The OCD

If you overcame all of the technical issues with the client, simplified controls etc. you would still have a major issue. Servers. What's the server capacity for a console match of BF3, 24v24? This is the biggest limiting factor. The reason PC gamers can play together in larger quantities is because of dedicated servers. Any idea what the difference between a "listen" server and a "dedicated" server is? A listen server is when one of the players is hosting while playing the game, so everyone else in the game connects to the "most stable" connection from all of the players. A dedicated server is just what it sounds like: a separate PC is setup to host, while all the other players connect to it without having to connect to each other in a sense. All of the servers running DayZ are dedicated servers that people pay for, and can support anywhere from 50-100 players concurrently. Most if not all console games use the Listen server method because it's exponentially cheaper when the people who already bought your game are hosting for you for free basically, at the cost of reduced players in a game. You CAN setup dedicated servers for the 360, but you have to wade through Microsoft's shit to do it. They charge you a licensing fee out the ass, and you have to use specific servers to host content with that are approved and validated by Microsoft. Then you have to pay the exorbitant monthly fees associated with that, since there are only a handful of providers opposed to the PC server market. This is the biggest reason why DayZ will not be coming to consoles any time in the next 5 years.

You are directly insinuating that this is what this thread is about and for, promoting "casual" play. Which it isn't. It's a means to counter broken game mechanics until they are fixed, ie glitchy as fuck zombies that new players don't know how to exploit to avoid. At what cost? Is your scale literally black and white? If it doesn't make it harder, it can't be a good thing? Most people aren't for this type of gameplay; you are in the minority in this respect. Maybe have hardcore servers where you get 1 shot by zombies, while spawning with absolutely nothing in the middle of town with hundreds of zombies already aggro when you spawn. Sounds like your perfect game. I'm not sure if you know what defend means, but running away is not a way to defend yourself; It is a way to avoid confrontation. Finding a weapon sometimes is easier said than done when you're being chased into residential areas that only have 1 entrance and 1 exit. Not to mention, that again, zombies are extremely buggy inside buildings, can hit through walls etc. Still haven't seen a valid argument. People are saying it would be easier or less realistic, but this game is in Alpha. This is when you try new things and test them out and get feedback. I bet if you asked newer players what the most annoying part of this game is when starting out, 9/10 you'd get an answer that has something to do with zombie aggro and it being unavoidable in small coastal towns.

Yes, something like this would fit the task nicely. Not only does it fit the "lore" *shudder*, but it is also temporarily highly functional. /signed to 2x4 or something similar

So why do you spawn with anything? You're right, we should spawn completely naked without the ability to move. Only through trial and error should we eventually be able to learn how to crawl. At some point around the 60hour mark, we might be able to stand on our legs, and we could pick out simple objects against the harsh background. But, it has already been 2 days since we spawned, so we're probably close to death from dehydration, but we don't know how to drink liquids without drowning. Seriously, stop with the fucking troll comments and have some real feedback other than "CAREBEAR LOL NOOB". Some people like wasting literally hours of their lives trying to figure out how things work; most people don't. The type of person who enjoys figuring things out is called a rational, and statistically makes up less than 1% of the entire world's population. I'm a rational, and i've been playing for almost a month, so i'm not "crying" for my own benefit. I've paid my unnecessary dues to the zombie underlords, and I just think this is an aspect that wasn't very well thought out. To reiterate: I just think that it is absolutely ridiculous that we have no way to defend ourselves on spawning. Not because it's hard, but because it's fucking annoying to be chased by zombies that glitch through walls and one shot you from 12k health to death by breaking your legs. I don't think that it's unreasonable to spawn with SOMETHING to deter hostiles with. Otherwise, I think we should literally spawn with nothing. No pack, no bandage, no flashlight. Trolls will be trolls I guess...

You are not a new player. New players don't know that zombies will walk inside buildings, nor do they know how to equip hatchets right off the bat. It doesn't matter if DayZ is just a mod, it still needs to be user friendly to an extent. Making players basically just meatbags until they find gear is not user friendly. Any argument up to this point can be completely negated by the fact that you are all suggesting mechanics that you had to figure it out by numerous trial and error. I'm not opposed to figuring things out for yourself, but it is ridiculous that you are 100% COMPLETELY HARMLESS when you spawn.

So if you're just gonna troll without giving some semblance of an informed response or try to have a civil tongue, i'm not even gonna respond to you. If you want to flame without justifying your case, you can go circlejerk with the bandits. That being said, "realistic" "hard" "cruel" or not, you need some way to defend yourself initially. You wash up on a beach with nothing, you still have your hands and feet don't you? If you could punch and kick, i'd be completely fine with starting naked, but you can't. It's bad design to allow players and zombies alike to slaughter an unarmed noob. I'm always welcome to constructive feedback; trolls need not post.

I've read this thread in its entirety and completely agree with the idea behind private servers pretty much eliminating the hacker issue. The reason EVE's cluster works as well as it does is mainly due to the number of concurrent users, which usually maxes out at 50k-60k and is usually around 20k-30k. DayZ on the other hand is currently at what, at minimum 100k+ players concurrently? Not only would we need a MASSIVE world(i'm talking millions of square miles opposed to the current 225k Chernarus), there would have to be some way to manage the looting system dynamically that's an alternative to "looting" zombies that you kill for the bulk of your gear. Let's face it; one of the most unique aspects of DayZ in its current form is the ability to loot buildings that have dynamically generated loot. If everyone started in the starter areas, the over-saturation of players:loot areas would be insane. This is one of the main reasons why I don't think DayZ should ever consider a massive playable landscape/MMO type scenario with the current mechanics. That being said, I honestly wouldn't be opposed to 1k-2k players on a map(maybe 25x the size of Chernarus) with actual cities that span for miles and underground subway systems/bunkers etc. that offer persistent building fortification or what have you. But if it were to be a F2P game with an item shop, the only items I'd want to see would be "pay for convenience" opposed to "pay to win". Pay to win games ultimately end in a massive loss of playerbase because people can drop $20 and negate hundreds of hours of playing the game, which is demotivating to say the least to legit players who don't want to spend money on the game. Alternatively, you'd be able to carry an additional 8 pack backpack or something like that, or have hip holsters so you can carry an additional pistol or something similar. Sol made a good point about the character clothing aspect; people will pay out the ass to look as unique as possible. With all of that being said, it would be a completely different game at that point. For the short term, I truly believe that private servers with some sort of automatic admin logging(admins' "admin" actions are reported to a central server to hopefully negate admin abuse, whilst giving admins a better tool-set to deal with scripters and server management as a whole) is the best solution to deal with the various issues we have right now.