DieBrotmafia

Its already in Rockets mind if DayZ sells well. Keep in mind though: The DayZ for consoles won't be the DayZ you expect looking at the PC version. It will be a more casual version. Rocket already stated something like this in an interview. Some limitations: Instead of 100-200 players / server in the standalone you'll get 24 or 32 maximum. Because of this AND the console limitations, map size will be decreased. I'm very sceptic about consoles handling chernarus. And playing with 20 players on Chernarus is too little to be fun, you'll walk around for hours not meeting other players. So the map size has to decrease. You can even see that in Battlefield 3 and there the maps aren't close to as big as Chernarus, still they got significantly smaller on consoles. The controls are another thing and the overall "casual" community. So the game won't be the same anyway. I don't care if a whole new team will port it from pc to consoles and the resources spend on the pc versions don't get affected at all.

Was also my opinion. But according to some interviews, people can drive with a boat or use some other ways to get from one island to the next with their same character. So if a new island is released that is better suited for looting or some stage of the game, you have a disadvantage compared to the players that can go there. Or your clan decides to take a short trip there, you'll then stand there... If everyone would get a new character on the new maps anyway it doesn't matter as much. But this is just a minor thing imo.

Locking it down was my only concern, I hope consoles will kept seperate from the whole pc version as Rocket mentioned. What I wonder is, couple years ago before all of this DLC stuff, companies like Blizzard made patches for games that were a decade old. Games got supported for years without any additional cost. Think about Counterstrike 1.6 or Counterstrike Source wanting money for additional maps. Usually they made huge updates with a new engine or expansion packs after a few years with heaps of new content and single player missions. They still made patches for the games for years, what was the reason for their great reputation so they could sell the next games 5 years from now. Whats now happening in the industry is small packages getting sold with little content that are still bought because otherwise you aren't "in" and they "only" cost 10$. But over time it adds up. Again, I have no problem with the money thing, I have a problem with restricting great community contributions only so the company can sell their shoddy DLCs better that otherwise no one would buy. I don't even want to paraphrase it like this. I HOPE that Rocket won't do this and don't know what he will do. I simply don't know, I rather think Rocket is a good guy. But because I don't know him as a person I just wanted to give my opinion in case he has this thought. Likely that he doesn't, he didn't mention it specifically at least. Nah, Rocket is doing awesome. He is with a game studio now. Thats the reason I worry, lots of good people get changed by money. Would you restrict user-made content if you could make millions that way? Not implying he IS, I'm just worried he could get tempted by this hence the whole thread. cfnz is right there is a lot of conclusion jumping going on, but better to give some input right now rather then later. Likely its all not meant the way it looks like in the interview, I'm sure Rocket will clarify. But only if we get him to read it.

As lots of people still don't get it: It doesn't matter if he produces maps and we can pay for them. After all, no one is forced to buy them. Everything allright. It does matter if he is tempted to make the game less modable so his maps don't have to compete with free user-created high quality content. Which will overall make for much less high-quality content. If he doesn't restrict the community in order to make more money, everything is fine. Think about the Arma 2 developers would've decided to not make their game modable. In this case they could sell some mods they did themselves caused by the lack of free content. More money for them, tempting. But there would not be hundreds of great community-made mods where the quality sometimes exceeds anything the developers could do. We would not have DayZ in the first place. This is what worries me, not if I pay 10$ more or less. With development kits or money for maps comes a huge temptation of restricting a game in order to have less quality competition. If you promise that all content will be free, no matter how much you charge for the initial product, you have no temptation to cripple the game. I'd rather pay 60$ instead of 30$ and then 10$ for an additional map, even if the latter were to be cheaper.

You don't even comprehend what the point is. I don't care about money. I wrote it in the thread, I would gladly pay 60$ for the game if I like it. I don't like the principle of paying for further content especially if it restricts moddability or seperates the community. And you certainly can't brag about a Minecraft model, in this case you should be honest and call it Activision model. Then he shouldn't claim Minecraft model if its not. No question bout that. Makes it even more important for us to maybe influence it in the better direction.

