Do custom servers make a good sandbox?

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

"Play it the way you want" is something that gets thrown around these forums on a daily basis.

But, doesn't allowing the server admins to set the rules, go against that ideology? How can someone play it the way they want if the server admin sets up the sandbox in a way that conflicts with his play style?

Perhaps private/custom servers could be removed from the server directory and they can advertise their IP here on the forums, so people seeking those can still get in them, but the new players aren't expected to navigate a clusterfuck of different server settings? Just an idea. (I know, dayz commander is great)

Really, I'd like to know what the general consensus is on this. Not weather or not you think custom servers are fun for you as a player, but do you think custom servers are good for DayZ as a game/community.

[notonehoot 16]

It's my story, in someone else's environment. We retain the idea of my life as a bandit, survivor or just a flip-flop. There should be no reason to say "Pub hives under the carpet", in my personal opinion Private hive's allow us to innovate ideas and solve bugs. Had it not been for private hives half of the bugs would not be solved.

*Disclaimer*

Solely my opinions.

[Rage VG 4033]

"Play it the way you want" is something that gets thrown around these forums on a daily basis.

But, doesn't allowing the server admins to set the rules, go against that ideology? How can someone play it the way they want if the server admin sets up the sandbox in a way that conflicts with his play style?

You see, "Play it the way you want" doesn't mean "Play it the way you want at the expense of others." If a server admin has set rules, they are with the intention of making sure nobody is hindered by another player in any way not intended by the game.

If they set a rule like, say "No Sniper rifles", then that's a different story, because he's banning a valid and fundamental part of the game, and he's probably just a terrible admin.

[Mr Nasty 1023]

I see the positives and negatives on both sides. Im conflicted.

[Steak and Potatoes 13480]

I think they are good for the simple fact of creativity side aslong as you dont get some asshat server spawning everyone in with MK48's and nvgs food supplie for a week etc. For instance our server we spent all the extra time on creating places to explore within the map so in your travels you can wonder into the woods and find things you've never seen pushing you to want to explore the map further for all the additional content. This does not confine sandbox but in my opinion adds to it.

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

You see, "Play it the way you want" doesn't mean "Play it the way you want at the expense of others." If a server admin has set rules, they are with the intention of making sure nobody is hindered by another player in any way not intended by the game.

If they set a rule like, say "No Sniper rifles", then that's a different story, because he's banning a valid and fundamental part of the game, and he's probably just a terrible admin.

What about a server that bans people for killing players? Or a server that publicly announces who killed who.

I think they are good for the simple fact of creativity side aslong as you dont get some asshat server spawning everyone in with MK48's and nvgs food supplie for a week etc. For instance our server we spent all the extra time on creating places to explore within the map so in your travels you can wonder into the woods and find things you've never seen pushing you to want to explore the map further for all the additional content. This does not confine sandbox but in my opinion adds to it.

Exactly. There are good servers out there that are making DayZ better. But, who defines "better" or "adding to it"? Who polices the servers to ensure asshat admins aren't abusing their power to change the game? It's a big grey area that is wide open to misinterpretation.

[Rivy 32]

As long as you can tell which servers are official and which are not, I don't see any harm done. At all.

Maybe I agree with the server admin and I think playing with nothing but pistols will be fun. I think it's good for everyone and it makes the game grow as a whole. Keeps it from getting stagnant.

More options = better.

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

i think with more variables, comes a larger player base..

while some will see it as watering down the DayZ experience, i see it as opening the game to those who might not have liked the Pure dayZ game.

as long as its clear in the UI before joining so that players know what they are logging into, then i have ZERO issues with customs servers running any number of flags for new game play mods or turning off other core features.

[Rage VG 4033]

What about a server that bans people for killing players? Or a server that publicly announces who killed who.

That would fall into the "Terrible admin" category, and I'm entirely behind you there. PvP is a major part of the game. It would be like saying "Hey guys, come over to my house and play some monopoly! Only rule is, you're not allowed to buy properties!"

