DayZ Alpha won't launch until launched !

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

^^true this^^

[Blondedash 403]

^^true this^^

why did it have to be on separate pages :( .

[Blondedash 403]

Try my best XD

But seriously, people nowadays are uninformed demanding small children, with no sense of reality but still "all-knowing" somehow, because theyre entire life revolves around the phrases "fast" and "instant". Everything has to be created now, or even better yesterday, and it has to work out of the box with no bugs, and it has to do everything at the same time AND they want acces to it now.

Nobody have the patience to wait for a good product anymore, and as soon as people use money on something we feel "obligated" to "enlighten" all others who bought the same product and the devs of the product.

Patience is a long gone virtue in this globalised world we live in and people, in general, doesnt even bother to read up on things to get backgrond knowledge, they just assume they are right.

Theres countless threads on this forum, showing prime examples of the impatient humanity and what we have degenerated to. :)

Its the same world as always, but the "information age" have given everybody an easy way to vent frustrations without any kind of resposibility attached, (internet) so people will ofc do this without any thoughts.

This is all general talk, not pointing at anypone specific, merely the entire human race as a whole.

And i will gladly admit i was like this a couple of years back. Im not proud i was like that, but i did something about it.

Ok, rant is done, back to topic XD

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Its gonna be nice to get hand os SA heh, but i dont mind waiting a long time for something awsome.

A rushed game, in this genre,was already released and we all know how that went (WarZ) :D

bis is a great company because they don't do it for the money but because they want to.

[liquidmind 320]

A Call of Duty game costs about $100 million USD to make, so comparitively, DayZ/Arma are very, very small markets making tiny amounts of money.

read somewhere that Elder Scrolls Online took 250 developers 5 years. Even if you forget taxes and pay them only 1000$ a month, that's 250.000$ a month, 3 million a year, 15 million over the whole development period. And that's just the costs so the developers can sleep and eat. no office, no computers, no distribution, no lights and yes, no taxes... I think they needed more than 100k...

And people think making a game is easy...

[byrgesen 1340]

read somewhere that Elder Scrolls Online took 250 developers 5 years. Even if you forget taxes and pay them only 1000$ a month, that's 250.000$ a month, 3 million a year, 15 million over the whole development period. And that's just the costs so the developers can sleep and eat. no office, no computers, no distribution, no lights and yes, no taxes... I think they needed more than 100k...

And people think making a game is easy...

Well actionman did write 100 million, not 100k and i believe he is talking about actual development, not advertisement and PR exspenses and so on, so its plausible tbh.

I cant say for sure, but i did find an articel saying COD: Modern Warfare 2 costed around 200m $ to make, with all expenses.

Call of Duty [Modern Warfare 2] cost $40 million to $50 million to produce, people close to the project said, about as much as a mid-size film. Including marketing expenses and the cost of producing and distributing discs, the launch budget was $200 million, on par with a summer popcorn movie -- and extremely high for a video game.

And here some on COD: 4:

While ActiVision does not typically disclose development and marketing cost associated with software it is estimates that COD4 cost ~$20,000,000 USD (2007)

Still BI is nowhere near that amount of money and resources, so they cant spit out a game every other year like the other "giants" on the playing field.

Thats a good thing though, a small dev team usually means money isnt the primary objectve. Usually ;)

EDIT:

Found another articel about average gaming development expenses:

The average development budget for a multiplatform next-gen game is $18-$28 million, according to new data.

Polyphony’s Gran Turismo 5 budget is said to be hovering around the $60 million mark, while Modern Warfare 2's budget was said to be as high as $50 million.

But do remember BI is only making single platform games :) They dont have to spend money on PS3 or XBOX launches, so they have even fewer money to work with, because theres only 1 platform to earn them on.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Byrgesen

[Kra 151]

Bla bla bla.

Alpha and Beta and Final is still the same as it was 10 years ago.... You are talking abuot the very foundation of software development here.

The release model changed yes, but the definition of Alha and Beta did not.

Alpha:

Beta:

Release Candidate:

Source: https://en.wikipedia...ease_life_cycle

So basicly what you are saying is that "the old alpha and beta definition is invalid", but thats far from the case. They do indeed still apply and companies try theyre best to stick by them.

The only reason people complain about this now is because 10 years ago, companies didnt do much open testing, they do now. But the rules of the game is the same, you are just part of it now.

