Should The Alpha Disclaimer Let The Game Off The Hook?

[Prag 5]

First let us examine what DayZ (in my eyes) attempts to be. 

 

A fun multiplayer survival game where players can play in many different ways. 

 

Some people would prefer that survival is more from zombies than other players but it succeeds in being a survival game. The dev team have been throwing a lot of minor features into the game with the goal of allowing players to be highly unique in their look and playing style. And it's mostly fun.

 

Now let's look at what the SA was supposed to improve upon. 

 

It was supposed to have fewer hackers and bugs while bringing more stabilized features. 

 

I can't say if there are fewer hackers or bugs but I can say that as of now (understandably) there aren't many stabilized features. 

 

Lastly I want to examine the argument that people make when they scream IT'S ALPHA. 

 

To me, the problem with telling others that it's Alpha or to uninstall the game and quit playing or whatever it is that we've seen so often posted with hostility is that you're then telling those players that they MUST have the same expectations that you have even though they paid for the same product with the same amount of money as you. 

 

You're saying that because you expected the game to be developed slowly that the other player must have had the same expectations from the beginning and if you didn't you can just quit the game and stop whining. But what if a person is going off of what Dean has said the timeline is? We all know that he and the devs have maybe overestimated what they and the engine could handle within a given time. 

 

To give a specific situation: To a person who hasn't played (much or at all) but saw Dean say that he expects for cars and bases to be here in x amount of time (within months), if those things are implemented and then pushed really far back should the disclaimer really cover that? 

 

This is an open question. I'm personally split. I think that the developers expected more from the engine and now there behind because they're working on the game in a different way. But then should they and the game be let off the hook if it appears that they are pushing forward with plans rather than catching up because of the disclaimer? 

 

I agree that some things that frequently get complained about go back to it being a really stripped version of an Alpha game. But then other things shouldn't get the benefit of it being an alpha. 

 

I should point out that I'm not talking about the players that post crazy things like "The game could have been done within a matter of weeks" or people like that. I've seen people make some valid points in post obviously rooted in frustration (which is understandable) only to be told that they and their opinions don't matter because it's Alpha. 

 

And as more of a personal question aside from the main point of this thread: Is there any way that the developers could have known about the issues with the game engine before they started using it for development? I ask because one friend that I have that works in game design says they absolutely should have given the fact that they used a version of it for the mod and the time that they had to work with it while the other says that it's more complicated than that. 

 

Edited March 3, 2014 by Prag

[antonioajc 500]

I really, REALLY need a TL DR. I'm half asleep here.

[blissfulkunt 196]

Yeah, Im not exactly sure what your trying too say to be honest, maybe it went right over my head... I cant tell if your dissing the game or pro DayZ.

 

Sooo.... in that case whether this has anything to do with what you said or not... Yes I think it should let the game off the hook?

 

Im sure the developers knew the problems going into it but im sure they also knew they could fix it? make it better?

 

This Alpha is the only alpha I see with such potential, quick updates and devs that actually care.

 

Im so excited too see where its gonna be in a year, even a month.. especially with the crew doubled there is definately going to be big things coming.

 

Sorry if my answer had nothing to do with what you said, im tired too. but I tried!!

[solodude23 649]

Answer to the title: During the alpha, yes.

[Capo 323]

 

To give a specific situation: To a person who hasn't played (much or at all) but saw Dean say that he expects for cars and bases to be here in x amount of time (within months), if those things are implemented and then pushed really far back should the disclaimer really cover that? 

 

 

 

 

Yes, definitely. A lot of game studios keep everything under wraps until the beta/preview at the earliest, and even then they don't really communicate with their fanbase, but rather just gather all the data that the beta testing is for. This style of development has it's advantages in that usually they haven't made any statements to be made accountable for.

