Disgraced

Nope. Just checked the download site.

Hopefully youre not trolling. Doing that will have the whole server yelling at you as it will go out over the global channel. Unbind that caps lock. I bound a key to use the direct communication channel,but it mostly doesn't work Ending a patch to the Arma II base game. L

I think that Syrasa is just using the term "PM" interchangeably with email (most people take PM to mean "use the message board's internal private messaging system"). L (being Capt Obvious)

Waiting for Server Response is inevitable. I believe that the point here, though, was that if you wait for a very long time that first time when you are supposed to get the gender dialog, it might not show up again. L

It's a aver sided setting. Certain features can be turned off. If the server says something like advanced or hardcore, then you might: Not see nameplates Not get cross hairs Not be able to go third person These servers are actually better places to play, in my opinion. Player killers use these tools to more easily "hunt" you (ie they can spot you through terrain very far off). L

Hang nail/ ingrown nail: I noticed that there are no nail clippers in game. These characters could get some wicked hang nails without proper grooming. Choking: we eat so fast. There should be a chance to choke and die if someone isn't around to Heimlich, kind of like transfusions require another player. You could make it so people who have murdered other players will suddenly flash back on their murderous life when eating and be more likely to choke.

You're creeping through the brush... Scared, gripping your pistol and suddenly understanding why the grips have that checked finish, when you hear a twig snap... quietly, but it's there... You freeze. There's a figure there, through the branches... It's vaguely human, but... so are THEY. You slowly concentrate to keep your breath from tearing in and out of your lungs so it can be heard for a mile in every direction. The figure stops, looking around, at a crouch, not unlike you. You take a chance and clear your throat. Hardly a whisper of sound, but your eyes lock, you and this stranger, and they are living eyes. Not the rotted eyes of the dead. You breathe a sigh of relief, but the other person raises a gun. A much larger and dangerous weapon than yours. You panic, and go to ground, then harshly whisper, "Don't shoot. I don't want to fight you." "Ok," your unknown assailant slips out, "Just keep those hands where I can see them..." And so it goes. Or WOULD go, if we had a little more at our disposal, mechanically. I think that, in real life, there are those nigh invisible cues and tells that let us know (even perhaps falsely(!)) that another party is friendly, or hostile. What I would propose is that there be a player initiated flag on each character to reflect demeanor. It could be as simple as 'friendly', 'neutral' and 'hostile'. No, this won't help with snipers, but that's the realism of this mod, right? So here's how it would work. You come upon someone, say within 10 meters, you can read their flag, if you can see them. It says hostile. They look it. They are consciously walking around projecting the aura of 'kill or be killed'. Likewise with neutral or friendly. How is this different than bandit skins, you say? Firstly, the perception distance. You cannot tell through a sniper scope, or binoculars, what that intention flag is on another player. Remember, it's small cues from close up observation. So the real mechanic here is that you have to switch the flag to HOSTILE to attack someone. So there's that moment when the other party might suddenly realize that you are reaching for a gun, or looking around for witnesses, or slipping into an ambush position behind you. The point is, some will miss the flag switching out. They aren't watching for it. But those of us who are have that split second to react, go hostile, and return fire. So that gives a mechanic with many options. Walk around with your hostile flag and people will know. Shoot on site and all that. But you could be more subtle. Use the neutral or friendly flag to talk it up a little. Put the other party off his or her guard. Then, when they aren't paying attention, swap to hostile and take a bead on their head..... Yes, no? L

Except that this might be easier to build in, since it's apparently a basic function of arma to not holster a pistol... Although I believe I've read that other mods do it. I think this has more implications, but bolstering a pistol would be helpful.

Really? I see logic behind it, and very clearly. We judge people all the time by the image that they project. This would simulate that. I think it fits exactly into the vision for this mod. You still never know what a person will do. You can still give an appearance or projection as you please. You can still just kill at a distance. You can still try to fake people out, but it gives them a simulation of the reality of reading the change in a person's demeanor in the fraction of a second that they decide to drop the façade and let you have it. I think it's a good suggestion. L

Wha? OK, so do you like the idea or not? I'm trying to get the attention of rocket or the devs here to get their opinions, not snarky remarks about my delivery. Thanks, though.