Ohh and btw, back in the older minecraft versions, there were tons of bugs and crappy code in the game, i would know i hosted servers back then, and Notch didnt clean anything untill the Beta. The open Alpha was unstabile, it crashed alot and had alot of gameplay bugs.

Sound familiar? :D

No, I never said it was invalid. Of course it isn't as most traditional companies do actually adhere to whatever systems they've developed over the years. I guess what I should of said instead of "People need to accept the fact that the traditional definitions of "alpha" and "beta" in regards to software development just aren't relevant in this day and age.", I should of said "People need to accept the fact that the traditional definitions of "alpha" and "beta" in regards to ALL software development just aren't relevant in this day and age.". And in my opinion, "release model" is most definitely a part of the software development cycle. I never said it was invalid, I said; it is changing. Hell if you read a little further up in your article, you'll see that they came from IBM hardware testing days. Perfectly outlining that the meaning of the words change, especially with context.

Everything you quote pretty much reflected everything I said in the first place just with more words making it a little clearer (disregarding RC because it isn't relevant in this discussion and pretty much falls under beta anyway in regards to releasing a paid unfinished product). Using Wikipedia is a good example actually, Wikipedia's definitions are revised all the time. Just check the version history of what you linked me.

I did rush that post a bit because it was already getting too much and the attention span of the average forum reader leaves much to be desired. I tried to keep it simple.

As for Minecraft, I was there at Indev, so I know exactly what you mean about the stability of it, again my downfall here was using too few words. When the Alpha (what he labeled as alpha) blew up in popularity he felt that it wasn't fair that it was crashing so much so he spent a fair amount of time (IN ALPHA) to clean as much as he could to the best of his ability. Sure it was still crashy and buggy, but compared to other alphas I've had access to, might as well been mid beta. In fact Minecraft was still implementing base game features after 1.0 which confirms what I was saying that traditional "alpha" and "beta" didn't apply there because the biggest distinction between alpha and beta (in the traditional sense, in my opinion) was feature lock. With that last sentence you could of described any part of Minecraft development, even into the release!

I agree with what you say in your follow up post, it's pretty much always been that way, internet hasn't changed it much. I was brought up with this type being described as "backyard (or schoolyard) experts" and thus was taught not to open my mouth unless I truly knew what I was talking about. Spreading disinformation was a punishable offense in my house.

Anyway, way to much time spent on this drivel.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Kra

[byrgesen 1340]

No, I never said it was invalid. Of course it isn't as most traditional companies do actually adhere to whatever systems they've developed over the years. I guess what I should of said instead of "People need to accept the fact that the traditional definitions of "alpha" and "beta" in regards to software development just aren't relevant in this day and age.", I should of said "People need to accept the fact that the traditional definitions of "alpha" and "beta" in regards to ALL software development just aren't relevant in this day and age.". And in my opinion, "release model" is most definitely a part of the software development cycle. I never said it was invalid, I said; it is changing. Hell if you read a little further up in your article, you'll see that they came from IBM hardware testing days. Perfectly outlining that the meaning of the words change, especially with context.

Everything you quote pretty much reflected everything I said in the first place just with more words making it a little clearer (disregarding RC because it isn't relevant in this discussion and pretty much falls under beta anyway in regards to releasing a paid unfinished product). Using Wikipedia is a good example actually, Wikipedia's definitions are revised all the time. Just check the version history of what you linked me.

I did rush that post a bit because it was already getting too much and the attention span of the average forum reader leaves much to be desired. I tried to keep it simple.

As for Minecraft, I was there at Indev, so I know exactly what you mean about the stability of it, again my downfall here was using too few words. When the Alpha (what he labeled as alpha) blew up in popularity he felt that it wasn't fair that it was crashing so much so he spent a fair amount of time (IN ALPHA) to clean as much as he could to the best of his ability. Sure it was still crashy and buggy, but compared to other alphas I've had access to, might as well been mid beta. In fact Minecraft was still implementing base game features after 1.0 which confirms what I was saying that traditional "alpha" and "beta" didn't apply there because the biggest distinction between alpha and beta (in the traditional sense, in my opinion) was feature lock. With that last sentence you could of described any part of Minecraft development, even into the release!

I agree with what you say in your follow up post, it's pretty much always been that way, internet hasn't changed it much. I was brought up with this type being described as "backyard (or schoolyard) experts" and thus was taught not to open my mouth unless I truly knew what I was talking about. Spreading disinformation was a punishable offense in my house.

Anyway, way to much time spent on this drivel.