 

I particular enjoy Dayz's development team because of the fact that they are so free with information and are willing to communicate with the community. Because of that though, it means that some of the time they're going to say stuff that isn't 100% accurate or predict deadlines they won't make, because making a game is hard work, and shit happens. I don't think that's taken into account with some complaints. 

 

Of course this forum community, like any, has it's fair share of idiots, trolls and children who ask for or complain about things things that are completely irrelevant, stupid, or already being dealt with. Not to mention the people who come onto the forum and instead of filing a bug report, post a ragethread because they died, in an alpha which is known to be riddled with bugs, and then wonder why they get an "alpha" response. 

 

On the other side of that equation, you have people who give the impression that they speak for the dev team, and that's just as bad, and probably one of the reasons why this forum has been abandoned by the team in favor of reddit.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Capo

[Hrki 94]

Play game in alpha = http://imgur.com/vg7D4xi

[soulfirez 901]

As for slow development they warned it would be in alpha for a year or more so yes when your expectations are finish it now i want vehicles now i want i want then your going to get told to pack ya bags...

[Esolu 320]

The alpha disclaimer didn't allow me to read this.

[LaughingJack (DayZ) 767]

Now let's look at what the SA was supposed to improve upon. 

 

It was supposed to have fewer hackers and bugs while bringing more stabilized features. 

 

I can't say if there are fewer hackers or bugs but I can say that as of now (understandably) there aren't many stabilized features. 

 

Yeah...no, not only. Sure these things were also attempted to have, but the main difference between Mod and SA is just that in the SA things can be made, which just weren't possible in the mod because of the limitation of the engine, the server architecture etc.

Somewhere I read this analogy which fits imho real good:

Imagine ArmA 2 as a small house with a shower (the Multiplayer) in in the second floor. Somebody started building a bathtub there (DayZ).

The inhabitants were absolute happy, but soon demanded more and more, it should be bigger, have more things, made out of marmor etc. etc. But the stairs were too small to bring the things up, so a crane was put on top of the house and a hole was broken into the side of the house to bring it in. So the bathtub was getting bigger and better, but the house wasn't made for that and it became cracks and the water pressure destroyed the pipes, the floor was hanging through and nearly breaking and the neighbours brats were inserting nasty things in the pipes, since they had to be made outside the house...

So, since there was no way to make the bathtub any bigger without completly destroying the house, a new house was built. This time with a bigger stair, hardened, waterproof floor, better pipes inside the house etc. etc. But the inhabitants only saw the bathtub, that was brought upstairs and as soon as water was running they demanded to bath, even if they were told, that it was not as comfortable or shiny or with all the funny extras they knew from the old bathtub, hell not even the roof of the new house was finished and sometimes it was raining straight into the bathtub.

But since they were begging and begging, they were allowed to bath - and they complained about the missing of the shiny things they were used to, the cold water that sometimes came out, the rain that fell through the roof, and that these idiotic brats still were able to get to the pipes, because some windows were missing....

And that is the story, what DayZ SA was supposed to improve upon...

 

 

 

Lastly I want to examine the argument that people make when they scream IT'S ALPHA. 

 

To me, the problem with telling others that it's Alpha or to uninstall the game and quit playing or whatever it is that we've seen so often posted with hostility is that you're then telling those players that they MUST have the same expectations that you have even though they paid for the same product with the same amount of money as you. 

 

I can't speak for all of the people here, since some are just morons, but I think they biggest part of the people that answer with "ALFER!" is just plain annoyed by the 100th thread with "Wher are the vehikls?" or "FIX THAT!" and after 10, 15 or 20 times answering the same thinsg eloquently they just don't care anymore and write "ALPHA" or even other, even less nice things....

 

 

You're saying that because you expected the game to be developed slowly that the other player must have had the same expectations from the beginning and if you didn't you can just quit the game and stop whining. But what if a person is going off of what Dean has said the timeline is? We all know that he and the devs have maybe overestimated what they and the engine could handle within a given time. 

