Looking back, Do you think that EA release was a good idea?

[Karmaterror 982]

I say the EA was a brilliant move and has helped the game no end.....

 

Without EA we wouldn't have them taking over a new studio dedicated to zombie AI

 

Without EA we wouldn't be seeing the size of the dev team doubled

 

Without EA we wouldn't have a team of mass testers (currently what.. 1.5 million strong) finding bugs, robustly testing new systems and features, and more importantly how these features effect the server and database under load, not just in a closed 20-40 tester environment.

 

Without EA we would have a tiny team working there asses off, as triple A studios eventually fumbled there way to something generic but enough like dayz to pull in the masses.

 

Without EA we would have the hype and popularity die down, we already saw the mod become quieter towards the end. Then we wouldn't have had the sales figures that allowed for everything I mentioned above.

 

I rest my case :)

Edited April 15, 2014 by Karmaterror

[tatchell (DayZ) 73]

not sure if too naive or just plain dumb.

 

you contradict yourself in your own argument without noticing.

 

The game sold this much based on the hype of the mod, now tell me, how would they make MORE money waiting more 2 years, letting their hype fade away and then releasing the game?

 

Yeah, if they would finish the game, they wouldnt sell much at all, seems that the one that's bad with math here it's you, my friend.

 

They made the right decision to make the more money possible from the game, now my point is that they already have the money.

 

Now it's all down to hoping bohemia will actually make up to their promises and finish this game on the scheduled time, and by a brief look on this development timeline, i dont think it will be the case. Dean have some bad issues with scheduling as we can see by the time it took to the standalone even get to this broken alpha that we have now.

 

Plus it's taking forever to implement the most basic mechanics like a decent zombie AI and pathing, decent ballistics, loot system and hunting.

 

If you really "want to believe" this game future will be all rainbows and ponies, dont blame realist people for trying to make their money worth something.

 

Okay, let me clear this up for you because you seem to be too simple to understand anything I'm saying.

 

Firstly, the original argument that I was having was about whether or not Early Access was merely just a "cash-grab" driven by financial interests, suggesting that BIS don't care for the demand for EA or the fact that the final product would benefit from testing. I was and am arguing that it cannot have been this case because it doesn't make sense due to the fact that the most profitable tactic would not have been to allow and EA at all as this reduces their total revenue.

 

Your premise that all of SA's hype has come from the mod. That is just untrue. Standalone has attracted it's OWN interest, not just piggy-backed off the mod's success. First evidence would be that already more people are now playing SA in it's Alpha phase than the total number of players that have ever played the mod. These new players clearly didn't care about the mod (like myself) because we didn't get it. SA has attracted people due to the hype specifically about SA. Not mod hype. SA hype. Clear?

 

You're saying that by releasing the game only when it's finished will mean people will no longer be interested in DayZ. The hype will have "faded away". This is also just wrong. Look at so many games that have had large gaps between 2 releases. Let's think about Tomb Raider for example. People didn't lose interest in the franchise because there was a long wait between the earlier releases and the modern releases. In fact as time goes on between releases there is more interest because there is a growth in a renewed novelty factor. So the success of BF3 after so long since the BF2 release is an example.

 

So, let's imagine that BIS finish making this game at the end of 2015. If they wanted to make as much money as possible they would have decided to release the game when it was finished, so 2016. The marketing strategy would clearly not be to start hyping up a game that won't be finished for another 3 years (which is what has happened, as the SA was first announced in 2012), they would do it at a sensible time before release. Otherwise this would maybe have seen interest tail off as we are possibly seeing now. So, in response to your silly point, NO THEY WOULD NOT HAVE LOST MONEY BY RELEASING THE GAME LATER BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE PUBLICISED IT AS EARLY AS THEY HAVE DONE. The hyping up would have been later and the release would have been later. Do you understand? Have I lost you yet?

 

Therefore, to prove my ultimate point that EA is not a "cash-grab", what BIS has done by offering us access to the Alpha is forfeiting interest in the game (=profit) in order to create a better product by testing it and also allowing 2 million people so far to get the game at a discount. Therefore it is pretty fucking obvious that they are not trying to optimise their profits from SA or else they're doing an awful job at it.