I guess i just settled my mind on the first sentence ;) But i see your point.

Originally planned to be started in Beta 1.7, the first part of the Adventure Update was released as Beta 1.8 on September 14, 2011. Starting on September 9th, 2011, developmental versions were "leaked" by Mojang.[24] Beta 1.9 was never released, but 6 pre-releases using the 1.9 version number were made available for users to test and report bugs back to Mojang. On October 18th, a feature freeze went into effect and Mojang shifted all Minecraft development focus to fixing bugs and preparing the game for release.[25] On November 13th a release candidate of 1.0 was released, along with an official update to 1.8.1 that added sounds from the developmental version

This pretty much ruins your argument though. Just because it was v1.x doesnt mean its not Beta, according to minecraft Wiki.

The last beta was 1.8.1 as far as i can read. Althought the final release started at v.1.0.

It also clearly states the feature freeze in the end beta stage, so again, the "old" definition about Perpetual Beta applies just fine here.

And the added content after v.1.0 release is nothing major, just smaller additions of mobs, blocks and items, but nothing major which would require game engine changes, again fitting for the definition on Wikipedia :)

The official release of Minecraft, Minecraft 1.0, was released on November 18th, 2011, during MineCon. The release includes many features from the Adventure Update that were not included in Beta 1.8. The most prominent feature is an ending to the game, which can be achieved by defeating the Ender Dragon boss in The End. For the full version changelog of Minecraft 1.0, see Version History.

1.2.1 released on March 1, 2012, added the Jungle biome as well as mob and chat improvements. 1.3.1, released on August 1, made many changes to gameplay, added Adventure mode, many multiplayer enhancements and other improvements. The Pretty Scary Update, version 1.4.2, was released on October 25, included new mobs, including the new Wither boss mob, blocks, and items.

You can also look at the "Table Of Features" on minecraft WIKI and see the Beta and the Full client has the same features, except for "Premium Account Features".

I understand what you are trying to say, but the thing is, people are sticking to the definitions for a reason, they still apply and are used on an everyday basis in software development :)

But i dont think the SA will be released as a perpetual beta at all.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Byrgesen

[Max Planck 7174]

But do remember BI is only making single platform games :) They dont have to spend money on PS3 or XBOX launches, so they have even fewer money to work with, because theres only 1 platform to earn them on.

The times are changing mate!

Read it and weep: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/123007-DayZ-Creator-A-Console-Port-is-Almost-Certain

[OrLoK 16182]

an OFP version was also released for consoles, so it's not unheard of.

L

[byrgesen 1340]

The times are changing mate!

Read it and weep: http://www.escapistm...-Almost-Certain

an OFP version was also released for consoles, so it's not unheard of.

L

Orlok i need to see it to believe it heh. Havent been able to find anything BI has released for consle in the past.

I will weep in silence and hope it never happens XD

I feel this is as much a console game as Need For Speed is a PC game to use keyboard with :)

EDIT:

Np i found it my self

:facepalm:

A 2005 release of OFP: Elite and Carrier Command ofc lol.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Byrgesen

[OrLoK 16182]

more proof for the other doubting thomas'

[gesundheitk 420]

I don't think it's really the case of "I want the game now!", because as far as I'm concerned, I can wait even three years of development if only the devblogs were more-or-less on time. Even if they are just a bunch of words, I just feel more connected if it runs through there, not through someone recording at PAX, and every week a devblog is expected but it doesn't occur. I would feel much better if it meant that every other Friday was devblog day if it meant less disappointment on Fridays. It just feels so exhausting when a devblog is anticipated, but it doesn't arrive. I know rocket does not mean it, but if you have to cut the deadlines for the devblogs when you need to, do it. I honestly don't mind it being another schedule instead of every week because that promise is obviously not going to be fulfilled. Godspeed with the standalone, but please, just promise to update the devblogs more, or shift it so it's every other Friday instead of every Friday when half the time, there is none.

[hazedaze 89]

You won't.

I see. tough times making 1585 posts ha. ease up a little go out get some sunshine have a joint or sex maybe. just a suggestion.

[colekern 1364]

I see. tough times making 1585 posts ha. ease up a little go out get some sunshine have a joint or sex maybe. just a suggestion.

How exactly you got that from two words, I will never know.

Edited April 2, 2013 by colekern

[Max Planck 7174]

I'll give both of you beans if you stop that discussion. Honest injun.

