DayZ Standalone Discussion

[OrLoK 16186]

This isn't really an indy release is it? OR is it?

 Definitely not an Indie, nor a AAA but something in between IMHO

 

Rgds

 

LoK

[DanielTy88 133]

I like arm chairs! Because it gives me a place to rest my arms!

[colekern 1364]

Bohemia Interactive has more than just one game as of now, in fact there are three in active development. They don't have unlimited resources, so they're having to find a balance.

 

Also, those tweets are just the things that Rocket himself is doing. There are other programmers and such doing lots of stuff who don't bother to tweet about it.

Edited August 14, 2013 by colekern

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

Let's stop being rediculous shall we?

 

Without going to far down the road...The game was scheduled for a tentatative release date for last December. The head honcho went so far as to say the game would be a failure if it wasn't.

 

Eight months later I don't think it is out of line to be expecting more progress then what we have. The game isn't even anywher eremotely close to a release candidate. It isn't even REMOTELY optomized.

 

Do you have any idea the collective man hours and money the community has dumped into this game to give rocket FREE publicity? Personally I have never seen anythign like it.

 

Time to shat or get off the pot. Times running. So many possibilities out there. Shit, just take A3 for tiny little example of what is on the horizon.

 

Honestely...I have already let go of DayZ. Between the script kids and the the dev team dragging their feet on SA I'm already looking for the next generation of gaming. Pefecty content to wait it out till then. Might even pick up A3 when it is officially released.

 

Adios DayZ.

Oh dear.  If you're still hung up on the December release date you need to go and do some reading.  It's been explained many times that was for a ported mod, not a new project as we have now.  I really can't be arsed to explain it again, it's all there for you if you want to read about it. 

Edited August 14, 2013 by Fraggle

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

It's early days.  The team is likely to expand.  As for the iron cooling down well it can be plugged back in again when the time comes.

Edited August 14, 2013 by Fraggle

[IkaikaKekai 1957]

It's early days.  The team is likely to expand.  As for the iron cooling down well it can be plugged back in again when the time comes.

ADHD kicking in again, I believe that 'striking when the iron's hot' is actually a blacksmith reference.  But yeah, the fire can be restoked when it needs to be, right now we're still collecting iron and coal.

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

Hahaha, bloody metaphores.

 

I can't stand all of this talk of striking while the iron's hot etc.  DayZ generated it's own hype and publicity without spending a single penny.  Also, simply nothing will change the fact that a game takes time to make, so it's kind of a moot point.  Hype or not, content takes time to make and lets not forget they're trying things that simply haven't ever been tried before in any other game.  Just because something has lots of hype surrounding it does not mean you should instantly try to capatalise on that hype at the expense of other things.  In fact, 9 times out of 10 that's a recipe for disaster. 

 

I see DayZ as a long-term project, hopefully it's a game I'll be able to enjoy for the next few years once released.  The single one thing that would piss me off at this point would be if I was to think they were rushing it.

 

As gamers we should be happy that a publisher is allowing the team the time and space they need as well as the creative freedom to try new things.  Now days that is a very rare thing.  Most of the criticisms I see for the SA so far usually boil down to one thing, lack of patience.

Edited August 14, 2013 by Fraggle

[bfisher 561]

Hahaha, bloody metaphores.

 

I can't stand all of this talk of striking while the iron's hot etc.  

 

Seriously.  What do people think?  In a year or so, fighting zombies and killing other players online in a giant open world map is going to go out of fashion?  The Call O' Duty and Battlefield people crank out a new game every year.  AND IT'S THE SAME FREAKIN GAME EACH TIME!

 

When the standalone comes out, people will drop what they are doing, tell their boss or their wife or grandkids to fuck off and go back to Cherno to find some beans!

Edited August 14, 2013 by bfisher

[HumanBeing25 299]

 Definitely not an Indie, nor a AAA but something in between IMHO

 

Rgds

 

LoK

Like a broken car than still runs.

[aleksiuski@gmail.com 58]

Seriously.  What do people think?  In a year or so, fighting zombies and killing other players online in a giant open world map is going to go out of fashion?  The Call O' Duty and Battlefield people crank out a new game every year.  AND IT'S THE SAME FREAKIN GAME EACH TIME!