 

To give a specific situation: To a person who hasn't played (much or at all) but saw Dean say that he expects for cars and bases to be here in x amount of time (within months), if those things are implemented and then pushed really far back should the disclaimer really cover that? 

 

This is an open question. I'm personally split. I think that the developers expected more from the engine and now there behind because they're working on the game in a different way. But then should they and the game be let off the hook if it appears that they are pushing forward with plans rather than catching up because of the disclaimer?

 

Don't trust Deans timelines. Hell, he is known for delaying. The problem here is, he is neither blizzard saying "it's done, when it's done, deal with it or get lost" nor is he a PR guy (he is the nightmare of all PR departments i think ;)) that gives vague answers that are correct - he is far too direct and far too honest and just says what he believes - and that may be wrong. And poor hicks is always the one that has to backpedal....

And yes, within an alpha, this IS covered in my honest opinion. In a real Alpha there ware always things, that can happen, which may push features back, because they demand fixing. E.g. think of the Vehicles. To be implemented real good like it is planned, Physics and crafting has to be implemented. Let's say, there is a major problem with Physics at core level, so that has to be fixed, so vehicles will need a month or two more.

Annoying? Maybe. But this is exactly one of the things that CAN happen during an alpha.

 

Well they WERE behind, and they just have this delay now on them, even when they are on track now or can implement things even faster than they thought they could in the original timeline (e.g.: those fashionable items. Since the programmers were working on the engine and the server architecture, the desigenrs were crafting. So it was possible to push out such an amount of "fashion"-items rather fast after the Alpha-release, because it was already delayed, but these items were ready to go, since the desigenrs weren't sitting on their ahnds...

 

 

And as more of a personal question aside from the main point of this thread: Is there any way that the developers could have known about the issues with the game engine before they started using it for development? I ask because one friend that I have that works in game design says they absolutely should have given the fact that they used a version of it for the mod and the time that they had to work with it while the other says that it's more complicated than that.

 

I am a programmer (but not in gaming industry :( ) and if I had tom take a guess I'd say, it's not that easy.

Yes, the limitations of the engine (even if it was rebuilt totally) could have been guessed, since it derivates from the "original" mod-engine, but not all issues, since some things just can not be guessed and aere just seen as they occur...so: it IS more complicated than that. And on the other Hand BI owns DayZ and I'm pretty sure, they wouldn't have let the DayZ devs buy in another engine.

Edited March 3, 2014 by LaughingJack

[Eight Ball 26]

 I think that the developers expected more from the engine and now there behind because they're working on the game in a different way.

 

I think neither Rocket nor BIS are surprised with what the engine can handle, at least not surprise in the bad way. If anything they probably have under-estimated what they could do.

Dean has been modding on this engine for many years and BIS...well BIS made the engine and have been working on it for the last decade.

So it's safe to say they know what it's capable of.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Sooke

[CrashBoomK 12]

Honestly I don't see the problems.  Let me lay this out for ya'll like this.  The game is in Alpha.  Now not only is the game in Alpha but you have an actual Playable Consistent Alpha.  Now take a game that also is allowing Alpha aka Shroud of the Avatar who only does brief glimpses for a weekend at a time separated by several months and only certain systems.  Which would you prefer?

[Prag 5]

 I cant tell if your dissing the game or pro DayZ.

 

That's a small part of the problem that I was speaking to. It feels like people have chosen sides between two teams that are hated rivals on the forums. I think that like a sports team you can still really enjoy the product but want just a few things improved and that doesn't mean that you should be told that it's Alpha so STFU and get off. 

 

And LaughingJack did a great job of explaining it. I get that it would be frustrating to see a million threads about Zombies coming through walls and I myself get annoyed at the threads about how KOS can be fixed even though again that's just a style of play. But I don't go and yell at a person and tell them that they're worthless. I just don't reply so that the thread can die faster and I wish that others did that.

