Seriously, they should've opened up a kickstarter.

[mark3236 (DayZ) 77]

Total mod downloaders right now (although stats have not been updated for so long) is 1.7 million.

 

Think about that.

 

Now, let's say among those, about 1 million of them are willing to pay for the standalone.

 

7 days to die, which had no reputation or brand value whatsoever raked up 500k, with 10k backers.

With NO REPUTATION.

 

If the developers opened up a kickstarter, and sold it for about $30~$50-ish, they would've raked up at least 50 million. 50 million USD. The development would've been much faster.

 

I don't know, this may just be crazy talk coming from a Computer engineering / Economics / Business Administration major, but I really think they made the wrong decision.

 

Don't try to defend them like "They have their own lives. They have no obligation whatsoever". Study more, and you'll learn that they in fact, do have obligations. It's called "Brand Value", and "Customer Value Proposition".

 

They won't go to jail if they keep postponing the release, but they WILL lose revenue, and that's stupid management decision on their part.

 

When's it coming out, I'm done waiting.

Edited September 28, 2013 by mark3236

[Guest]

Total mod downloaders right now (although stats have not been updated for so long) is 1.7 million.

 

Think about that.

 

Now, let's say among those, about 1 million of them are willing to pay for the standalone.

 

7 days to die, which had no reputation or brand value whatsoever raked up 500k, with 10k backers.

With NO REPUTATION.

 

If the developers opened up a kickstarter, and sold it for about $30~$50-ish, they would've raked up at least 50 million. 50 million USD. The development would've been much faster.

 

I don't know, this may just be crazy talk coming from a Computer engineering / Economics / Business Administration major, but I really think they made the wrong decision.

 

Don't try to defend them like "They have their own lives. They have no obligation whatsoever". Study more, and you'll learn that they in fact, do have obligations. It's called "Brand Value", and "Customer Value Proposition".

 

They won't go to jail if they keep postponing the release, but they WILL lose revenue, and that's stupid management decision on their part.

 

When's it coming out, I'm done waiting.

 

 

Use the search funtion mate, this topic has been made like 1000000000000000000000000000000000 times. It will be ready when it is ready!

[mark3236 (DayZ) 77]

Use the search funtion mate, this topic has been made like 1000000000000000000000000000000000 times. It will be ready when it is ready!

 

 

I know there's no set date, I know people are already pissed about it, and some aren't.

 

I just wanted to point out that for every day that passes without going alpha, that's one more royal customer they'll have to buy back. DayZ is a hardcore game, so it's different from something like LOL. Every customer is their critical intangible asset. And they are apparently not doing anything to calm them down.

[Guest]

I know there's no set date, I know people are already pissed about it, and some aren't.

 

I just wanted to point out that for every day that passes without going alpha, that's one more royal customer they'll have to buy back. DayZ is a hardcore game, so it's different from something like LOL. Every customer is their critical intangible asset. And they are apparently not doing anything to calm them down.

 

 

Actually you're wrong, most of the "Royal customers" will have a good understanding that this is a complicated process, plus the devblogs are more than enough for us, many publishers will simply type up a list of changes, but Dean goes out of his way to make videos so we can see it.

 

Your just impatient 

[Inception. 9443]

The less players, the better.
To an extent, of course. 

Edited September 28, 2013 by Inception.

[Hosty 647]

No, a DayZ kickstarter would be retarded for 3 reasons:

 

1.They can fund the game themselves

2. Kickstarter usually grants stuff for more cash you give, which would just make it p2win

3. It's done when it's done

 

Oh, and about 7Days2Die, it got hyped and known because people like PsiSyndicate,Frankie and Paulsauresjr played it.

Just like Rust, but then the hype died out cause they were too stupid to profit from it.

Edited September 28, 2013 by Hosty

[rossums 2190]

I'd rather have a smaller fanbase that love the core concept of the game and what it means compared to all the other popular games like Call of Duty and Battlefield.

DayZ is at the opposite side of the spectrum when it comes to the instant gratification and hand-holding, I'd rather have a strong and dedicated playerbase of these type of players that enjoy DayZ for DayZ rather than the ZOMG360NOxSCOPEx420 players that only want to play it because it's the 'popular' thing at the moment and end up totally ruining the game with all the 3000+ vehicles, loadouts and perks for players.

