Standalone in June what do you think?

[Pandema 352]

I'd prefer it comes out in June, more likely to have money to buy it at that point.

[Mos1ey 6301]

I bet it's June 6th anniversary of D-Day .....

DayZ-Day.....

that would be cool .....

I guarantee you a date hasn't been set yet.

He said they'd review the situation in June, not that they're releasing in June.

Edited March 23, 2013 by mZLY

[colekern 1364]

..............................................................................................................

this silence is stretching so incredibly long that I'll need pac man to clear all these dots.

Have you ever heard of 'Aliens: Colonial Marines'? Or perhaps 'Duke Nuken Forever'?

Have you ever heard of half life 2? Or perhaps Starcraft 2?

Also, in all of your examples, those games went through development hell. DayZ has had stable development.

You're making a huge deal over nothing.

Edited March 23, 2013 by colekern

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello there

I'm seeing the same old same old after any *presumed* release date is passed.

What does it have to do with any of us when it's released? Either you buy it or not. The only folk it affects is the devs. My mind boggles at those who think they seem to have a share in the company.

Just be patient. You don't want to wait? Move on. You are allowed to do other things with your life. Come back when the SA's released.

I fail to see the issue.

Rgds

LoK

[Raged 187]

You know what happens when games are released on set-in-stone release dates? Skyrim, Dead Island, Etc.

Games that could have won major awards or GOTY titles if they'd taken an extra couple months to polish them off. Because of set release dates we received buggy animations/gameplay and what could have been a 10/10 turned into a 7/10.

I'm glad that DayZ is aiming for the 10/10 instead of the 7/10 just to keep the ants in people's pants.

[Dreygar (DayZ) 178]

I don't understand the need for it to be released soon, either... people these days have little patience.

Ever seen the Evan William's ads?

This is a pretty bad example as it's the same chick and she is obviously hot regardless?

[Dreygar (DayZ) 178]

You know what happens when games are released on set-in-stone release dates? Skyrim, Dead Island, Etc.

Games that could have won major awards or GOTY titles if they'd taken an extra couple months to polish them off. Because of set release dates we received buggy animations/gameplay and what could have been a 10/10 turned into a 7/10.

I'm glad that DayZ is aiming for the 10/10 instead of the 7/10 just to keep the ants in people's pants.

I'm sorry, but... Games are going to be released with bugs and glitches no matter what. Nothing is made with any kind of quality control in check anymore. Day Z, whenever it releases will be no different.

I have my own rating scheme, and my own opinions... I don't pay attention to game awards or magazines as they are more than likely paid to advertise and praise the game anyway. I've seen some games that get 10/10!, Wow! Best game ever... and I have to sit back and go.. really? Games like Call of Duty come to mind.

[herbster 34]

Anyway to retract a vote? I went for the last option too quickly!! The 1st half I agreed with but the last I didn't!

There's no option for 'Think the standalone team have missed their window, would love to know what exactly has gone behind the scenes though.'

[Raged 187]

I'm sorry, but... Games are going to be released with bugs and glitches no matter what. Nothing is made with any kind of quality control in check anymore. Day Z, whenever it releases will be no different.

I have my own rating scheme, and my own opinions... I don't pay attention to game awards or magazines as they are more than likely paid to advertise and praise the game anyway. I've seen some games that get 10/10!, Wow! Best game ever... and I have to sit back and go.. really? Games like Call of Duty come to mind.

Fair fair, but what I'm talking about particularly, is the fact that for games like Skyrim that I drooled over for almost a year. Then on the initial release, literally my first 5 minutes in game I had to reset because there was a bug in the opening scene which made it so it froze as soon as you were brought off the carriage. It didn't really stop there (which you understand if you played it in the opening days). Whereas with COD for example, I played the shit out of it from start to finish without seeing one major glitch aside from maybe 2 seconds of lag after a cut scene or something.

Overall Skyrim and Dead Island did get 10/10 from me, but not until 3 months later when all the patches and everything went out. It just seemed to me like they producers/devs did little to no beta testing before releasing it to the public because of promised release dates. Which is why I love and respect the now called 'minecraft-model' of game testing with alpha models and such.

[PaxC4T 159]

Rocket mentions why they have delayed it.