 

What BIS has done is please hardcore fans by giving in to strong demand for EA. This has forfeited profit by allowing many people to get a discount. This has also meant that the game will lose "hype" because people will know about it and what it's like for a very long time before it is finished. The only thing here that actually benefits BIS is the fact that the testing will allow their product to be better. The people who really win out of this are us. This is what I am arguing, EA has not been a financially logical decision other than allowing for the improvement of the product.

 

What do you not understand?

Edited April 15, 2014 by tatchell

[rydekk 250]

So, as title says, do you think that releasing this game in its state as EA alpha back in december was a good idea? Do you think it needed more work even for an alpha release? Or maybe more features implemented?

 

Wait... EA is involved in this?

[akafugitive 244]

Yes, but most products also have certain standards to meet.

 

You cannot for example sell someone half a washing machine as a whole one and so on. 

 

All I am saying is that Steam implements some checks and measures to ensure that the scenario I outlined cannot happen. Are you not for consumer protection?

Steam does a pretty good job I think. I am fine with the associated risk when I buy an alpha game, I've been screwed over for thousands of dollars before from worse things then buying an alpha game, I moved on.

[DayZ_Friendly 145]

do you seriously believe that this game is in a better state than titan fall ?

 

I bought Titanfall for $80.  I bought DayZ SA for $30.

 

The amount of technical problems I've been having with Titanfall: SLI issues, network issues, serious lag in-game, and overall graphics quality.  The campaign is a joke.    I want to ask for my money back.

 

DayZ SA on the other hand is graphically beautiful, it rivals the best graphics out there...BF4, Arma3.  The "emergent" gameplay I've already gotten far exceeds anything I've ever experienced before in any game.  The adrenaline rush of the first few fire fights.  It's the best $30 I've ever spent...hands down.

 

So, yes.  Titanfull can suck it.

[doctorbadsign 645]

Steam does a pretty good job I think. I am fine with the associated risk when I buy an alpha game, I've been screwed over for thousands of dollars before from worse things then buying an alpha game, I moved on.

 

Just because you have been screwed over for worse things doesn't mean that Steam should not support checks and measures to ensure that the Early Access program is not abused.

 

I'm not necessarily saying that it should be scrapped. But perhaps developers need to pay a fee for every three months in Early Access or something.

 

There needs to be all sorts of checks and measures implemented on Steam to be fair. Some kind of vetting procedure would not be a bad thing, whereby someone checks the see whether the product is as described and so on.

[lipemr 160]

Okay, let me clear this up for you because you seem to be too simple to understand anything I'm saying.

 

Firstly, the original argument that I was having was about whether or not Early Access was merely just a "cash-grab" driven by financial interests, suggesting that BIS don't care for the demand for EA or the fact that the final product would benefit from testing. I was and am arguing that it cannot have been this case because it doesn't make sense due to the fact that the most profitable tactic would not have been to allow and EA at all as this reduces their total revenue.

 

Your premise that all of SA's hype has come from the mod. That is just untrue. Standalone has attracted it's OWN interest, not just piggy-backed off the mod's success. First evidence would be that already more people are now playing SA in it's Alpha phase than the total number of players that have ever played the mod. These new players clearly didn't care about the mod (like myself) because we didn't get it. SA has attracted people due to the hype specifically about SA. Not mod hype. SA hype. Clear?

 

You're saying that by releasing the game only when it's finished will mean people will no longer be interested in DayZ. The hype will have "faded away". This is also just wrong. Look at so many games that have had large gaps between 2 releases. Let's think about Tomb Raider for example. People didn't lose interest in the franchise because there was a long wait between the earlier releases and the modern releases. In fact as time goes on between releases there is more interest because there is a growth in a renewed novelty factor. So the success of BF3 after so long since the BF2 release is an example.

