DieBrotmafia

Beans for the honesty, glad you are banned and hope you learnt something from this. That two wrongs don't make a right.

All that needs to happen is this: - Better pathfinding - Zombies running in buildings as well Thats pretty much it, zombies would be pretty dangerous. You could even make them slightly faster compared to the player to increase the danger a lot. Thousands of slow-walking zombies simply won't happen in the next 5 years or so and it would not even be a threat anyway.

I might just start playing again.

It either were hackers teleporting close to you or you had really bad luck. Even on a 50 player server its rare to see someone on 220qm².

This is ridiculous, I'm sure they'll look at the evidence and they will be free (hopefully soon)

I think most people do it like me, the game currently is too hacker-ridden to play and there are too much bugs (duping especially) so I rather wait for the standalone to be released.

fully zoomed in its 400m, just right clicking is 300m

Arma engine is amazing. I couldn't imagine DayZ without the super-realistic huge landscapes, realistic day / night circles, weather and all that stuff... Sometimes it looks like real life. I don't see any engine that comes close in terms of realism and thats what made DayZ huge. Its only bugged because the engine is obviously not adapted to these zombies, but think about zombies and glitches being fixed. I couldn't imagine an engine that would fit better.

Whats wrong with the code?

We would be better off to just let admins ban all the hackers. Maybe 10% would be genuine people, but the rest of us could play at least.

This gonna be gud

Find a solution to combat that grass disappears in the distance, making you vulnerable even though to you it looks allright. I think Arma 2 could theoretically put you a bit under the earth looking at it from someone elses perspective.

I give you 2 hours till you all get hacked in the air or find yourself on the thunderdome... I'd heavily advise you to use your own private hive and server.

Source: http://www.rockpaper...y-z-standalone/ I thought it was supposed to follow the Minecraft model? Minecraft worked in a way that whenever you bought the game, you got all future updates and content for free. The alpha version was cheap, as the game progressed it was more expensive, rewarding people that bought early and helped testing the alpha. There was never any money involved for new content or maps. Regarding the above quote, this is not the minecraft model. I have to say I'm a bit disgusted by this. I'm willing to pay 20$ for the alpha or 60$ for the finished version, but all of this paid developement kit shit that other producers lately introduced in lots of games... It sucks. Because at the same time they introduce a no-mod policy. Look at Battlefield 3, no mods allowed. Because no one would buy the DLCs if there was free content from the community available. In the end, it makes for a worse game with less content that you need to pay more to get. This makes DayZ look somewhat weird, as it started getting big based on an engine that everyone can mod freely. The standalone will now supress this. I can understand that and I'm all for it regarding the whole hacking issue. But together with this new "information" about paying for additional content it gets a real sour taste one has to admit. And I don't see how community maps are compatible with paying for official maps, as the quality likely won't differ and no one will buy these official maps. To the guys saying you don't need to buy the maps: Yes I don't. But it will clutter the community in the folks who got access and the ones who don't. This is a step in the wrong direction. I'm all for Rocket making money and Rocket staying true to whatever concept he has in mind, not getting too influenced by what casuals want. This has nothing to do with gameplay. Edit: To clarify: I don't have a problem with paying money. I don't have a problem with paying for additional maps. I would only have a problem if user-generated content gets restricted for the sake of selling the additional maps better. I don't want to allege that this is what Rocket has planned, its just not clear from the interview. Arma 2 itself is a great example of selling DLCs while at the same time allowing the community to generate content. Battlefield 3 is an example of a company restricting great user-created content just to sell some shoddy DLCs.

There are tons of games where modding was possible, like Half Life (2), Unreal Tournament etc... with no vulnerability problem whatsoever. And there are games like Battlefield 3 that clearly have no way of creating new maps in order to sell more of their own maps. All of the problems with executing scripts etc.. could be solved in a different way through giving different people different rights so they can't execute scripts. Arma 2 wasn't build with this in mind but it would certainly be possible. Keep in mind I didn't say Rocket will never open the game up to mod it. It may very well be this is just a temporary fix to stop the hacking and later on if theres time this will be rewritten. Its just that lots of companies nowadays do it like that, even if they had the chance of allowing people to make new maps without any downsides they would not do it because otherwise they can't sell their DLCs.