 

 

Honestly I don't see the problems.  Let me lay this out for ya'll like this.  The game is in Alpha.  Now not only is the game in Alpha but you have an actual Playable Consistent Alpha.  Now take a game that also is allowing Alpha aka Shroud of the Avatar who only does brief glimpses for a weekend at a time separated by several months and only certain systems.  Which would you prefer?

 

I can't tell if you were being serious but this is another small part of the problem. If you were being serious then you couldn't have read the entire thread but you still decided to take a hard defensive stance. 

 

But getting back to the original point, the consensus seems to be Yes during Alpha. 

 

So my next question is do you truly honestly expect for the game to reach beta stabilization? Not if you care or not but if you really think that it will by the end of the year?

 

I don't want for people to read to much into this and tell me to bug off because I want beta too fast. I didn't play this particular mod but I noticed that a lot of people seem to think that it was half-done. I personally feel like that's the nature of any mod but again I can't personally give an opinion on this one. 

 

So I'm leaving another question open to you more experienced guys. 

[rickyriot 1009]

[OrLoK 16186]

 

 

 probably one of the reasons why this forum has been abandoned by the team in favor of reddit.

Hello there

 

Big dogs testicles.

 

The Devs have not abandoned the forums. I talk to many of them almost every day and all the points of contact are bought up.

 

R *is* a redditor and it is his proffered medium, that's nothing new though.

 

Posting and reading here is just not as simple as other forms of comms like Twitter etc which can easily be done whether on a PC or a mobile device.

 

Bah humbug.

 

Rgds

 

LoK

[Nocturnal (DayZ) 85]

The alpha disclaimer absolutely lets it off criticism in terms of the amount of bugs and lack of features.

 

By all means, report bugs and suggest/discuss features but if you want to throw harsh criticism about the game and developers while judging the Standalone in it's current then I'm sorry, but the alpha was not meant for you.

 

Come back in a year.

[TEST_SUBJECT_83 465]

TL;DR

 

 

Yes.

The game has only been in alpha for less than 3 months.

[Karmaterror 982]

I would usually type a long reply....but

 

Projected alpha period.....2 YEARS

 

Current build time.....3 MONTHS

 

LESS than 13% of build time gone

 

Of course it does lol

[Prag 5]

The alpha disclaimer absolutely lets it off criticism in terms of the amount of bugs and lack of features.

 

By all means, report bugs and suggest/discuss features but if you want to throw harsh criticism about the game and developers while judging the Standalone in it's current then I'm sorry, but the alpha was not meant for you.

 

Come back in a year.

 

I assume that you're speaking more generally rather than directly and anyhow I agree. Everybody seems to agree that it does let the game off the hook currently. 

 

I guess the thing that split me was more related to a different subject. But I've gotten my answer. Thanks posters. 

[oregonized 673]

If you actually took the time to read the disclaimer, you should not be bitching about the game like it is a finished product.  This goes for everyone.

[deebz1234 243]

without reading your post.

 

 

YES

[Leo Balzac 190]

I demand the alpha build be the same as the final build because I've looked at an example of code once so therefore I'm a developer with experience and I know what I'm talking about. Anyone who thinks this game needs time to be made properly are just fanboys who will do anything to defend Dean and BIS. This game has been in development for over a year now therefore Alpha should be the same as release. 

[Nylrem 12]

Personally I think it does and doesn't.  Yes it is an alpha, and yes it will have bugs and glitches from here to the moon, but the issue is we had to pay for it.

 

Even though we paid for it with the express consent and knowledge that it was an alpha and would have bugs and glitches (to cover BIS against legal action for having unfinished software that could at some point break down and be unplayable) we still payed for it.

 

The fact that we paid means that they have already made money off the players, therefore the players are already paying for the development of dayz with no real guarantee that we won't be paying 10x more in the future.  I'm positive that if I went to work and told my boss "hey you are gonna pay me now for the work I will do next month"  I would get laughed out of the building.

