JESUSARIUS REX (DayZ)

The ONLY thing i agree with is a new engine for ArmA/DayZ, but NOT RIGHT NOW... A new engine for DayZ 2/sequel and ArmA 4 is a must though. And quite frankly, I have battlefield for destruction, i don't need or WANT it in DayZ... It's not needed. And ALLLLLLL the games you compare are on a brand new engine or have really small environments. Do you realize how long an engine takes to make? Look at your all mighty source engine! Portal 2 still uses it. Source 2 isn't even announced yet, and source is nearly 10 years old. So the Real Virtuality engine being 15 years old, isn't that old... NOT TO MENTION ALPHA!. I'm sure the devs will add tree falling when wood cutting and basic stuff like that. It's already in the engine. Their is just no need to break a fence. ALSO, ROCKET SAID THEY ARE REDOING VEHICLES BECAUSE HE WANTS MORE REALISTIC A) PHYSICS AND B ) REPAIRING. So really, the physics aren't that bad. I'm mean, consider ALL the physics that go into your gun in the ArmA engine. AND PEOPLE ARE RIGHT ABOUT THE ARMA 3 ENGINE. As much as i love the game, I should be able to run the game on high/medium settings at the least. I have 2 550 ti's in sli. Now, i would like to be able to run DayZ at fairly high settings thank you very much, and with the ArmA 3 engine DayZ would be unplayable because that engine is terribly optimized.

And low grade ones, that you would use to about 500m max would be more common, like ones with 4x to 6x zoom. That's what i've been getting at. Edit: not rare, but uncommon.

exactly, you had a nice, sturdy surface. I hit a deer easy at 200 yards, and I wasn't using a stand (although i have sat in them before, but it was poorly placed, so i didn't see any deer). I could completely believe 500m if you #1 calm (not talking about hunting here), #2 have a good support surface, and #3 a good rifle. But I'm trying to relate to the game, and in the game, running through the forest, you won't have nice support. What I'm try to say is, if you have a branch or rock, or bipod. Ya 500 is ok. But even if your prone, if you have no support under the gun your accuracy will go down a lot. Get what I'm saying? I'm sorry, i wasn't being clear before that's my fault. Edit: Also, i know the bullet will still be effective, but with other factors, 800m is a tough shot. Edit2: and you probably are a better shot than me, and know more, but the majority of people who survive would be from about my level of skill to military marksman, ya know? Edit3lol: and you also said 500m is not stupid easy nor stupid hard. I said it's hard, but not super hard. 800m is HARD though.

And you do realize they generally use a bipod on a sturdy surface as well? This is DayZ... We aren't aren't talking about a firing range with perfect shooting conditions, or a military sniper set perfectly in a perch. "Sniper" rifles general have much nicer optics than a hunting rifle as well. the max you will ever see a hunter shoot a deer is about 300 yards... Have you ever shot that far? do you have any concept how HARD that is unless you have IDEAL conditions? 800m is the effective range in IDEAL conditions. And a crow is not a 12x12 plate... It has a killzone of about 4 square inches. BTW, the wind was blowing about 25 mph that day as well. I'm not trying to say I'm an awesome shot, I'm just saying people have no idea how hard shots at 500m are... And i nailed that crow the first time i ever shot a high powered rifle. I literally went through 5 rounds before making that shot.

Ya, it is easy, but i just don't comment of posts about loot because they're gunna say I'm a hacker or something. It's TOO easy imho.

What Gews just said. Hunting rifles aren't long range weapons. Sniper rifles are...

Nobody buys a.30-06 or 700 without a scope. They should pretty much spawn with them. And really, a 500 meter shot is incredibly hard with a hunting rifle. I would say 200 meters normaly and 300 max. I can hit a crow at 100 yards (114 meters) no problem with a .30-06, but double that distance and it becomes incredibly significantly harder. Hunting rifles really wouldn't be op. Edit: Also, if you are an up close and personal type of player, use a handgun. They are made to do damage at close range (that's why pistols use a large, slow moving projectile).

Minecraft is a java based game with low res textures and no polygons what so ever. The only thing you need to run it is 6gb of ram... Edit: It still looks better than minecraft. I have a 550 ti, an $80 usd card, and i can run on mid settings fine... Your logic makes no sense. And minecraft on high simply adds slightly better lighting, which is nothing compared to dayz's lighting,

I'm guessin english isn't your first language, because you misunderstood what i was saying. My post said i didn't want to have to shoot in order to gain accuracy. The second part was showing how tough guns are.

I think the devs may add tear gas and stuff later on.

I think my biggest problem with night is that I'm forced to use a flashlight. I'm a stealth guy, and a giant light ruins it. On a moonlight night it's fine for me. I thinks it's the right balance of shadows and visibilty. If every night was like that, I'd love the dark.

I understand it's not fair lol. If someones behind you, you will probably die anyways. I'm just pointing out how it take more time. Maybe you hear footsteps, ya know? Really all I care about is being able to clear rooms without getting stuck in the door, and collision would hamper that I mean, in the alpha i would be open to try it. I just think it won't work. As an experiment, it may not be a bad idea, and may become permanent. Bah, I honestly I think I'm not being open minded enough. It's alpha, so i can be changed at any time. Also, I keep my gun down the majority of the time, like when I'm in the woods or just observing. I keep it up when in cities or villages though. Not because I want to shoot the first person I see, but because it's the sad truth I might have to lol. Edit: And also for the occasional zombie^ ;)

An Auto system would be different than pressing space. I can agree with an auto system, if its done right. That's a good suggestion. I just REALLY don't like the idea of getting stuck and having to press space to turn.