 

So, let's imagine that BIS finish making this game at the end of 2015. If they wanted to make as much money as possible they would have decided to release the game when it was finished, so 2016. The marketing strategy would clearly not be to start hyping up a game that won't be finished for another 3 years (which is what has happened, as the SA was first announced in 2012), they would do it at a sensible time before release. Otherwise this would maybe have seen interest tail off as we are possibly seeing now. So, in response to your silly point, NO THEY WOULD NOT HAVE LOST MONEY BY RELEASING THE GAME LATER BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE PUBLICISED IT AS EARLY AS THEY HAVE DONE. The hyping up would have been later and the release would have been later. Do you understand? Have I lost you yet?

 

Therefore, to prove my ultimate point that EA is not a "cash-grab", what BIS has done by offering us access to the Alpha is forfeiting interest in the game (=profit) in order to create a better product by testing it and also allowing 2 million people so far to get the game at a discount. Therefore it is pretty fucking obvious that they are not trying to optimise their profits from SA or else they're doing an awful job at it.

 

What BIS has done is please hardcore fans by giving in to strong demand for EA. This has forfeited profit by allowing many people to get a discount. This has also meant that the game will lose "hype" because people will know about it and what it's like for a very long time before it is finished. The only thing here that actually benefits BIS is the fact that the testing will allow their product to be better. The people who really win out of this are us. This is what I am arguing, EA has not been a financially logical decision other than allowing for the improvement of the product.

 

What do you not understand?

 

jesus christ, you're just plain dumb, silly me thinking you're naive.

 

There's so much bullshit in your post that i wont even bother writing a wall o text to a person who clearly have 2 digits of IQ.

 

First of all, the game only have the public it does because the veterans from the mod, driven by hype, made SA top seller on steam in the release week, if wasnt for the mod players, dayz SA wouldnt even exist. People like you would probably still be playing minecraft or another "of the moment" bullshit.

 

Second: This "zombie survival" niche is a recent thing, brought by walking dead and made to pc gaming by dead island, left 4 dead and got its apex on dayz mod, now it's starting to get old and people dont pay so much attention anymore to games of the genre.

 

Third: You clearly dont know anything about sales and market demand/interest, thinking that all people that bought the game now, right after the apex of this 'zombie survival' tendence, would buy the game 3 years after, when there will be probably another completely different tendencie in the gaming market and DayZ will be like a need for speed is for us. You're clearly dumb if you dont realize that.

Edited April 15, 2014 by lipemr

[tatchell (DayZ) 73]

jesus christ, you're just plain dumb, silly me thinking you're naive.

 

There's so much bullshit in your post that i wont even bother writing a wall o text to a person who clearly have 2 digits of IQ.

 

First of all, the game only have the public it does because the veterans from the mod, driven by hype, made SA top seller on steam in the release week, if wasnt for the mod players, dayz SA wouldnt even exist. People like you would probably still be playing minecraft or another "of the moment" bullshit.

 

Second: This "zombie survival" niche is a recent thing, brought by walking dead and made to pc gaming by dead island, left 4 dead and got its apex on dayz mod, now it's starting to get old and people dont pay so much attention anymore to games of the genre.

 

Third: You clearly dont know anything about sales and market demand/interest, thinking that all people that bought the game now, right after the apex of this 'zombie survival' tendence, would buy the game 3 years after, when there will be probably another completely different tendencie in the gaming market and DayZ will be like a need for speed is for us. You're clearly dumb if you dont realize that.

Yes "silly you". You're clearly too incapable to even bother trying to argue about what was even being discussed. Try reading posts properly cos everything your saying is irrelevant. Pretty pathetic tbh.

 

Just try answering this question - has early access been merely to line the pockets of BIS? This is what we were talking about before you came along.

Edited April 15, 2014 by tatchell

[akafugitive 244]

Just because you have been screwed over for worse things doesn't mean that Steam should not support checks and measures to ensure that the Early Access program is not abused.

 

I'm not necessarily saying that it should be scrapped. But perhaps developers need to pay a fee for every three months in Early Access or something.

 

There needs to be all sorts of checks and measures implemented on Steam to be fair. Some kind of vetting procedure would not be a bad thing, whereby someone checks the see whether the product is as described and so on.

but there is. WarZ was kicked off of steam for awhile because they included a list of features that didn't exist yet.