 

Most games that release early don't charge, because the game will have bugs up the wazoo, and they must make sure it is playable before it is paid for.  This is the nature of the entertainment industry, you must invest your money in your product and hope for a return, not take a huge profit and promise for it to work out later.

So lets look at it another way.  What if after rocket splits all development is ceased, and the SA dies.  No servers, no support, no single player.  Will you be happy losing your money?  Too bad, it was an alpha and it didn't work and you agreed...

 

If I pay for a game, it should work consistently, as in no random deaths, no falling through buildings, no easily glitching into buildings, and yes even working npcs.  So although it's an alpha, asking for money for it implies something more than getting told too bad.  And I imagine the reason it is out as an alpha is so that the fan base didn't die/run to another game during development.  And the reason you have to pay, is because I bet someone in BIS still wasn't convinced that it will work and make money.

 

Plus isn't just screaming ALPHA in a thread randomly a pointless post and a form of trolling? 

[Prag 5]

Personally I think it does and doesn't.  Yes it is an alpha, and yes it will have bugs and glitches from here to the moon, but the issue is we had to pay for it.

 

Even though we paid for it with the express consent and knowledge that it was an alpha and would have bugs and glitches (to cover BIS against legal action for having unfinished software that could at some point break down and be unplayable) we still payed for it.

 

The fact that we paid means that they have already made money off the players, therefore the players are already paying for the development of dayz with no real guarantee that we won't be paying 10x more in the future.  I'm positive that if I went to work and told my boss "hey you are gonna pay me now for the work I will do next month"  I would get laughed out of the building.

 

Most games that release early don't charge, because the game will have bugs up the wazoo, and they must make sure it is playable before it is paid for.  This is the nature of the entertainment industry, you must invest your money in your product and hope for a return, not take a huge profit and promise for it to work out later.

So lets look at it another way.  What if after rocket splits all development is ceased, and the SA dies.  No servers, no support, no single player.  Will you be happy losing your money?  Too bad, it was an alpha and it didn't work and you agreed...

 

If I pay for a game, it should work consistently, as in no random deaths, no falling through buildings, no easily glitching into buildings, and yes even working npcs.  So although it's an alpha, asking for money for it implies something more than getting told too bad.  And I imagine the reason it is out as an alpha is so that the fan base didn't die/run to another game during development.  And the reason you have to pay, is because I bet someone in BIS still wasn't convinced that it will work and make money.

 

Plus isn't just screaming ALPHA in a thread randomly a pointless post and a form of trolling? 

 

I especially agree with the last sentence. Overall I think that it's a well thought out statement and a valid point that added to this. 

 

Before we have people who come on and say "I only payed x amount of money for it and I've already gotten my value. Don't you get that AAA games that have been worst cost more. Great Value" 

 

I'd like to say that I get that you're coming from... a place of principle. If I only paid $2 for lemonade at a neighborhood stand only to realize that it was water with yellow food colouring in it I'd still be pissed and feel cheated. 

[DarkwaveDomina 1099]

What hook? The game page practically tells people not to buy it because it's in a state.

 

If, in a year or two, the game has not made a major improvement and patches are non-existent you can put it on all the hooks you want.

[Iowa23 12]

In law you can in 'some' cases, take 'some' resonsibiity, for telling someone to do something that is unlawful or detrimental to said person or other persons.

 

People have freedom of will so, telling someone to do something extreamly rarely results in 100% guilt for said action. One example would be a person telling a severly mentally disabled or delusioned person to do something unlawful or harmful.

 

So when you are told not to do something, explicitly, and even if you do make that choice to be very sure, if you deside take that action there is clearly nobody in the world to blame other than yourself. People need to stop asking for refunds, its insulting to yourselves every dam person on the plannet.

 

The game is very accumplished if slightly bare bones, but with a clearly stated 1 year plus of alpha in countless sources on the internet i can't see how you can ask for any more at alpha release