This was amazing

Its uses .45 acp in FNX45 mags. i have one too but haven't found ammo yet.

While i agree with you, the problem with the movement is the muscle memory. Yes, you can't eat beans in one gulp, but we're talking about combat, not eating from a can. The time it takes to turn, lower your weapon, turn more, and raise it is just so long that i feel it's detrimental, because you will be 100% dead by the time that happens. Opening your beans 10 seconds faster isn't a life or death situation. turning around is. And yes, in real life it would take longer to turn around with a rifle, but it would take so much longer in game. I'm not saying it's a bad idea or should never be implemented, I'm just saying the way people WANT it implemented is extremely unfair.

I wish they would rewrite lighting though. ArmA has no dynamics at all. It's just like "LET ME SHOVE THIS COLOR FILTER IN YOUR FACE THAT ALSO ALTERS THE BRIGHTNESS." lol

As far as stanag vs cmag, the only difference would be the cmag feeds better. The bullets are the same. Ya, but because most people have not shot a gun means i have to suffer even though i have? I don't like that. It should be based on the players skill in game, not some magical learning curve. Hunting rifles are literally the easiest thing to shoot next to a .22. I mean, I can hit a grouping tighter than a deers butthole a 100 meters with a .30-06 lol. LOL http://youtu.be/bj5Kcs4dzro Edit: not trying to be rude, just showing how weapons are much tougher than you think. A weapon that was oiled before being left in an empty building for four years will still function fairly well. If it was completely unmainted it's whole life, then left for years, the weapon wouldn;t function.

While i don't agree with 100% daytime, all the servers in my timezone, and many others, are NIGHT. edit: ALWAYS

They shouldn't have the same mobility, but the point everyone is trying to make is there is no way to add a FAIR system. It's better to just leave it the way it is. In real life, you can slide a full length rifle like a mosin nearly parallel to the door, in order to peak around the corner. YES, it would be MORE clunky than a pistol, but there's no way to simulate what i just described in DayZ, so there's no point at putting someone at a HUGE disadvantage for "realism" that's not very realistic in the first place. Believe me, I play airsoft, and a M4 is super easy to use in CQC, in fact much easier in real life than DayZ. Edit: And with what people are suggesting, a Mosin would be WAY easier to use irl than in DayZ. And while pressing space may seem like a good idea, it's not. In real life you don't think about moving your weapon in tight spaces, it just happens. Pressing space requires you to think about what to press after you get stuck. Edit2: I know you don't strafe through a door irl, but you can't "slide" through door (know what i mean?) in DayZ like real life. Hence why I think strafing through doors is fair.

I never liked getting stuck on walls in arma II. It's just as unrealistic as bringing collision back. What do people do when they want to turn around irl? they move they're weapon, which is hard to simulate on a video game. not to mention it makes clearing rooms impossible, because you can't strafe sideways through the door to peak around it.

I don't like having a huge learning curve for marksmanship, as i feel it doesn't represent me, or reality. The first time i ever shot a .30-06, i nailed a crow at 100 yards, in a 25 mph wind, on about my 8th to 10th round EVER. The next day, i went out and shot my first doe, and it was a clean shot. Only put about 15 round down range with a .30-06 and 5 with a .270 the day before. I feel shooting your first animal would be similar to the adrenaline you feel shooting a zombie ( of course a zombie/person would be much much harder to focus on and would have your heart pumping even more). I'm not saying a hunting rifle is the same as an assault rifle, and i do realize a AR is harder to shoot. All I'm saying is guns are made for ease of use. A learning curve is really dumb IMHO, as it doesn't take long to become a fairly accurate shot, and shooting of 100 bullets to practice is really just unnecessary in a game. I would ok with a small learning curve, a big one? no. Edit: I feel it would be ok to natural reduce accuracy a bit, as we are not talking about trained soldiers anymore. But the accuracy I'm reading about makes no sense at all.

I always thought it would be better to have zombies do more beating damage, as in broken bones, bruising, and concussions. To me, a flesh eating zombie doesn't work. Even if they do bite you, you wouldn't bleed out like it ripped out your jugular( unless it actually did :) ). I think players are enough of a threat for bleeding lol.

I don't see a reason to ban someone, since combat logging can be prevented in game. If people try it, they'll just die, so what's the big deal. You get their loot, and they die for combat logging. I'm pretty sure the game can also tell the difference between force closing and internet loss, but if it becomes an issue, just do the same thing for internet loss. The chances for disconnecting during combat are very,very slim. Edit: Mainly, it would hurt new players who have grown their dayz facial hair yet.

What?.... Wait... WAT? Weren't we all noobs at some point with veterans feasting on our misery? The noobs should be grateful there's no l86 thermal or as50s to blow your liver out as you walk through Cherno. My god that's one of the main features of DayZ. Learning to survive!