[rossymond 68]

I'm personally a little disappointed with the lack of communication from the Dev Team. But then I understand they are very busy people, and would rather spend time working on the game, than posting on here.

I can personally see me not being able to play the SA until at least the end of the summer, with the mad rush to get one of the first 50,000 keys or whatever it may be, then not being able to get one until the next batch, and so on.

This again is a little disappointing but then as long as it end's up being the game we all hope it's going to be, without straying too far from it's genius roots, I will for one, be a happy man.

[YourMomsPapo 0]

Hello there

*brace for impact*

There was never any official release time. Folk assumed it would be before his Everest jaunt. It did seem appropriate back then.

It's no surprise that it will be released later on, but I expect a great storm of complaints, toys being thrown out of prams, accusations of lies and a Illuminati conspiracy and a general wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I'm strapped in and my shields are up.

Rgds

LoK

"Well, it was a weeping and a moaning and a gnashing of teeth" - Kanye West ( Mercy )

Lol great post btw,

straight to the point of how un-patient people are...

I can wait for a MMO miracle, this is the best game i have played since... well, best game ive played period!!

[gummy52 57]

Labelling an unfinished product as an "alpha" is exactly what should be done. That's what "alpha" means!

...No, it doesn't.

People need to accept the fact that the traditional definitions of "alpha" and "beta" in regards to software development just aren't relevant in this day and age.

Expecting consumers to use their brain just isn't relevant.

What the fuck are you on about?

Profiting off of alpha testers.

Edited April 3, 2013 by gummy52

[DickSharpe 23]

...No, it doesn't.

Expecting consumers to use their brain just isn't relevant.

Profiting off of alpha testers.

Why don't you elaborate on your answers and provide reasoning for your arguments? You might come across as someone to be taken seriously if you try to make your points in an informed manner.

At the moment you seem like an uninformed, impatient troll who throws out single sentence answers, that contain no relevant information and do not contribute to the discussion or help others understand why you see things the way you do.

Can you blame others for not understanding what you are on about let alone why you feel that way? I think not.

[byrgesen 1340]

Why don't you elaborate on your answers and provide reasoning for your arguments? You might come across as someone to be taken seriously if you try to make your points in an informed manner.

At the moment you seem like an uninformed, impatient troll who throws out single sentence answers, that contain no relevant information and do not contribute to the discussion or help others understand why you see things the way you do.

Can you blame others for not understanding what you are on about let alone why you feel that way? I think not.

You just explained how theese forums work XD

Over half of all answers are exactly like that, but its the internet so people just doesnt give a rats ass.

@gummy52

Try having a convo i real life like that and see how you fail, ohh wait, maybe the problem is you arent having convos in real life so you are used to answer everything in one line sentences, that doesnt make sense and doesnt help anyone...

And i also agree with alot of the posts about the Devblogs not being used properly, it is disapointing really.

Edited April 3, 2013 by Byrgesen

[Inception. 9443]

Gummy52, if you don't provide supporting evidence, it's nothing more than a pointless comment.

[timedance 120]

@INCEPTION: I want to be forum moderator! - Please can you give me rights to moderate/edit posts? :) B)

[Steam_Power 42]

@INCEPTION: I want to be forum moderator! - Please can you give me rights to moderate/edit posts? :) B)

Is this how the process works.... If only I had known before....

[gummy52 57]

At the moment you seem like an uninformed, impatient troll who throws out single sentence answers

if you don't provide supporting evidence

Bohemia Interactive is misrepresenting what an Alpha is. What an Alpha is is common knowledge. Therefore "evidence" is not applicable. Their model completely contradicts what an Alpha is. You can't make up your own definitions on the fly. My "single sentence answers" are all that is required when someone's entire "argument" is based on a statement that is false. For example, an earlier post claimed that an Alpha is defined as an unfinished product. That isn't true.

Perhaps I seem like a troll because my posts are not walls of texts that substitute rational with emotion. Regardless, by definition Bohemia Interactive is misrepresenting the truth and collecting revenue while doing so. Arguing why the circumstances make that moral or immoral is certainly subjective and if you want to seriously defend companies that mime this behavior then you should look to yourself for who is uninformed and impatient.

Edited April 3, 2013 by gummy52

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

Rocket did want to call it a Foundation Build and explained at length why. Unfortunatly another Zombie game stole that term within a week and used it for their Steam release which didn't go very well so now that term is now tainted.

Call it what you like, they've been completely open about their intentions.

Edited April 3, 2013 by Fraggle