Rocket will make millions anyway. Think about just 20$ per alpha version and likely 500.000 people buy immediately. Thats 10 Million, obviously there are also costs involved. But he will make money anyway. What I have a problem is making a game less able to mod and thus decreasing the user experience and quality of the game in order to make money. If he makes a great game and charges money, everyone wins. If he restricts user-created content so he doesn't have competition with his own money-making additional content, he wins but the users lose out. I won't say it is like that, its just something I wonder about. Maybe Rocket indeed has in mind to make people able to mod it in the future and his own maps are just additional. A statement of him specifically on this would be cool. A sceptic person could otherwise think he sacrifices user experience in order to make more money. Looking at the hate of people on lots of these schemes in the past years one should be really careful with statements like this, as one could think the reason for not making people able to mod it goes beyond the simple hacking issue.

Rocket in his new interviews stated it will be on Arma 2.5, meaning likely based on Arma 2 engine but modified to some degree. Less complex ragdolls compared to RV4 as an example.

Rumors are only very rarely at helicopter crash sites

Dressing like a zombie, not getting detected by the zombies if you walk very slowly and then drawing your gun would be amazing.

I estimate its kinda hard to hit someone at 400 meter distance with an Enfield... Even with the mouse you sometimes fiddle around between 1 or 2 pixels, I estimate this isn't easy with a controller.

Likely a hacker... Can you fly deeper then that? In that case I would love to be a bird for a day or so... Flying around, looking at everything, annoying players.

If they follow the minecraft model everything is fine. Best is if they outsource or use a different team for the console version once the pc version is stable. I don't think its that unrealistic. Lets say an extra team of ten people works for a year on the console version, would be ~ 500.000$ or so in expenses. If this makes PC gamers happy because the PC version gets updated as frequently, it may increase the reputation of DayZ. This can easily make a difference between a million sales or two million on the consoles if theres not as much hate from the community. If the guys at bohemia have a brain they won't dumb down the pc version and waste the potential of building an awesome reputation in an entirely new market. IMO nowadays you get computers cheaper then ever before. My 4 year old pc can run DayZ with everything on high except some settings that just use performance and do little visually, namely VSync, AA, object details (is on middle) and these strange effects if you move... You can get a used PC like that for 150$ on ebay. This will also run Battlefield 3 just fine, not maxed out obviouly. Still better compared to the consoles. Once cheap new consoles come out (XBox 720) the price-ratio from pc to consles might change again, but currently, PC wins IMO.

Go back to left 4 dead if you want jumping around and easy but controls. DayZ is like Arma a simulator, not Quake 3. Not having full control over the character / being somewhat clumsy is part of the realism and adds to the atmosphere. Hopping around giving headshots is not. I could not imagine this game with any other engine. I have to admit I didn't play Arma 2 before DayZ. I did play the old Arma back then and really liked the simulation kind of game though. As already stated, huge map size, real time, perfect weather effects and pitch black nights. Really feeling lost in the woods. The Arma engine is amazing and the graphics look truly wonderful and close to photorealism at some places (the landscapes) and a bit outdated at other places (cities). All in all its the best engine one could currently use for a game like DayZ, maybe a heavily modified Battlefield 3 engine would do better.

What are you talking about? Mid-range video card goes around 120-160 bucks. I don't like going off-topic and derailing this thread but take a look at this just as an example: 600$ gaming build If you want something really good, pay another 100-150$ for the graphics card and 100-150$ more for the cpu, then you're at 800-900$. You then got a HD 7870 and an i5-3570K. You won't get much more performance even if you pay 3 times the price. and look a bit around here: http://www.tomshardw...m/forum-13.html

You dun goofed. I wouldn't count the monitor as you buy that only once really. My 4 year old computer that I paid ~ 600$ back then can run everything maxed out, except no AA, VSync, post process effects and object details on middle as these 4 make visually close to no difference @ 1920x1200 with decent frames.