I somewhere heard the idea of simply adding some finished mini-game to the whole package. Just add some puzzle game, add DayZ as a feature and now you can claim you're selling a finished game on steam.

All of this will be solved once the zombie pathing is fixed. They will run in buildings and don't run in strange zig-zag lines to you... I don't believe walking zombies can be effectively implemented in an open-world first-person shooter. It doesn't work. It could only work if the game is all about walking through tight corridors. Think about zombies only walking. You have 360° around you that you can go to. You can first observe from a distance. You can always run away from zombies. The only possible way for them to get you is if they get in a 360° circle around you and there is no way out. Think about even with a distance of only 20 meter how many zombies you would need. That would be a circumference of ~ 60 meters. If one zombies shoulder width is 60 cm, this would mean 100 zombies that stand perfectly in line next to each other. And now imagine that with 50 players, more zombies (because they don't build a perfect circle) and so on... You'll easily get > 10k zombies per server. It simply won't work and if you watch out where they're coming from there would be no threat. Currently if you get in any building, e.g. the church, zombies are no threat at all, you can just let them follow you. Only solution would be to create immense numbers of zeds, this won't happen.

He has a point though with making the whole character disappear instead of killing someone... I enjoy this kind of humour I have to say.

It would've sufficed to keep the options Yes. I have an Nvidia-gpu. (16 votes [51.61%]) Yes. I have an ATI-gpu. (13 votes [41.94%])

Where? I'm pretty sure I read something about Arma 3 rather being an evolution, not something totally new. Do you have a source?

Just wait, someone will come eventually.. I mean the map is only 200 km², eventually one of the other four players will stumble across that torso... Just kidding, log out and in again, if that doesn't help just leave your comp on and wait till you run out of water.

You want a more casual game... Safe zones... And make the game less immersive by adding stuff like trading or ranking systems. This isn't Diablo 3 or Call of Duty. I think your suggestions are fine, but they are the opposite of what DayZ on its core should be like. If you want a game like this, just play War Z if its released somewhere in the future. I'm not telling your opinion is invalid, its just a different kind of fan base that will be more attracted to Left 4 Dead or World of Warcraft compared to the survival realism Arma 2 or DayZ players.

They likely aren't aware DayZ currently is in alpha. Most people see a cool game, download it and play it and expect it to work. I study business administration and if you look at case studies, only the very minority of people that have a problem complain, e.g. look on the forum. The vast majority just leaves if they aren't satisfied. And to them DayZ is a brand that they associate a negative bugged game with because they don't know what alpha stage means. I wouldn't underestimate this. Look at the people talking bad about the glitches at gamescom, they have no clue this stuff happens in alpha. People expect it to work. So if it doesn't, at least communicate with them, tell them (at best daily) with a short update on the forum, just one sentence, what the current progress is. Its your future buyers Rocket, not just alpha testers anymore. So I think waiting for weeks with bugs, not wasting a single sentence on the current state of the game, letting people live with not being able to play for days... You can do that in a free alpha mod, but if you don't want web 3.0 negative spreading reputation, communicate so people will understand.

We understand that the what enables hacking can only be solved in the standalone. What I don't understand why Rocket can't just let people treat the symptoms at least, give admins the ability to ban and make a list of all the hackers. If someone is banned, it will be transmitted to the hive and this means global ban for at least 48 hours or until the standalone is released with a fix. Yes some innocent people will be banned, but better lose 1% of the players that will have to wait for the full version (even if its unfair) then having an unplayable game and current players going down 5% every day.

Players in 24 hours goes down rapidly. Now at 137k, probably decreasing by 5-10k daily even though new people try the game. If I were Rocket this would worry me, not because of the people that wait for the standalone and just pause. But the huge amount of people that don't read the forums, aren't as informed as we are and leave the game because they think "what is this piece of shit, I can't even play it, this company produces the most bugged games ever." These guys won't buy the full version because of that if you enrage them. I think it isn't important to cater of all the communities needs, but downgrading to a previous version so the graphical glitches disappear and giving server admins the right to ban hackers, even if this means a few good people getting banned from single servers could be the solution.