I'm perfectly happy with the constant updates from the devs allowing us to know exactly what's going on, you don't get that from many developers at all.

[SmashT 10907]

They already have funding from BIS

[bibbish 49]

I'm not a big fan of Kickstarter, but I think the OP raises some interesting points. It doesn't 'feel' like there is much money behind SA.

 

Part of me thinks that we should never have been told SA is coming until a month before it is completely, definitely ready to launch in some form. That way we wouldn't be so bothered and would enjoy the mod. 1.8 has been great. Arma III's mod is unnecessary too. These extra considerations confuse people. 

 

More people could have paid a few quid for Arma II and be enjoying DayZ right now. Instead they be like 'I'll just wait for SA', and that's no fun...

[Howler in Darkness 2]

I was bummed out about the delays and no set date yet, but they keep updating DayZ mod itself, 1.8 is great! I would certainly rather them take some time on SA as they are to get it done right with less rough edges. Why do peoples complain when we are getting these great updates for DM for free while wait, quit complaining and go play. Kickstarter may not have sped up anything really, and it may be taking the same amount of time anyhow.

[rossums 2190]

I'm not a big fan of Kickstarter, but I think the OP raises some interesting points. It doesn't 'feel' like there is much money behind SA.

 

Part of me thinks that we should never have been told SA is coming until a month before it is completely, definitely ready to launch in some form. That way we wouldn't be so bothered and would enjoy the mod. 1.8 has been great. Arma III's mod is unnecessary too. These extra considerations confuse people. 

 

More people could have paid a few quid for Arma II and be enjoying DayZ right now. Instead they be like 'I'll just wait for SA', and that's no fun...

The only reason that we knew about it so far ahead of time is that the standalone was originally only going to be a packaged port of the current DayZ mod as it's own standalone game - they then decided to completely redo everything rather than just packaging Arma II and DayZ together late last year.

[SalamanderAnder (DayZ) 1747]

Total mod downloaders right now (although stats have not been updated for so long) is 1.7 million.

 

If the developers opened up a kickstarter, and sold it for about $30~$50-ish, they would've raked up at least 50 million. 50 million USD. The development would've been much faster.

 

 

I just want you to analyze your own words.

 

1.7 million copies of Arma 2 Combined Operations x ~$30 a piece, they have already made close to 50 million thanks purely to the DayZ mod.

 

Where do you think that money is going, exactly? Why would they need to open a kickstarter for a game that is already selling copies and generating income for the company in it's current form? They already have their own kickstarter. You're playing it right now.

Edited September 28, 2013 by SalamanderAnder

[terrvik 2409]

With funding comes lots of responsibility. Looking at how the community is right now I would imagine avoiding any type of crowdfunding was a smart move.

[Mos1ey 6301]

I'm not a big fan of Kickstarter, but I think the OP raises some interesting points. It doesn't 'feel' like there is much money behind SA.

 

Part of me thinks that we should never have been told SA is coming until a month before it is completely, definitely ready to launch in some form. That way we wouldn't be so bothered and would enjoy the mod. 1.8 has been great. Arma III's mod is unnecessary too. These extra considerations confuse people. 

 

More people could have paid a few quid for Arma II and be enjoying DayZ right now. Instead they be like 'I'll just wait for SA', and that's no fun...

 

When development started on the standalone started they were planning on just beefing up the mod a little bit and releasing it as a standalone game that didn't require ArmA II, so it was only going to take a few months to complete. A short time into development they essentially scrapped everything and decided to rebuild the game from the ground up, had this always been the plan I'm not sure that they would have announced the standalone as early as they did. Although people would have probably guessed that something was up due to the community devs taking over development on the mod.

 

Also, as Viktor says - when you start taking people's money it changes everything. The impatient kids turn into paying customers that you're obligated to deliver to. Personally, I think they made the right decision to rely only on BiS and I trust the dev team to deliver us as awesome game that's well worth the wait. :)

Edited September 28, 2013 by mZLY

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

*i have this tiny glimmer of hope that i will have zombies for halloween*

[ThuggleS 45]

I disagree with your statement for a few different reasons.

