Xucphra

Not everyone is meant to be a tester, nor does every gamer intend to be one. The point I'm trying to make is that, as others have said, gamers don't necessarily know what's best for them. A very large number of DayZ players are going to get bored with the game before it ever reaches its final version. The dedicated players will be here no matter what, and stay throughout the whole development process. But many more people will get burned out, bored, disinterested or dissatisfied because they thought they knew what they wanted and didn't get it. It's really easy to put the problem off, saying the buyer is at fault for not listening or being ignorant. I'm just suggesting that finding scapegoats in other people's poor decisions doesn't make much sense. Decisions should be made based on what's best for everyone involved.

Although that is true, you could also argue that the responsibility isn't wholly given to the buyer in this pre-release scenario. The devs knew they released an alpha, and I'll bet they thought a lot about how an alpha release of this sort can affect the game in the long run. Given the popularity of the mod and the large following this game has, it's safe to assume the devs knew it would sell pretty well. Even with the disclaimers and the rather reasonable desire to let players get involved in the development, the fact is they're presenting an unfinished product for sale. I don't necessarily disagree with their model, but I wouldn't say they should be free of blame when you look at how this will influence the final product. Consumers are stupid. Just look at how well a silly game like goat simulator can sell on steam despite being littered with bugs and lacking in content. Someone in charge of DayZ had to know that a lot of dumb people would buy into the alpha without understanding what they were really getting into. Maybe, but caving in might not have been the right decision. As I said, consumers can be stupid. I don't condone the whiny people who claim they didn't get what they paid for, but I still think it may have been better for the game if the impatient folk were ignored in favor of a better release. Some people may not consider the alpha the real release by definition, but even when the full game is finalized we'll never make it back to that moment we burned the day DayZ was first available on steam.

I've done that sort of thing before, it's a lot of fun to try and enjoy DayZ in somewhat abnormal ways. It's really interesting to see how different people approach sandbox style games.

Could you link to an official statement from somewhere?

I like the idea, good post.

I am of the opinion that your opinion is an opinion.

It's a gaming channel advertisement.

Beat me to it, heh I'm in favor of more revolvers. I would like a 44. so I can reenact Dirty Harry scenes.

I don't believe you can. Anything you need to know can be recorded or discovered by observation.

I can't really come up with a defense for that one, it is pretty silly. He said "How many zombies have you met in real life?" as a point against the idea that doors should have hinges that pivot in one direction simply because that's how they work in real life. It's really an argument about why we shouldn't break the boundaries of realism just because we can.

You're not listening to people's responses. Drawing blood from a person drains their blood amount. When the blood amount hits zero they die. The guy you drained blood from did not have enough blood to give you, so you drained what he had left and he died from it.

If we're going to use that logic, we might as well let survivors sprout wings and fly because running everywhere is tedious.

The silencer won't look very nice if you're firing regular ammo out of it.

I agree with you, but that's just how things end up. The best you can do is choose servers you like and avoid the ones you don't.

I found one too, not sure what it does. It's possible the item is in the game but it they haven't implemented its use yet.