 

When the standalone comes out, people will drop what they are doing, tell their boss or their wife or grandkids to fuck off and go back to Cherno to find some beans!

 

When standalone comes along, I propably wont play it. The same time Rocket + team has had to build a game from existing pieces, other indie-companies have made better games from scratch.

 

Lets concider the case of "7 days to die". It is a voxel-based 'minecraft' game WITH zombie-apocalypse theme. It has really vast and complex crafting (krhm minecraft), you can build shit. It has complex variation of zombies (big ones, small ones, even zombie wildlife like bears and shit) that have day/night cycle with movement and attackpowers. They have loot, they have the shit. They have Co-Op, they have pvp. Whole thing has been done way faster then DayZ:SA, and even if it is voxel-cube game it has shitload of more unique ideas and feeling then dayz. Alpha for this starts at the end of this month, guaranteed. Alpha is actually already READY and people are youtubing it daily (lucky bastards..), but it will be released after kickstarter collection ends.

 

So, with games like this coming out and popping up... no, seriously.. DayZ:SA will have a shit-hard time to compete for my gaming hours.

 

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/7daystodie/7-days-to-die-zombie-survival-game

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2P3gr92Ap8

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=681Lt93w944

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NE6-XIMLf0A

Edited August 14, 2013 by Kuolio

[TheLastEmp 295]

It seems ridiculous to compare DayZ SA to 7 days to die.... Totally different games...

...It also seems ridiculous to me to claim that "better games have been made from scratch"

I'm assuming this means you've played through a fully developed DayZ standalone?? That's really the only way you could compare it to something else.

 

SA will be incredibly detailed and have many more mechanics implemented, especially when it comes to player interaction.

And this is only what I've been able to deduce from the devblogs on the current state of the game...

They are really doing some groundbreaking things with the development of the SA and I think that anyone who doesn't recognize that hasn't been following the development closely enough and probably shouldn't be criticizing it.

[aleksiuski@gmail.com 58]

Oh I have followed the devblogs, and I am very unconvinced. Basicly, what has been done, is "putting loot on top of objects and inside them", made the loot-distribution a bit more clever, added locations, made new UI, tweaked survival-elements and infection. Switched loot&zombiespawn handling to serverside, tweaked behaviour and made some new animations. Then add-in new weapons and ammunition system, with detachable accessories to weapons. Then some very vague mentionings of "crafting" and "bases" and such, with absolutely nothing more on them. All we can see from videos is some random people going through buildings and shooting Zombies that usually are moving very glitchy and bugged. Oh forgot the big thing; new clothes and motorcycle helmet.

 

Seriously. If this is all, then fuck it.

 

After one year of waiting, we have absolutely nothing on our hands. And, for me as a consumer, I am bored of waiting and seriously with all the quality gaming that is now riding the Zombie-theme DayZ:SA needs to deliver with a capital D to even be bothered with. From what I have seen SA is very far from creative, exiting and *FRESH* game. After playing hundreds of hour of DayZ and it's Mod-family, everything is ... well, old. 

[TheLastEmp 295]

Oh I have followed the devblogs, and I am very unconvinced. Basicly, what has been done, is "putting loot on top of objects and inside them", made the loot-distribution a bit more clever, added locations, made new UI, tweaked survival-elements and infection. Switched loot&zombiespawn handling to serverside, tweaked behaviour and made some new animations. Then add-in new weapons and ammunition system, with detachable accessories to weapons. Then some very vague mentionings of "crafting" and "bases" and such, with absolutely nothing more on them. All we can see from videos is some random people going through buildings and shooting Zombies that usually are moving very glitchy and bugged. Oh forgot the big thing; new clothes and motorcycle helmet.

 

Seriously. If this is all, then fuck it.

 

After one year of waiting, we have absolutely nothing on our hands. And, for me as a consumer, I am bored of waiting and seriously with all the quality gaming that is now riding the Zombie-theme DayZ:SA needs to deliver with a capital D to even be bothered with. From what I have seen SA is very far from creative, exiting and *FRESH* game. After playing hundreds of hour of DayZ and it's Mod-family, everything is ... well, old. 

There's so much more than that it's not even funny... Nor is it worth my time to go over everything.  All I can say is, you're shorting yourself if you write it off without ever having played it.

