Cheers. Yes that sounds like having threads run on different cores but I could be wrong as I'm not a games programmer. Also I don't know the application architecture so its all just guess work on my part. Having said that one of the benefits of server side architecture is that you can have multiple processes rather than a single process which makes me wonder if this game architecture lends itself to that. Anyway I'm just thinking out loud really.

I wonder if DayZ uses a single server side process to do everything or whether they seperate out tasks into seperate processes. Don't suppose anyone knows? I say that because in the stream he mentions that performance is impacted by management of server side objects. It seems odd that this management would be performed by the same process as the process that serves clients. Having said that I dont know what he means by 'management of server side objects'.

They could just put a stance icon in the UI. It works well in Red Orchestra. Having said that there should be servers offering both styles. 1st person is ultimately the best for immersion in my opinion so hopefully there will be 1st person only servers.

Cause people demand them?

Its looking good. Server side loot opens a can of ....... beans, For example, will there be any logic surrounding item inflation? If the server knows that there are already two instances of AS50s on the map (either held by the current players on the map or in spawn points), will it actively not spawn anymore? Could the server admin specify the numbers of each item that can spawn on a map? Also could server admin specify spawn time for different items? For example, on a particularly evil map they could make food spawn in less numbers and less frequently. Obviously this system is also open to abuse - if server admins can specify numbers, then they could spawn a load of AS50s for friends for example.

Thats because whilst the server will remove most of the data from the client, the client will still be updated with some data albeit much less than before. For example, in the mod the client is given data (or is able to obtain it with a script) so it knows where every other player is in the map (I think) so anyone hacking the client or intercepting the data knows the same. That will now be removed and that data will be kept on the server, but the client will still have to know about the person hiding behind the wall you are walking towards so that data will also be available to client hacks. So in summary, server side architecture helps to reduce hacking, but it won't remove it completely. Thats why other methods are needed aswell.

From the first post Q: How are zombie spawns going to work? A: We're probably going to spawn all zombies + loot at the start of the mission on the server to decrease lagspikes and to remove the spawning issues we had. This also allows the potential for the whole "roving zombie" crap people keep harping on to me about (seriously, I get facebooked every day with this one request). Q: Doesn't that mean all zombies will eventually be killed? A: The zombies respawn, but it's done at a server level, not client like previously (which was a nightmare).

I like that Zombie's spawn server side. No longer will you be able to view a town from a distance and know whether or not there is another player in it. Good change for a great change in game tension.

When you install a normal game, the game runs on your computer. Its your computer doing all the calculations, all the display, all the AI, everything. All your PC resources are split between these tasks. However you can divide this workload between computers. You can leave your computer (the Client) doing the display stuff and the reacting to what you do stuff but you can move all the other AI and game calculations stuff to another computer (the Server). The result is that your computer can concentrate on displaying the game and the other computer can concentrate on running the game. As regards hacking - well to keep things simple. If the game is doing all the calculations on your computer then its easier to make it calculate things differently or do things differently because you can change things on your computer. If its on a different computer, then its a lot more difficult because you have to change things on that computer. However it cant be prevented completely because the server still sends data to the client and that data can be accessed. So for example, if the server is telling the client that there is another player hiding behind a wall infront of the player, then its possible to access that data with a cheat and tell the player (i.e. radar). Hope that helps.

Looking promising. Nice to see that survivors have retained some sense of civilization and are watering indoor plants as they pass by.

Would be nice if the rarerity of all weapons (even items) were configurable by the server admin. Maybe it is, I dont know.

Pac Man and Space Invaders were great. Later I had a Spectrum 48k too. Waiting for the game to load was always a ceremony.

What about respect for those who gave up their free time to create this mod? Have you created anything or done anything in your free time for others? Whilst there will undoubtedly be updates for the mod, the priority now has to be the Standalone game. Have some patience.

...although I dont have a problem with there being a few pre-existing underground complexes on a server. They would be fun to explore. Its just the idea of the map being littered with them that makes me feel uncomfortable. That and survivors building one when they have trouble finding a match.

I was going to start a topic on this but found there is already a thread. Rocket repeats this in a few interviews. He really likes the idea of an underground bunker, inspired somewhat by XCOM. In my opinion its the only thing so far that seems off track from his vision of the game. In a world where survival is extremely difficult, it seems odd that a group of people would be able to plan, obtain the huge amount of required resources and build an underground complex. Ridiculous infact. I understand its an idea to solve a problem, but this seems overkill imo.

This is a free mod developed by people in their free time. There is only one person in the team working on the game code (Rocket stated this in a recent interview) and no doubt he has a lot on his plate especially now that they have to set up a team to implement the standalone game and do all the media bollocks associated with the games announcement. Just take a deep breath and accept that you aren't going to get frequent updates or frequent communications at the moment. No doubt it will change. Give them a break.

Trolltastic. The removal of the AS-50 was a dead giveaway. Some good ideas there though.

Ofcourse there will be. One is a mod developed for free by people giving up their free time, the other will be a paid for game supported by a team paid to support it.

There will be bugs. Most likely a lot of them. The community will be used for QA which is not a bad idea - large cheap test team. And thats not being cynical. Releasing it in Alpha state means that defects will be found sooner rather than later and customer requirements (i.e. our desires for the game) can feed directly into the development process resulting in an end product that is for the most part exactly what we want. Also if they adopt an agile type methodology, which I suspect they will, then we'll be getting fixes\new features every few weeks. It really is a good idea if you have the right customer type. I say that because customers need to know and accept they are paying for an Alpha State game and that they need to contribute to the games development. I'm personally quite excited to see how the development of this game progresses. If its successful then other companies in the industry may adopt the same methodology.

You won't need Arma2 or Arma3 to play the standalone. You need Arma 2 Combined Operations to play the mod. The mod will continue alongside the standalone and will no doubt be a proving ground for new ideas. However it is very likely that the mod will always be plagued by hackers.

Mostly been said already but I'd like to add my 2 cents. For the standalone game I'd like to see the Zed spawn on player functionality removed. Instead I'd like to see Zeds permanently milling about urban areas and groups of Zeds having a stroll around rural areas. Perhaps even the odd lonewolf Zed in the countryside (looking for livestock) to keep you on your toes. I'd also like to see them wondering around the outskirts of an urban area. That would prevent spotters finding survivors on the basis of Zed spawn and would make snipers nervous about their position. Unpredictability is essential I think. Depends on performance though I guess.

Blimey this forum is hyper sensitive. It was just an idea. .... in other less spannertastic attracting suggestions, Dean mentioned in a Q&A that a possible answer is to give Vigalente's the means to fight back. Optimistic maybe but certainly an interesting suggestion. We shall see how its implemented.

Or have Zombies smell or in someway sense inhumanity. Maybe. Just an idea.

What about having Zombies able to smell or in someway sense inhumanity? The greater the inhumanity, the greater the desire for the blood. Not very realistic granted (lol, cause having zombies is .....). Just an idea.