When Does The " ALPHA!" Excuse End?

[blacklabel79 949]

id guess its not Alpha anymore when its beta ?

 

Also...there is no "Alpha excuse" People are just inexperienced when it comes to WHAT IS ALPHA, WHAT IS BETA, WHAT DOES GOLD-STATUS mean...ect ect...

 

It was said this partly-game will be in Alpha at least until the end of the year OR LONGER if the dev´s see fit. Useless Topic really.

Edited April 30, 2014 by {Core}BlackLabel

[IroPslam 25]

When it's BETA

better res than my sig but lel

[weedmasta 784]

This. This is what I wanted from this post. I see the pressure that was put on the dev team to release but I don't think releasing the game in it's current state was the responsible thing to do.

 

That is not for you to say. There is also a business side to this after all.

[zeroy 240]

TL;DR - but Im not sure what more do you want than the roadmap already publicise for this game... answer: When its ready and going to Beta.

[ImageCtrl 719]

@op

Not read it, but I guess when it is beta.

[kichilron 8550]

This. This is what I wanted from this post. I see the pressure that was put on the dev team to release but I don't think releasing the game in it's current state was the responsible thing to do.

 

 

That is the way it works, though. There are certain things you need to try out while in the Alpha / Beta stage. See it as some sort of "finding yourself and the game" state. Some things may not stay, but have been tested out. Not all designdecisions are final and some are just there to see if it works or no.

 

I wouldn't worry about the details too much, as everything will change soon enough. More things are being added and things are being fixed. I don't really see where some of the complaints come from. If you want to critisize a game you need to make sure you've got all the information necessary to actually be able to judge the game the way it deserves. We Moderators are not here to stop people from critisizing the game, even thought many of you seem to have the feeling as if that is the case.

 

If you base your argumentation on an informaed basis and say: see, this won't work because of these reason and this and that - then your feedback will be heard and forwarded. It already happens at the moment.

 

 

 

I think that what OP needs to understand is that there are unjustified complaints and justified ones. Most are actually stupid complaints that negate the fact that it's in alpha, while others are proper complaints. Sometimes, people also yell alpha when it's a proper complaint, however.

 

 

This is where the part of the community comes in. We're here to moderate the forums and keep it as sane as possible. The usual "lolfix them zombambles now!" will be locked and yarded due to simple reason that there's already work being done on it, infact an entire team works on the Zombies.

 

Keep it as appropriate and informed as possible and there is no reason why your thread should be locked or that your feedback won't be heard.

[a_typical_noob 651]

TL;DR version:

OP can't read disclaimers.

[agentneo 337]

Take my beans , and i agree, sort the broken zombies out as priority.. then add all the flashey extra items and clothing.

Edited April 30, 2014 by AgentNe0

[tommy290 941]

TL;DR version:

OP can't read disclaimers.

 

The dev team should probably make the disclaimers a little bigger. ;)

[IroPslam 25]

That is the way it works, though. There are certain things you need to try out while in the Alpha / Beta stage. See it as some sort of "finding yourself and the game" state. Some things may not stay, but have been tested out. Not all designdecisions are final and some are just there to see if it works or no.

 

I wouldn't worry about the details too much, as everything will change soon enough. More things are being added and things are being fixed. I don't really see where some of the complaints come from. If you want to critisize a game you need to make sure you've got all the information necessary to actually be able to judge the game the way it deserves. We Moderators are not here to stop people from critisizing the game, even thought many of you seem to have the feeling as if that is the case.

 

If you base your argumentation on an informaed basis and say: see, this won't work because of these reason and this and that - then your feedback will be heard and forwarded. It already happens at the moment.

 

 

 

 

 

This is where the part of the community comes in. We're here to moderate the forums and keep it as sane as possible. The usual "lolfix them zombambles now!" will be locked and yarded due to simple reason that there's already work being done on it, infact an entire team works on the Zombies.

 

Keep it as appropriate and informed as possible and there is no reason why your thread should be locked or that your feedback won't be heard.

I guess I could've been nicer but thanks for hiding my post

9) Unnecessary posts:

Posting "don't care", "alpha", "TLDR", "search before you post", "cool story bro", 'fanboy' or any posts along those lines are unnecessary, inflammatory, and/or do not add to the discussion. This includes memes, GIFs and other images that are unnecessary/non-constructive; please keep them to an absolute minimum. If a duplicate thread exists, report it to the moderation team with a link.

TLDR

TLDR

TLDR

[Demoth 366]

This. This is what I wanted from this post. I see the pressure that was put on the dev team to release but I don't think releasing the game in it's current state was the responsible thing to do.