 

Edit: Just as a quick example.  I hope I run in to you in-game sometime so that I can knock you out with a baseball bat, zip-tie your hands together and wait for you to wake up so that I can take a dump on your chest and watch you contract a disease...

Edited August 14, 2013 by TheLastEmp

[aleksiuski@gmail.com 58]

There's so much more than that it's not even funny... Nor is it worth my time to go over everything.  All I can say is, you're shorting yourself if you write it off without ever having played it.

 

Edit: Just as a quick example.  I hope I run in to you in-game sometime so that I can knock you out with a baseball bat, zip-tie your hands together and wait for you to wake up so that I can take a dump on your chest and watch you contract a disease...

Knocking people out is core gameplay in arma 2, same as dragging people around. Taking a poop is the addition dayz SA adds, nice.

[JIJOK 49]

why so hurry to get SA if then all that ppl do is complain ? About bugs, loot , spawn, KoS, etc. Lets the guys work in peace 

[TheLastEmp 295]

Knocking people out is core gameplay in arma 2, same as dragging people around. Taking a poop is the addition dayz SA adds, nice.

You can find out everything else if you want to take the time.  It's worth it imo.

 

In response - 

Melee is not core gameplay... melee doesn't exist at all in ARMA... reworking that has been a pain in the ass for the devs and they're still currently working on it.

Dragging people around? yes. But the devs have gone above and beyond that in making an interesting mechanic for surrendering and restraining players for different amounts of time based on what they're being handcuffed with.

Taking a dump on your chest a joke intended to emphasize two things:

1. The ambitious level of realism the devs want to bring to DayZ.

2. How seriously they've incorporated disease into every aspect of the game.

 

I really don't think you're stopping to appreciate just how much the devs have accomplished in a comparatively short amount of time with a small team, working on an engine that was never designed for what they're attempting to do.

[FrostDMG 398]

I think most of you guys are excepting way too much out of SA on launch... You'll probably be for a not so nice surprise...

Oh but don't worry, it'll be released as ALPHA so you can forever use it as an excuse...

Anyway, good luck getting close enough to someone to zip tie them.

[Skinwalker 31]

The same time Rocket + team has had to build a game from existing pieces, other indie-companies have made better games from scratch.

 

 when i read the original Dayz SA spiel i expected that they were indeed building it from the ground up as Rocket & Co advertised...but ive come to find out 'building from the ground up' means using a pre-existing engine and modding it further ( anyone else getting dejavu? hello, dayz and arma 2) which leaves me even more disappointed that the alpha has still yet to be released. if the "standalone" is just a mod built on the Arma 3 engine you can count me out

Edited August 14, 2013 by Skinwalker

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

It's not just re-hashed or ported content.

 

Exluding the map (which is having a LOT of work done on it, and we'll likely see new maps in the future) all of the content and most of the systems being implemented are completely new.  Every animation will be new, the player skeleton is newer than Arma 3's, every in-game object will be new.  Every weapon is being newly made and textured.  Later on they will record new sounds in the sound studio.  The weapon modification system is new.  The inventory system is new, the health system is new, the crafting mechanic is new.  The vehicle customisation system will be new.  Basebuilding that will follow later will be new.  The weather system is new. The wildlife will be new.  The disease system will be new.  The actual core of the game is new allowing them to do many things not possible in any mod.  I could go on.

 

NONE OF THE ABOVE IS MY BIAS FANBOY OPINION.  JUST PURE FACTS.

 

None of this is being ported from anywhere else, it is all being newly created for the SA.  Doesn't sound like a mod to me.  In fact there is simply no definition of the word "mod" that can be applied to the SA. 

 

As I explained at length in another post.  Every game you own is probably built on a pre-existing engine.  It is EXTREMELY rare for any game to use a new engine because they cost millions of pounds to develop.

 

I'll quote my recent post on game engines to clear up any confusion about what it is they're using and why using a pre-existing engine is common practice.  I made this post in response to somebody that was dissapointed that the SA was using the TOH engine as a base for the game:

 

"It's hard to define.  They used the TOH engine as a base but are making/have made sweeping changes to it.  TOH uses the RV3 engine as does Arma 2, it's just a newer version of it. 