I actually try to install the dayz files into an @dayz/addons directory in BOTH the arma2 AND the Operation Arrowhead directories. 1. You have to EXTRACT the rar files into these directories, not copy them in. 2. the addons directory parallel to the @dayz directory is built into the game, it's not your fault. 3. You have to start BOTH versions, in order, before installing the dayz files. Or so I've heard. 4. When you click 'play' in Steam, on OPERATION ARROWHEAD, not the original game, you have to select the last option, Launch Combined Operations. 5. You need to either use the method of launching the game, and going into expansions to activate it OR put the -mod=dayz option into the launch options in steam for operation arrowhead to get it to work. Direct X 9 and other problems may be beyond the vagaries of getting this mod working and start to engender questions like "Does your computer work with other D9 games?" L

I chose to use more than two sentences. You could have explained in more than one word to make a cogent case in the negative, but instead you chose to say nothing salient. This would allow people who want to play kill or be killed to do so, while those who want to interact more or have a role playing style atmosphere to indulge that without harming (in fact, I think adding to), the psychological component of this mod. But we all have our opinions, don't we... they're like... something... hmmmm.... L

I think most of the people like you that blather on about gameplay and what Rocket should do totally misunderstand the concept of "anti-game". He is not making a game at all. Or at least something that is not like any game that is currently popular with the masses. He is not here to cater to what you desire' date=' but he is here to make you want the things you don't desire. The one-time gender choice is perfectly "anti-game". The only problem I see is that some IRL women might have gotten bugged out of the choice. Something I see being rectified. Think outside of the... [/quote'] Would you support rocket if he decided that when you first made a character you had to choose whether you had an M9 or a G17 as your sidearm and you would be stuck with that weapon for the rest of time? Would you support him if you had to choose whether your movement speed was run or walk, with all the advantages and disadvantages associated, permanently for all characters? Would you support rocket if your maximum health was randomly determined for your account and fixed forever for all your characters, so that some people would be juggernaughts and some unlucky few made of thin paper? For a start, such decisions make no sense in the context of the world, but you could easily dream up some plausible decisions - such as, for instance, choosing whether to be a fast-but-light character with reduced carrying capacity but improved speed or a heavy-duty character who can carry more but moves slower - but forcing you to stick with that forever, never giving the option to try the other, would not be good design. It would be terrible design. If you're trying to say that rocket's objective is to design something that is terrible, then it is his prerogative to do so, and I'd predict that as he steadily makes the game more terrible less and less people will actually want to play it; but I don't believe that's what he set out to do. I believe that rocket wants to make a game that is fun but harsh, addictive but challenging as hell; an anti-game in the sense that it eschews the usual notions of a learning curve and balanced gameplay to throw you right into the thick of things and forces you to deal with it or die, without holding your hand and walking you through your first time with baby steps. I do not believe that he wants to make an anti-game in the sense that he wants to make something nobody would enjoy playing. If he does, then, well, that's a terrible idea, and this is me saying so, and I'll play the game for as long as it's entertaining and give up when it no longer is. But I reject your idea that this is not a game. It is a game. It is described as a game and played like a game; the purpose is for people to play it. It is not a game with stereotypical mainstream appeal, because it deliberately rejects some things that would normally be considered good game design in order to create a very different experience. That still does not make it a good idea to reject ALL things considered good design, and rocket doesn't; he still optimises his code and fixes bugs, tries to ensure that what we have is something we can actually play. Then again we return to the question of why I don't have a model my own appearance and have the gameplay adjusted based on my own personal attributes when I "create a character" to play this game' date=' why I don't only get one go at it, and why everyone runs around as pretty much gung-ho arse-kicking motherfuckers when, in all likelihood, they'd crap themselves and die fast in an actual zombie apocalypse. We're not playing ourselves. Nobody is ever going to really be playing themselves in this game. There is nothing you can do to it to make killing have the same impact it ought to, to make death something as feared as it should be, to make people react as they really would to this threat and still have a game that anyone will actually want to play. At the end of the day, the very way that it is presented is that you get a character, you try and do as well as you can, and when that character dies you get a new one; the character is not you. [/quote'] Cut it out, your long winded arguments are facetious. Quit trying to equate other decisions with this one. Weapons are not on the table. This was the decision made here. Why are you so passionate about people being able to switch back and forth? You keep arguing that people should be able to play the other gender from what they are sitting in their chair, but they CAN DO THAT. You want to have it a changeable flag from time to time. It's not. I haven't seen one reaction post from rocket in here saying, "You know what, Carcer? I hear your pleas and that's a good way to think about it. I've changed my mind." You are beating and beating and beating and beating and beating a dead horse. L

I didn't say any of those things in the post you are responding to. I clearly stated that what you said it fine, but the devs chose a different route, with a purpose. Please, don't pull the bs prejudice card here. It's just... so off. I could tell you lots of things, about my real life that would probably defuse your obvious picture of me as some kind of stuck-in-the-50s redneck or whatever. Trust me, I've deal with more gender issues that you do, on a daily basis. PLease get off your high horse about gender switched players. Guess what?? THEY CAN PLAY A FEMALE IF MALE OR A MALE IF FEMALE. THAT"S ALREADY POSSIBLE. This is not about ANY of that. It's about people trying to reason the dev team on THIS game out of a decision by citing what OTHER games did or would do. That's a useless argument, here. L

