Bettik

The PvP as a fundamental aspect of the game isn't the problem. The players choosing to go bandit aren't the problem. The problem is that this isn't a game, it's an experiment. And so far, the results of the experiment are that given this particular zombie apocalypse scenario, everyone will ultimately become a "bandit". Day Z attempts to put people in a world of anarchy (no law, no direction), say "go", and see what happens. No, the real problem here is that as hard as it tries to present you with a "realistic" world, it doesn't really come close. Sure, it comes closer than anything we've ever seen before, but everything is still confined to the strict mathematical procedures that generate it. Specifically, in real life, nothing "re-spawns", and nothing is so predictable as all the procedurally generated content in the game. Solution? All the content generated by the game needs to be far far less predictable. The whole concept of things respawning needs a serious overhaul to make it less obvious. And finally, and perhaps most importantly, people need something to "DO". Either make survival more of an ever-present threat, or embrace the fact that people get to the point of surviving comfortably within hours of playing the game and give them something else to concentrate on.

So, first of all, I think this is a pretty fantastic experiment. It's both entertaining and somewhat revealing about human nature. When I say that, however, I don't mean so much about the moral ambiguity that ends up surrounding murder. Mostly, I think this survival simulation ends up putting a microscope on the real crux of human society. It all comes down to the haves versus the have nots. In the case of Day Z, it's become very apparent that the haves are those with vehicles and everyone else are the have nots. They are the "1%", so to speak. Now, I've heard that the longer term goals planned for the standalone include expanding upon fortifications with the possibility for people to create truly fortified camps/bases. I can see how that gives people something to aspire to and something more to do than just "stay alive". However, with servers that can support 50, 100, 200 players, and such limited spawns of vehicles (that will never respawn unless destroyed), it begs the question: what, then, are the long term goals for vehicles? It's currently very easy to "vehicle horde", as many have pointed out in these forums. With the vastness of the map as it is (especially when on foot), the possibility of stumbling upon a player camp with vehicles is about as good as winning the lottery. I think it's rather clear that the static nature of vehicles needs to be re-evaluted. While I don't have the answer, I'm sure there is one.

Honestly, I think you're on to something. Perhaps the solution is simply to make fuel drastically more scarce. If fuel is more scarce, then vehicles have far less value. It wouldn't be popular AT ALL, but that's only because everyone has already been given their candy, and no one would be happy with it being taken away like this. Furthermore, the storage capacity of vehicles should also be drastically reduced. Something along these lines needs to be done. The experiment can only claim "reality" as long as things are consistent. As it stands, everything respawns in predictable areas leading to saturation of items -- mostly for the haves rather than the have nots because they have access to quick transportation that comes with a warehouse-sized storage locker built in. The only finite resource in this world are the vehicles. Everything else spawns over and over again no matter what -- from zeds, to weapons, to ammo, to medical supplies. Vehicles are the only things that don't, and that doesn't "make sense". The value of vehicles needs to be reduced in that they are really only effective for fast travel and that they only last for a limited time (fuel scarcity). Otherwise, there will never be an effective opportunity for vehicles to change hands. In a situation where anyone can just jump ship and try another server, I doubt you'll ever see many servers get a very large consistent population. Ultimately, everyone will continue to server hop until they find unclaimed vehicles.

Other than the obvious melee weapons, I'd say the double barrel is the worst.

M1911 is easily the most useful weapon in the game right now. It's relatively quiet, one-shots zombies, and due to a bug it essentially has infinite ammo which frees up inventory space. I like my M9 SD for the more covert operations, but the M1911 is my "every day" weapon of choice. Even when the unlimited ammo bug is fixed, the ammo is still more common than any other type in the game. I can't see any other side arm trumping the M1911 other than the M9 SD, to be honest. And like I said, even then, the M9 SD is really more for "end game" special situations.

I lol'd.

I'd like to see the game continue with Bohemia Interactive's engine. Although it's consistently buggy, ArmA engines always strive for and achieve more realistic ballistics and sounds than any other games out there. For Rocket and his tiny team to try and duplicate that in something new would be a pipe dream. The biggest draw, at least for me, with this game is that it continues to stay true to the idea of realism in all aspects--not just the idea that players and their goals are the driving force behind the game, but also the look and feel of it all. Hopefully, with the announcement of War Z, Bohemia will now shit rather than get off the pot, as it were, and go beyond just "supporting" Rocket. They need to invest in the future of this project now!