[doctorbadsign 645]

but there is. WarZ was kicked off of steam for awhile because they included a list of features that didn't exist yet.

 

Yes, but it should never have got there in the first place.

 

And you should also note that it is still there under a different name.

[dallas 5195]

I can't speak for everyone, but it seems 1,845,617 people thought the idea of an early release was worth $30.

Edited April 15, 2014 by Dallas

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

You're clearly too retarded to even bother trying to argue about what was even being discussed. Try reading posts properly cos everything your saying is irrelevant. Pretty pathetic tbh.

You may want to edit your post with the R word before the forum gods smite thee :p

[tatchell (DayZ) 73]

You may want to edit your post with the R word before the forum gods smite thee :P

Haha thanks for the heads up!

[lipemr 160]

Yes "silly you". You're clearly too incapable to even bother trying to argue about what was even being discussed. Try reading posts properly cos everything your saying is irrelevant. Pretty pathetic tbh.

 

Just try answering this question - has early access been merely to line the pockets of BIS? This is what we were talking about before you came along.

 

arguments ran short, so you try to change the subject? typical.

[tatchell (DayZ) 73]

arguments ran short, so you try to change the subject? typical.

No, what you said was irrelevant and you're not worth the time. So can you actually give me some kind of relevant answer to the argument that you insisted on butting in to? Or are you really too "dumb" as you put it?

Edited April 15, 2014 by tatchell

[akafugitive 244]

Yes, but it should never have got there in the first place.

And you should also note that it is still there under a different name.

I get what your saying, and it is a horrible game that did horrible things but steam is about allowing small gaming companies take off, I think steam has inspired more creativity then caused harm. If I spent $20 on a crappy game i play twice then so be it. You could always go back to spending $60 a pop on Frappe mainstream games that are no better. Dota 2 has never been completed and it is one of the most popular games Edited April 15, 2014 by akafugitive

[Inception. 9443]

Lipemr, I have told you before to be nice. Stop insulting other users. As for you, tatchell, don't lower to his level.

[xX_fr0st-w0lf_Xx (DayZ) 343]

Dayz  may not (and probrably is not) all about the cash. We know the history, we know how we got here. However how much of the 40 million dollars made for this game will be reinvested in dayz? 50%, 35%, 15%. 

 

If the company can keep the consumers happy while spending the least amount of funds then it is expected that they do that.

 

However, everyone here may be right, BIS is not about the money after all, and in that case we will see them investing a much greater percentage of the profits made by dayz. 

 

And if that is true, then you can expect the best zombie MMO ever. 

[lipemr 160]

Dayz  may not (and probrably is not) all about the cash. We know the history, we know how we got here. However how much of the 40 million dollars made for this game will be reinvested in dayz? 50%, 35%, 15%. 

 

If the company can keep the consumers happy while spending the least amount of funds then it is expected that they do that.

 

However, everyone here may be right, BIS is not about the money after all, and in that case we will see them investing a much greater percentage of the profits made by dayz. 

 

And if that is true, then you can expect the best zombie MMO ever. 

 

It's only down to hoping, now. And that's a terrible thing.

 

when there's a LOT of money in the equation, anyone that knows the real world knows that people tend to be douchebags and fuck everyone else.

Edited April 16, 2014 by lipemr

[xX_fr0st-w0lf_Xx (DayZ) 343]

It's only down to hoping, now. And that's a terrible thing.

 

when there's a LOT of money in the equation, anyone that knows the real world knows that people tend to be douchebags and fuck everyone else.

[doctorbadsign 645]

I get what your saying, and it is a horrible game that did horrible things but steam is about allowing small gaming companies take off, I think steam has inspired more creativity then caused harm. If I spent $20 on a crappy game i play twice then so be it. You could always go back to spending $60 a pop on Frappe mainstream games that are no better. Dota 2 has never been completed and it is one of the most popular games

 

I'm not against that one bit. 

 

All I am saying is that someone reads the proposed description, plays the game for a bit to see if it matches said description. If it does not then they should ask them to change the description. If they refuse then the game does not get listed.