 

Firstly, what evidence do we have that throwing more money at the development process will result in a better finished product? Will it result in it being released sooner? Yeah, probably. Will bringing on tons more people to put their hands into the development of the game make it better? Not necessarily.Too many cooks in the kitchen, as they say.

 

Secondly, raising money on Kickstarter typically means selling your product for a much lower price than the eventual retail price. So, let's say the full-retail release price of DayZ turns out to be $40. Now let's say they Kickstarter it for $15 and 1 million people buy-in at the $15 level who would actually have paid full $40 on release. This means they lost gross $25 million in expected revenue to gain an extra $15 million in pre-release development capital. This may not always be the best decision for a development team to make.

 

Thirdly, rushing the development and release of the game by any means is only going to hurt the overall quality of the game. I'd rather wait longer to be able to have a better experience with the game when it is actually released. There are TONS of awesome games on the market to play in the mean time.

Edited September 28, 2013 by ThuggleS

[Blackops Bambi 12]

Total mod downloaders right now (although stats have not been updated for so long) is 1.7 million.

 

Think about that.

 

Now, let's say among those, about 1 million of them are willing to pay for the standalone.

 

7 days to die, which had no reputation or brand value whatsoever raked up 500k, with 10k backers.

With NO REPUTATION.

 

If the developers opened up a kickstarter, and sold it for about $30~$50-ish, they would've raked up at least 50 million. 50 million USD. The development would've been much faster.

 

I don't know, this may just be crazy talk coming from a Computer engineering / Economics / Business Administration major, but I really think they made the wrong decision.

 

Don't try to defend them like "They have their own lives. They have no obligation whatsoever". Study more, and you'll learn that they in fact, do have obligations. It's called "Brand Value", and "Customer Value Proposition".

 

They won't go to jail if they keep postponing the release, but they WILL lose revenue, and that's stupid management decision on their part.

 

When's it coming out, I'm done waiting.

 

Apart from the pointless question in the end of your post, you're spot on the money here.

 

While I'm sure the standalone will be a beautiful game once it's finished, I think the branding and marketing of it has been grossly mismanaged. They've now pretty much worked their way into this bizaare "sinkhole"-situation where some randomnly posted devblog shows off a bunch of guys running around naked with crash helmets (because thats OMG-awesome, right!?) and a few new actual features, which are then picked up on in a heartbeat by what is most likely the most invested and enthusiastic modding community the gaming industry has ever seen, and then turned into ACTUAL, instantly playable content at the price of... well... free... and then BIS and co. put their thinking hats back on while trying to come up with what new novelty to blow our minds with next (until we can enjoy that feature too in Epoch/DayZero/Origins/whatever a couple of weeks later). They're basically - they're actually - competing with their own fanbase right now, which seems nothing short of silly, given how much backing DayZ has had from the beginning.

 

Not bashing anyone here. Not Rocket -  not BIS - all of which have their priorities and prerogatives dominated by circumstances that few of us know all or anything at all about. I'll buy the standalone and play it just as sure as I'm downloading and playing pretty much every mod that pops into existance. I just think that it's a mismanagement of ressources that is primarily to blame for the long wait.

[Zombie Jesus 723]

Kickstarter is for companies that need funding, DayZ is backed by a developer that has the funding so why bother with a kickstarter. You would have people buy in before the game is out and it would result in people getting upset that the Alpha did not meet their final product needs. Kickstarter is for true indie development teams, despite what some will state on this forum BIS and the DayZ dev team are not really indie developers. They work for a medium size development company with enough resources to internally fund a project, no need to muddy the waters with a kickstarter in this case. 

 

The less players, the better.
To an extent, of course. 

 

What? It might be better for the players who have been here awhile but the company itself (BIS not Dean) does not prescribe to that logic. If they truly wanted this to happen they would not make a public Alpha, this is why it is taking this long because they do not want to release a public Alpha that causes too much butthurt. If they were going with a smaller closed Alpha and releasing an open Beta product your statement would make more sense for the initial release. 

[beavis_5000 111]

I think any long time gamer would much rather have a well finished and put together game than a game with a rushed release date.