[Xianyu 820]

People seem to think that by pushing back the release date, DayZ is going to magically not have any bugs...

Keep holding onto that dream.

It's gonna have bugs, exploits, and hackers are going to break into it. If not when it's released, then when content is added.

Pushing back the release date just lets them work on architecture and base-level content. You only find the majority of bugs when you open up the game for multitudes of people to have a go at breaking.

[Dreygar (DayZ) 178]

Overall Skyrim and Dead Island did get 10/10 from me, but not until 3 months later when all the patches and everything went out. It just seemed to me like they producers/devs did little to no beta testing before releasing it to the public because of promised release dates. Which is why I love and respect the now called 'minecraft-model' of game testing with alpha models and such.

What you said pretty much sums it up. Patches. I think game companies rely too heavily on patches to the point where they figure they'll just patch a problem later instead of doing any testing.

[_Anubis_ (DayZ) 139]

What you said pretty much sums it up. Patches. I think game companies rely too heavily on patches to the point where they figure they'll just patch a problem later instead of doing any testing.

Patches are, from the company point of view, a 100% monetary loss because those are free yet the company had to pay for their software engineers and testers to work.

Nobody does patches happily, they issue patches because there is some huge disappointment in the customer base about bugs and/or design and/or performances.

They don't do enough testing, that's for sure. Mostly because (once again) money plays a very important role and a game has to generate a ROI or the company will go bust: so what happens is simple:

1. game X is supposed to take Y calendar months and Z amount of man days (effort, hence money)

2. plans are man made, so 99% of the times you have a time/money overrun

3. The ROI has to be preserved no matter what so something has to be cut

4. What do you have at the end? System Testing (if you follow some V-based/agile model to develop hopefully)

5. So testing is cut/reduced in scope. It is a gamble. Too much outcry after? Make a patch.

What you are seeing now with the pre-sales concept of "alpha/beta/bla-bla-bla releases" is another (IMHO better) strategy to cope with this issue: release the game, albeit unfinished, do not ask for too much, watch the sales and go on with more and more polished features. Releasing an alpha means cash-in so the ROI break-even date gets closer.

_Anubis_

[PuRe DAYZ 39]

who cares when it comes out the longer they take the more polished it will be

Hopefully

[dgeesio 1034]

You know what happens when games are released on set-in-stone release dates? Skyrim, Dead Island, Etc.

Games that could have won major awards or GOTY titles if they'd taken an extra couple months to polish them off. Because of set release dates we received buggy animations/gameplay and what could have been a 10/10 turned into a 7/10.

I'm glad that DayZ is aiming for the 10/10 instead of the 7/10 just to keep the ants in people's pants.

lol skyrim one of best games ever released . more time doesnt mean it will be any better

also longer the production on this the higher the cost what was a 10.00 games just started going 20 upwards. can see this coming out with consoles now and being 30 quid plus.

Edited March 24, 2013 by dgeesio

[Shrapnell 92]

Everyone, just because the game got delayed a slight bit does not mean DayZ SA is turning into the new Episode 3.

atleast i hope not

[tilen 19]

who cares when it comes out the longer they take the more polished it will be

Hopefully

Being a pesimist, I'm gonna have to make you a bet that DayZ SA will be buggy as ever, no matter how many more delays they decide to go with. Looking forward to seeing what happens but as it stands I'm not going to simply buy it the second it gets released anymore.

[monkey001 7]

As long as it isn't buggy and half done I'm ok for the later release date.

Out of interest is june release of the final build or the alpha?

[SmashT 10907]

As long as it isn't buggy and half done I'm ok for the later release date.

Out of interest is june release of the final build or the alpha?

Alpha, full release won't be for at least another year and yes the alpha will be buggy.

Edited March 24, 2013 by smasht_AU

[Kodakly 10]

I'm mad that noone liked my post.

:C

[Bottlerocket 205]

June is not the release date - that's just when they'll 'review things'.

[kingfury4 65]

I'm fine with June, gives me time to scrounge my coins together to get the game.

[Sutinen 635]

It's just getting better everytime he shows it, I can't wait to see the zombie animations and melee.

I don't see why I wouldn't buy a better game later.

[BAHADIR 124]

Just a remind; S.T.A.L.K.E.R - Shadow of chernobyl was delayed "7 years", still it has enough number of fans...