I would really dislike if there is still a lot of resources going into this mod after the standalone is released. I mean a bit of work is allright, but everything that will be done on the mod could've been used to further improve the standalone.

This pc isn't good for its price. No one needs 16 gigs of ram. AMD processor, wouldn't do it. 120$ graphics card. Nope, don't do it. Will it still run, of course. I got an old core2duo 2.5ghz clocked at 3.6 ghz with a 15$ fan, Radeon HD4850 and 4 gigs of ram and everything runs allright on the highest settings at 1920x1200. I disabled AA, V-Sinc and post-process effects, object details is at middle. These things don't do too much, the game looks at least 80-90% as good as it can and it runs with decent frames. My rig is already 4 years old and I upgraded it for ~ 550$ back then. I'm not a fan of buying something one can't afford, maybe houses or cars but not a computer. Seriously. But I'm not your dad. Just keep in mind that on most rigs that you don't build yourself there is some stuff that you could get cheaper. Or some bottleneck that you could switch out if you build it yourself so everything runs at the same pace. Most of these prebuild-pcs have some cheap china motherboard or power supply that you can't overclock and so on... Thats the main reason I'd be careful of these bestbuy deals. If you absolutely need a pc right now and can't afford it, go to your bank, get a cheap credit, visit something like tomshardware forum, let these guys tell you which parts to buy and then you'll likely have a better deal.

60$

Awesome to read all of this. Can't wait for standalone to be released.

How do you know?

If I think about Rocket either spending 4 weeks to fiddle around with a mod where he can't access the engine, trying to find complicated solutions to problems that could be solved far easier with the standalone... Instead of releasing the standalone 4 weeks earlier. I'd choose getting the standalone sooner, the mod will die anyway. I hope rocket doesn't use too many resources on the mod. Some updates on how its going with the standalone would be cool though.

I think you're right about your message that currently, progress isn't made that fast. I think there are some flaws in your logic though: 1) We don't know what Rocket currently does, how much of his time is spend on the standalone vs the mod itself. So it may be there is actual progress made, just not regarding our mod. 2) We know Rocket will lead the whole standalone thing and won't have to work alone anymore (thats what it sounds like) so this should make us somewhat optimistic regarding the future. 3) Rocket can't work on the engine level(?) concerning the mod, so fixing things here is likely much harder. 4) No one knows what Rockets plans on the mod really are, will he use it to test new features for the standalone or use it to fix bugs in a mod that will later be obselete anyway. Your message is correct, Rocket should work on improving some of the basic things first. But is it really necessary to make that same statement every day? I'm sure its been heard and repeating it over and over again won't change a thing if he doesn't even have in mind to fix some of the things. If I were Rocket I wouldn't care about the whole hacker stuff, I wouldn't care about some strange glitches (as long as enough people can play) if I knew the standalone version that can solve these bugs far easier is on the way.

I bought Arma 2 just for DayZ and its worth it. It depends on how much money you have I guess. May be we need to wait 3 months or more for DayZ Standalone to be released. It all depends on your personal situation. If you make 100$ an hour and your time is worth a lot, buy it. If buying the game means you must starve the next 2 weeks or you can't buy the standalone when its released, don't buy it. We can't judge how much 30$ is in your life.

I don't like the idea with heartbeat and such on mouseover... Its the same reason I don't play on nametag server, you can scan the bushes and suddenly you see someone you otherwise would not have seen. This isn't implemented yet, right?

IMO military gear should still be there, I actually like it the way it is know. Maybe the high grade gear could be less common, but the high occurence currently could also have something to do with duping. There should be some kind of endgame and progression in this game that one can achieve, stopping at the CZ550 would not allow that to happen.