[marcjpb 5]

Like it or not, its part of dayz. This game is very community driven and allow more people to try stuff out. If the dev some custom feature is a huge suggest I am pretty sure they would just add it to the game core.

Until standalone come out it is the best tool Against hacker due to the rollback possible.

[aussiestig 681]

They are servers just like every other ArmA II server. ArmA II's server browser wasn't made for DayZ, would should they treat it that way?

[mr_chabowski@live.co.uk 2416]

All that's being exercised is the flexibility of the ArmA customisation. Besides muddying the water a fair bit it doesn't do any harm.

When SA hits, it's a different story. There has to be a foot put down.

DayZ as its own title, shouldn't be made so every facet of gameplay can be modified. The only choice should be from pre-set difficulty options.

There's a fine line between "variation" and "abomination".

[Mr Nasty 1023]

All that's being exercised is the flexibility of the ArmA customisation. Besides muddying the water a fair bit it doesn't do any harm.

When SA hits, it's a different story. There has to be a foot put down.

DayZ as its own title, shouldn't be made so every facet of gameplay can be modified. The only choice should be from pre-set difficulty options.

There's a fine line between "variation" and "abomination".

Well said. Really like the last line.

[Rivy 32]

There's a fine line between "variation" and "abomination".

I actually think all is fair when it comes to custom servers. If something is truly an "abomination" it will have barely any players.

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

I actually think all is fair when it comes to custom servers. If something is truly an "abomination" it will have barely any players.

There was a huge uproar when the makarov was removed from starting gear, if there were custom servers back then I fear the majority of players would have flocked to one that kept the makarov. Eventually tho, the majority saw the value of having no starting weapon, it just took that being thrust into a situation they didn't think they'd like to see it worked.

I bet a year ago, a lot of DayZ players wouldn't have believed that they'd be playing a game where it takes hours to get your gear and only a split second to lose it all to a snot nosed COD kiddie with a bigass sniper rifle. But, they tried something new and loved it.

Point is, people don't know what they want, so leaving it up to a large group is not the way to improve a game. Rocket is our visionary, we are his lab rats.

[Rivy 32]

There was a huge uproar when the makarov was removed from starting gear, if there were custom servers back then I fear the majority of players would have flocked to one that kept the makarov. Eventually tho, the majority saw the value of having no starting weapon, it just took that being thrust into a situation they didn't think they'd like to see it worked.

I bet a year ago, a lot of DayZ players wouldn't have believed that they'd be playing a game where it takes hours to get your gear and only a split second to lose it all to a snot nosed COD kiddie with a bigass sniper rifle. But, they tried something new and loved it.

Point is, people don't know what they want, so leaving it up to a large group is not the way to improve a game. Rocket is our visionary, we are his lab rats.

I'm not talking about changing the core game. Custom servers are the exception to the rule, the "other" rulesets. The official gamemode always has the most players. If someone truly enjoys the starting Makarov then what's the problem with that ? Most will still play "the real Dayz".

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

I'm not talking about changing the core game. Custom servers are the exception to the rule, the "other" rulesets. The official gamemode always has the most players. If someone truly enjoys the starting Makarov then what's the problem with that ? Most will still play "the real Dayz".

Are you sure about that? I would guess that the private hive population out numbers the official hive at this point, I don't really know how to check the numbers for sure, but just a quick look in DayZ commander shows less than a page of fullish official servers, but add in the private ones and there's about 2 more pages of populated servers.

[Babby Bird 3]

Are you sure about that? I would guess that the private hive population out numbers the official hive at this point, I don't really know how to check the numbers for sure, but just a quick look in DayZ commander shows less than a page of fullish official servers, but add in the private ones and there's about 2 more pages of populated servers.

The reason for the outnumber is due to hackers, people would play on a private hive as they are monitored by admins, Private Hive seems to have more freedom of kicking and banning since they can make up their own rules. What I see usually on PH are custom spawns and the community really close due to side channel being enabled half the time.