 

Most "new" engines in games are just different branches or iterations of a pre-exsisting one.  You could say Arma 3 used the Arma 2 engine as a base and so on, so really it's just the "DayZ" branch of the RV engine now, the number is irrelevant.  It's very rare to see a truly new engine being used in any game at all.

 

To use two common examples, Call of Duty has been using the same engine (IW) as base for all of it's games since 2005 and GTA has been using the RAGE engine since 2008 (or before if you include a little known table-tennis game) and that engine itself evolved from the "Angel Game Engine".

 

People that are getting hung up on numbers/versions etc and think the SA is using the Arma 2 (or the TOH) engine don't understand much about gaming engines in my opinion.  Using their logic you could say that Arma 3 is using the original OFP (RV1) engine from 2001 where as those of us with eyes can clearly see that's not the case.

 

There are just different versions of the RV engine for different purposes, including the ones the militaries use for training purposes.  Those versions of it are referred to as the VBS (Virtual Battlespace) engine and cater to the needs of the militaries that use them but essentially they all come from the same place.  

 

So really names and numbers are only really useful to describe the core engine at a very specific point in time."

Edited August 14, 2013 by Fraggle

[TheLastEmp 295]

 

It's not just re-hashed or ported content.

 

Exluding the map (which is having a LOT of work done on it, and we'll likely see new maps in the future) all of the content and most of the systems being implemented are completely new.  Every animation will be new, the player skeleton is newer than Arma 3's, every in-game object will be new.  Every weapon is being newly made and textured.  Later on they will record new sounds in the sound studio.  The weapon modification system is new.  The inventory system is new, the health system is new, the crafting mechanic is new.  The vehicle customisation system will be new.  Basebuilding that will follow later will be new.  The weather system is new. The wildlife will be new.  The disease system will be new.  The actual core of the game is new allowing them to do many things not possible in any mod.  I could go on.

 

NONE OF THE ABOVE IS MY BIAS FANBOY OPINION.  JUST PURE FACTS.

 

 

"It's hard to define.  They used the TOH engine as a base but are making/have made sweeping changes to it.  TOH uses the RV3 engine as does Arma 2, it's just a newer version of it. 

 

Most "new" engines in games are just different branches or iterations of a pre-exsisting one.  You could say Arma 3 used the Arma 2 engine as a base and so on, so really it's just the "DayZ" branch of the RV engine now, the number is irrelevant.  It's very rare to see a truly new engine being used in any game at all.

 

To use two common examples, Call of Duty has been using the same engine (IW) as base for all of it's games since 2005 and GTA has been using the RAGE engine since 2008 (or before if you include a little known table-tennis game) and that engine itself evolved from the "Angel Game Engine".

 

People that are getting hung up on numbers/versions etc and think the SA is using the Arma 2 (or the TOH) engine don't understand much about gaming engines in my opinion.  Using their logic you could say that Arma 3 is using the original OFP (RV1) engine from 2001 where as those of us with eyes can clearly see that's not the case.

 

Fraggle.  I love you. 

 

Don't ever leave us please.

Edited August 14, 2013 by TheLastEmp

[SoulHunter (DayZ) 233]

 

It's not just re-hashed or ported content.

 

Exluding the map (which is having a LOT of work done on it, and we'll likely see new maps in the future) all of the content and most of the systems being implemented are completely new.  Every animation will be new, the player skeleton is newer than Arma 3's, every in-game object will be new.  Every weapon is being newly made and textured.  Later on they will record new sounds in the sound studio.  The weapon modification system is new.  The inventory system is new, the health system is new, the crafting mechanic is new.  The vehicle customisation system will be new.  Basebuilding that will follow later will be new.  The weather system is new. The wildlife will be new.  The disease system will be new.  The actual core of the game is new allowing them to do many things not possible in any mod.  I could go on.

 

NONE OF THE ABOVE IS MY BIAS FANBOY OPINION.  JUST PURE FACTS.

 

None of this is being ported from anywhere else, it is all being newly created for the SA.  Doesn't sound like a mod to me.  In fact there is simply no definition of the word "mod" that can be applied to the SA. 