[Jex 1104]

Just because you have been screwed over for worse things doesn't mean that Steam should not support checks and measures to ensure that the Early Access program is not abused.

 

I'm not necessarily saying that it should be scrapped. But perhaps developers need to pay a fee for every three months in Early Access or something.

 

There needs to be all sorts of checks and measures implemented on Steam to be fair. Some kind of vetting procedure would not be a bad thing, whereby someone checks the see whether the product is as described and so on.

 

One example of how Steam don't vet anything was WarZ - remember how they didn't check that at all and aollowed people to get ripped off? Look into it further and you'll see Steam do fuck all it seems in QA.

[Jex 1104]

jesus christ, you're just plain dumb, silly me thinking you're naive.

 

There's so much bullshit in your post that i wont even bother writing a wall o text to a person who clearly have 2 digits of IQ.

 

First of all, the game only have the public it does because the veterans from the mod, driven by hype, made SA top seller on steam in the release week, if wasnt for the mod players, dayz SA wouldnt even exist. People like you would probably still be playing minecraft or another "of the moment" bullshit.

 

Second: This "zombie survival" niche is a recent thing, brought by walking dead and made to pc gaming by dead island, left 4 dead and got its apex on dayz mod, now it's starting to get old and people dont pay so much attention anymore to games of the genre.

 

Third: You clearly dont know anything about sales and market demand/interest, thinking that all people that bought the game now, right after the apex of this 'zombie survival' tendence, would buy the game 3 years after, when there will be probably another completely different tendencie in the gaming market and DayZ will be like a need for speed is for us. You're clearly dumb if you dont realize that.

 

Your argument is fucking ridiculous but let's blow your points out the water with a nuclear depth charge - do you have your life raft ready?

 

1) A good game is a good game. People enjoy playing good games and people enjoyed the mod but hated the bugs. The SA is hoped to iron out the bugs, tie up all the loose ends the mod couldn't and get the zeds right plus giving us some new content.

 

"If it wasn't for the mod players, dayz wouldn't exist" WTF??? You might as well say "If it wasn't for drivers, cars wouldn't exist" Of course the MOD wouldn't exist if nobody had played it to begin with! Jesus in a balloon what a stupid thing to say. We all played the mod and we all wanted an SA.

 

2) Zombie's have never been "a recent thing" just look at the string of movies of the decades and games. Games don't "get old" either. If a fucking awesome game comes out people are going to play it. Why the fuck do you think they're still making civilization if the genre's get old? By you're reckoning games would have stopped being made decades ago since every type of game has been done and redone over and over. Good games sell it's that simple and with youtube now, good games get exposure which generates more sales.

 

3) Your ignorance is amazing. Have you looked at the type of games being sold at the moment? How many different genres of games are there? Presumably work on BF4 and COD has stopped right because of the zombie thing? If DayZ came out in 3 years time and was an exceptional game then of course it's going to sell! What part of great games selling cannot get inside your thick little head?

[Jex 1104]

I get what your saying, and it is a horrible game that did horrible things but steam is about allowing small gaming companies take off, I think steam has inspired more creativity then caused harm. If I spent $20 on a crappy game i play twice then so be it. You could always go back to spending $60 a pop on Frappe mainstream games that are no better. Dota 2 has never been completed and it is one of the most popular games

 

They're called game reviews, read them ;)

[Jex 1104]

Dayz  may not (and probrably is not) all about the cash. We know the history, we know how we got here. However how much of the 40 million dollars made for this game will be reinvested in dayz? 50%, 35%, 15%. 

 

If the company can keep the consumers happy while spending the least amount of funds then it is expected that they do that.

 

However, everyone here may be right, BIS is not about the money after all, and in that case we will see them investing a much greater percentage of the profits made by dayz. 

 

And if that is true, then you can expect the best zombie MMO ever. 

 

Before you start slinging mud around about a company, perhaps you should try doing the tinyiest piece of research first?

 

Whether BIS are cashing in or not won't affect the quality of the game, they could still fuck it right up. We'll just have to wait and see.