Incorrect. It's rocket's anti-game. I suggest you read up on what he's trying to do. When rocket described it as an anti-game he was talking about the lack of balance and the challenge (unless my interpretation was horribly flawed somehow). No' date=' DayZ isn't supposed to be a "balanced game"; it's supposed to be difficult and unforgiving and harsh. I understand that and I think it's cool. I'm not asking for a game where the zombies arbitrarily scale to my character level, and I'm perfectly happy with a world where I will probably die frequently and frustratingly because some arsehole wants my beans or I just didn't find enough ammo; it makes managing to survive all the more rewarding an accomplishment. Those aren't things that I'm contending and they're what the whole anti-game thing is about. What I am challenging is the idea that people should be prevented from, y'know, roleplaying. Being yourself isn't roleplaying. If a man wants to play a female character or a woman wants to play a male character for one life, that shouldn't be a problem; they shouldn't be discouraged from doing so, they shouldn't be denied that opportunity based on an arbitrary binary choice they get to make once. That's not difficulty or challenge, or a "hard choice", as some people have said; it's just a "fuck you". A hard choice is deciding whether or not to take the extra magazine or the extra food, knowing you're possibly choosing between starving to death or being eaten by zombies, and that's something that affects you for all of one character, one life. Being forced to make a choice which denies you the option to do something differently in the game for the rest of time is not a hard choice in the spirit of the game; it's just a completely arbitrary one. It is bad design, even when you accept the idea that the gameplay should be harsh and unbalanced. The very fact that the choice is not even something which makes a gameplay difference (or at least, once it's all implemented fully and working, [b']shouldn't make a difference) is what makes the lock even more perplexing, because it cannot be a decision that was rooted in consideration of gameplay or difficulty. Rocket is already trying to move away from a system where appearance was dictated by earlier actions and give the players more customisability in how they look; it seems a massive step backwards from this to then introduce a new system even more rigid than the one he just discarded. The only reasons I can see for it are rooted in prejudice or the misguided notion that DayZ will become a world where the characters of the players ARE the players and behave exactly as the players really would in their situation, and that's simply never going to even be close to a reality. There must be something about sleep deprivation that just inspires me to yak on endlessly, it seems. And.... The dev team knows all of this and still made the decision to do it their way. Maybe they want the players to identify with their onscreen character and push people away from the gender switched aspects of role playing.... L

From what I recall, there are server logs and tools to do everything that an admin needs to do from an admin console without logging in. Listen, there are tons of admins who DO play by the rules. I doubt that snippy posts about taking one's ball home will change the rules. If would-be admins intelligently approach the dev team through proper channels and/or "vote with their feet", I'm sure they would look at the problem. Until then, to me, they get what they signed up for. I couldn't do it and I wouldn't do it, but posting snarky things in the forums just makes them look like jerks who want entitlements beyond the other players. L

Don't know if you've perished it, but theres an 80 page thread back and frothing this: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=3693

I can't disagree with you more sir, the developers are making games -for - the customers, to please them, to bring in revenue. For instance, Bioware made the call on Mass Effect 3's ending. However because it displeased their customers, they are releasing free DLC to expand and improve the ending. Dragon Age 2 was their call as well, and with DA3 they are listening completely to customer feedback, because, despite it being "their call" to make DA2 the way it was, it was a sensational flop because their calls did not match the expectations of the majorady. I work in game design kind sir. Our job is not to make what we want, our job is to bring to life something to please the customers, nothing more, nothing less. Developers vision does factor in, and that passion is what makes great games, however, the wishes of the majorady, especially on something so minor as aesthetics should be the decision of the player. And in every single other game on the market, it is. You just don't get this "game". I wonder if you ever will? It's not the end of the world, and it's not an insult or anything, but you can get a traditional experience in a thousand places. These kinds of things are a hallmark of how this game works. You are not provoking even a scintilla of thought toward change by bringing up that you can change other bits of skin or that these are options in other games. When I am frustrated or I don't like this game, I gtfo. I come back if I want to, if i want to. No amount of navel gazing and comparison to game x or pleas to appeal to the customer will change how it works. Thats on purpose. Rocket/"the dev team" seem pretty adamant that gender should reflect one's real life gender. It's not gonna change because it's that way in another game, afaict. L

Some of us appear to have either gotten stuck at 12 years old, or are unable to accept that the desire of the game builder to get you to use your real life gender in this game trumps the staid desire to swap "genders" as if it was a hat. L

Have you seen this post by the developer in this very thread? 1. Go to bathroom 2. Check whether you have a penis or a vagina 3. Select gender in game according to results 4. If you have a gender identity disorder, choose whichever one you feel most.