 

As I explained at length in another post.  Every game you own is probably built on a pre-existing engine.  It is EXTREMELY rare for any game to use a new engine because they cost millions of pounds to develop.

 

I'll quote my recent post on game engines to clear up any confusion about what it is they're using and why using a pre-existing engine is common practice.  I made this post in response to somebody that was dissapointed that the SA was using the TOH engine as a base for the game:

 

"It's hard to define.  They used the TOH engine as a base but are making/have made sweeping changes to it.  TOH uses the RV3 engine as does Arma 2, it's just a newer version of it. 

 

Most "new" engines in games are just different branches or iterations of a pre-exsisting one.  You could say Arma 3 used the Arma 2 engine as a base and so on, so really it's just the "DayZ" branch of the RV engine now, the number is irrelevant.  It's very rare to see a truly new engine being used in any game at all.

 

To use two common examples, Call of Duty has been using the same engine (IW) as base for all of it's games since 2005 and GTA has been using the RAGE engine since 2008 (or before if you include a little known table-tennis game) and that engine itself evolved from the "Angel Game Engine".

 

People that are getting hung up on numbers/versions etc and think the SA is using the Arma 2 (or the TOH) engine don't understand much about gaming engines in my opinion.  Using their logic you could say that Arma 3 is using the original OFP (RV1) engine from 2001 where as those of us with eyes can clearly see that's not the case.

 

There are just different versions of the RV engine for different purposes, including the ones the militaries use for training purposes.  Those versions of it are referred to as the VBS (Virtual Battlespace) engine and cater to the needs of the militaries that use them but essentially they all come from the same place.  

 

So really names and numbers are only really useful to describe the core engine at a very specific point in time."

 

I cant agree more with whats written up there. But afaik ArmA 3 uses Real Virtuality 4 engine ? There is imo still big differences between VR1 AND VR4.. Even between VR3 and VR4 based on the wiki of Bohemia Interactive;

 

 

Real Virtuality 4.0 Engine - Navigate the battlefield with fluid new animations; feel the devastating power of combat with the upgraded sound engine, new ragdoll simulation and PhysX™ - supported vehicles.

Edited August 14, 2013 by SoulHunter

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

Fraggle.  I love you. 

 

Don't ever leave us please.

FANBOIZ 4 LYFE <3

 

Unless they fuck it up, then I'll go play Witcher 3 to death when that gets released  :thumbsup: .  Actually I will anyway.

[FrostDMG 398]

Yeah, I doubt the vehicles in SA will have PhysX support like in Arma 3... Which means like every vehicle in Arma 2, there will be random explosions, crashes, broken bones and more... Unless the team pulls a miracle

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

I cant agree more with whats written up there. But afaik ArmA 3 uses Real Virtuality 4 engine ? There is imo still big differences between VR1 AND VR4.. Even between VR3 and VR4 based on the wiki of Bohemia Interactive;

Yes but that's exactly my point.  They are just using that engine from that point in time as a starting point. The RV4 engine used the RV3 engine as a base.  Numbers just describe that iteration of an engine at that point in time.  By the time DayZ is complete they'll need a new number or description to describe the engine running it.  Dayz has very different requirements to Arma as the modders have found out when trying to port things straight into the RV4 engine.  Much of the work they're doing on DayZ and the engine will filter back in to the Arma series so it's a win-win for anyone that enjoys either Arma, DayZ or both.

 

What BIS are doing is not unique (in terms of how they're using the engine).  Go and look at the list of Bethesda games available and their history.  You can see many similarities between many of those succesful games.  Work on one game will filter into another but the content is new for each game and more importantly each "brand" of game plays very differently despite the similarities in many of the games characteristics.

 

I didn't see anyone calling Dishonoured a rehashed version of Rage or Fallout but if you go and play them you can see how much they share because they are all taking advantage of the same engine (or different iterations/branches of it) or at least the same pool of in-house development knowledge is passed back and forth between all of their games.

Edited August 14, 2013 by Fraggle

[HumanBeing25 299]

FANBOIZ 4 LYFE <3

 

Unless they fuck it up, then I'll go play Witcher 3 to death when that gets released  :thumbsup: .  Actually I will anyway.

Witcher 3? Traitor! Traitor! He's a traitor! Get yer pitchforks, we've got a traitor to burn.