 

We've been burnt in the past with this issue so I say let them do there thing and do it right because if they do we are looking at one of the greatest games ever made.

[mark3236 (DayZ) 77]

I'm not saying we should be rushing the game or something. It's just that from the videos we have right now, they do seem quite underfunded. The development has been slow, that's indisputable. The devs themselves said that they missed their own deadline. However, we definitely know that the devs aren't playing around. They are working their ass off. That suggests underfunding.

True, too many devs might not be the best way to go, but they definitely do need more resources.

 

Then, why do they need funding if they have BIS? Large companies rarely make the best managerial decisions. Even though the DayZ mod was the one that made additional 1.7million*40 USD revenue, I highly doubt a large amount went into the standalone.

 

Go into the BIS homepage. Do you see a category for DayZ SA? No. They probably didn't fund them much. Maybe not at all, really. Do you really think BIS gave Rocket 50 million for development? If BIS was that much profit-oriented in the first place, they won't be making these hardcore simulation games (they have the worst potential sales, demand-wise).

 

I'm not saying Kickstarter in specific would be the best way to go, but if. IF. If they are low on capital right now (I have no idea if they really are), they brought that on themselves, that's all.

 

 

For instance, I would've been more than willing to throw 10~20 bucks for nothing, if they had asked for support in the beginning.

 

Now, I'm not that much of a royal customer. I am royal, but I go into the Army in 6 months. If they delay it more than 6 months, I won't be able to play it for 2 years. There goes their one customer, right there.

 

P.S. "When's it coming out" was a rhetorical question.

Edited September 28, 2013 by mark3236

[Inception. 9443]

 

What? It might be better for the players who have been here awhile but the company itself (BIS not Dean) does not prescribe to that logic. If they truly wanted this to happen they would not make a public Alpha, this is why it is taking this long because they do not want to release a public Alpha that causes too much butthurt. If they were going with a smaller closed Alpha and releasing an open Beta product your statement would make more sense for the initial release. 

 

No, of course it would hurt the company. But for me as a player it would be fine.

[bfisher 561]

It doesn't "feel" like a money issue.  It feels more like a design and implementation issue and throwing money at it might not make much difference.  You can't make a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnent.

[SalamanderAnder (DayZ) 1747]

I'm not saying we should be rushing the game or something. It's just that from the videos we have right now, they do seem quite underfunded. The development has been slow, that's indisputable. The devs themselves said that they missed their own deadline. However, we definitely know that the devs aren't playing around. They are working their ass off. That suggests underfunding.

 

 

How does someone working their ass off suggest underfunding? You have to pay people to work.

 

Also, in the last dev blog rocket said that they were moving into new offices and getting new team members. So your point is moot. You can't move a team of developers, hire more developers, and provide all the equipment they need, ect, ect, without money. So CLEARLY they have funding. Case closed. Throwing "more money" at a problem doesn't just magically fix it. You still have to do the thing that you're paying for, and that takes time and effort.

 

Money doesn't buy the solution, it buys the effort, which uses up time. Get used to it. All video games go through this process. The only difference is that usually the average ignoramus media consumer doesn't get to see a game go from prototype to full scale release in minute detail like we get to with DayZ.

 

How long did it take to develop Skyrim, which doesn't even have multiplayer and has a world that is significantly smaller than DayZ's? RHETORICAL QUESTION FARLEY. It took them over four years. Here we have Dayz, a game that has been in development for about a year and some change, and you think it's a money problem? You have a patience problem.

 

Another example is Watch Dogs. That game has been in development since 2009, yet it wasn't announced until 2012! That's THREE WHOLE YEARS of development time that not a single public soul was even aware of. So far, DayZ has had 1/3rd the development time of that game. And you think money is the thing that made it happen? No. It was lots of effort, over lots of time. It's literally that simple.

Edited September 30, 2013 by SalamanderAnder

[toxicsludge 406]

You can't make a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnent.

I could try though, right?

[Conkykillz 791]

What the Standalone has not been released yet .............

Why wasn't i told.......

Rocket your FIRED.

 

i Just love how people WANT,WANT,WANT, NOW,NOW,NOW

Sorry OP you have to get to the back of the line, in this long que of Very Patient Players