the occupants. Moreover, simply running into a tree at 30 mph shouldn't be grounds for a vehicle to explode every... single... time. The vehicles are teacups against the environment, I'm pretty sure a good 60% of my deaths over the past year have been accidentally nicking the edge of a jersey barrier or tree stump and having my mostly intact vehicle spontaneously combust. I think the player him/herself should sustain a lot more damage/broken limbs on significant crashes rather than the vehicle. Or rather, that it should vary. Sometimes, my engine should just die if too much damage is taken... or my fuel tank busts and won't hold any gas. As of now, none of these really happen before the vehicle itself explodes.

Yeah, I totally see the benefit in this... and perhaps I'm just inexperienced, as in nearly a year of playing Day Z... I can name two times where I've partnered up with someone. I think it'll help facilitate these interactions, but I feel like it will be a drop in the bucket compared to other systemic macro choices being made in the SA. That and adding reasons for players to not KOS, like damage-able loot, etc.

My most non-opinionated concern is whether or not a default lowered weapon will even affect KOSing at all. I totally get that it's really only a part of the solution, and is on the micro level as opposed to the macro deterrent of managing a complex survival system. I assume that it's meant to facilitate interaction between friendly players, with a raised weapon being a point of tension. But, I can't help but think that this represents a minority in interaction. KOSing appears to be, largely, the prerogative of the bandit... who will be KOSing regardless of stance.

I was just contemplating the idea of "constructables" in SA. I understand Rocket's justification for going with an "instanced" only model, vice an above-ground model. But, a few things just don't add up for me. I mean, on private servers/mods, there is seemingly no problem with a menial level of construction (i.e. HESCO bastions, fences, etc.). So I'm just a bit confused as to why it's so unfeasible. Wouldn't a better solution to discouraging structures popping up everywhere be to make the resource requirement fairly difficult to fulfill for the individual? Likewise, what prevents the existing buildings in Chernarus from being "commandeer-able"? (i.e. Putting in a strong door and/or barricading the windows, etc.) I'm just wondering as to why they couldn't have the existing structures of the game be able to be lived in by the player.

@Chabowski I totally agree that having a readied weapon should have drawbacks, like making you move slower. However, as I'm sure you know, the reasoning behind having a lowered aim and push to aim, is to supposedly minimize KOS. I'm merely saying, right now... we've got "hipfire always ready" + "push/hold to aim". What they're advocating for is "hipfire lowered" + "push/hold to aim". So the only real change, in my mind, is the default stance rather than the act of aiming. I too am like you and rarely use hipfire. I think the new system will be good, but I just think that it's more of a change in the default readiness stance rather than the actual act of aiming which is how Rocket described it. If it were tiered, which I suspect it will be, between "not ready" - "hipfire" - "ADS" then I think there may be a few problems with the small portion of players who use controllers. I don't pretend to think that this is a forefront of their control design, I just think that adding this layer of complexity may inadvertently sidestep alternate means of control. Long story short, I agree with the new system... but am just skeptical of whether or not it will be fully compatible with a controller (DISCLAIMER - Not expecting them to cater to controllers). Whereas just changing the default readiness stance seems a much more simple solution to the desired problem of minimizing KOSing. EDIT - Or, have the player raise his/her weapon up to hipfire if the fire button is held down but not the ADS button.

Yeah, as someone who plays with a controller... I'm a bit concerned with the "push to aim" deal. Mostly in how it will be different from what we've got now. I think what would be different, is the default lowered weapon... rather than push to aim, which is what we've already got. So, I'm thinking of it as the same thing... just with the default weapon orientation in "low-ready" or whatever the kids are calling it these days.

The hotkey thing is a genius inclusion. Though I really really really hope they do away with it on the HUD (i.e. the big square with the AK-74 in it)... or make it as minimalist as possible in the final product.

This... not the fault of Day Z... but holy hell... rooting to the ground to change to your secondary is annoying as hell. That, and I hope they somehow make it easier to rapidly rotate around, backpedal, and engage zombies behind you. There's not anything specific that's wrong with it that I can tell, but it doesn't work like it would in the real world. That and I think if they ported ARMA 3's aiming system vice ARMA 2's to SA, it'd help a bit more... plus, if they'd tone down the ridiculous amount of delay/sway one gets after running, I'd like that. There are a lot of annoying "out of control" things about ARMA 2 character behavior that annoy me, like occasionally getting put into a "trot rapidly to the left or right as if dodging something" animation that is uninteruptable.

Conclude or include? Confused... CreepyPasta incorporates elements of Urban Legends, you should check out the Urban Legends thread here. It's got some good stuff.

Solid story. Is there not a Day Z Urban Legends thread already?

Just slap Namalsk on to the northern border of Chernarus... or is Namalsk an island?

That's a much more concise way of describing this phenomenon, thanks. Yeah, it's just a bit annoying not being able to just crash on through a door when you're trying to put some distance between you and a mass of zombies. (Not specifically referring to zombies walking inside buildings).