The problem I've been seeing is that the dev team is addressing a number of issues all the time, but they're not doing it in the order that certain people want.

This community is not a hive mind though. As soon as one group of crybabies shuts up, another group starts whining about something else, making it appear the entire community look unsatisfied.

Constructive feedback shouldn't be met with "IT'S ALPHA", and I understand concerns that some of these terrible design flubs and bugs will carry over to release.

But the big flaw in thinking is statements like saying "the game should not have been released". The game hasn't been released. BI asked for assistance in funding the game and cost cutting measures that are similar to paying for servers to host and submitting bug reports.

They've been pretty transparent about what they were doing, yet people continue to buy the alpha then claim they've been cheated. Perhaps if people had any sort of impulse control and understood that they are taking a risk by essentially funding a project that may not yield desired results, they could have opted out participating in this.

[xalienax 621]

That is the way it works, though. There are certain things you need to try out while in the Alpha / Beta stage. See it as some sort of "finding yourself and the game" state. Some things may not stay, but have been tested out. Not all designdecisions are final and some are just there to see if it works or no.

 

I wouldn't worry about the details too much, as everything will change soon enough. More things are being added and things are being fixed. I don't really see where some of the complaints come from. If you want to critisize a game you need to make sure you've got all the information necessary to actually be able to judge the game the way it deserves. We Moderators are not here to stop people from critisizing the game, even thought many of you seem to have the feeling as if that is the case.

 

If you base your argumentation on an informaed basis and say: see, this won't work because of these reason and this and that - then your feedback will be heard and forwarded. It already happens at the moment.

 

-snip*

I have to agree. The mod team here is actually more unterstanding to most. I myself as one of the more outspoken cirtics of general direction they have chosen to move in with the SA. Many other game's froums would see a thread like this one locked and OP warned to not go down that road.

 

I have no loyaltry to rocket and if you look at many of my posts im all about being critical, but I've yet to see anyone's threads gueniunely unfairly deleted that didnt cross some general guidelines or had devolved into a flame war.

[pillock 850]

Just typing out the title of this topic makes me shutter at what the "fanboys" are going to say about this. So, before I get to this, I'll have everybody know that I have played DayZ since October 2012, and recognize the mod as one of thd greatest gaming experiences I've ever been a part of.

So If you do some browsing through the forums you will indefinately see some posts from impatient people saying things like "when are cars coming when are tents coming zomggggg ir soo slowww rocket". And then if you scroll down a bit you will see a post from somebody else, maybe a mod, saying "The game is in ALPHA, you were warned of all the bugs etc...", which is a valid excuse. When we bought the alpha version of the game it did warn all players that the game was incomplete and lacking content.

So, what I'm here to discuss is, when does that excuse stop being valid. Now, some people will undoubtedly throw out the "Beta" answer, but I'm looking for s bit more then that.

I personally think that when you release an early access game in the alpha state, which is becoming quite the trend now, you have a certain responsibility to at least make the game playable. Bugs and such are obviously expected, but I don't think you can just toss out a game like DayZ, to a community like DayZ's, and have it not be in a playable state. Obvously unplayable is a bit of an exagerration, but there are some serious issues with this game. Patches that take months in "testing" should not be released to stable with huge imbalance issues like fists being more efficient than axes, and then not even a hotfix in weeks? Nobody can deny the extremely slow development of this game, but I 'm not even asking for more content, the core gameplay is just not there. I don't know how someone could release a game like DayZ to a fanbase as massive as DayZ's, in such a broken state (zombies being the attrocity that they are etc..), and not expect everybody to be pissed. The fact that the ALPHA excuse has to be thrown around so much should point out that something is wrong.

I went on a bit of a rant there and I guess what I'm trying to say maybe the "alpha" excuse isn't always the way to go. Instead of constantly reminding people that they bought an early access game, maybe we should try to examine and fix these core problems.

What do you think? Should the game have been released? Was it the responsible and right think to do to give this incomplete game to the DayZ fanbase?

EDIT: I'd like to clarify that I am not sitting here begging for more content, I am simply examining the development strategy and community reaction to it . I have other games to play, and still enjoy the mod, so don't confuse my motives here. I want to see DayZ grow and succeed, I just don't see the alpha release as the right move in the game 's current state.

 

I agree that an open-access, paid-for public alpha does have a responsibility to its customers to keep the latest version in a playable state. But, I also think DayZ currently fulfils this responsibility and is perfectly playable.

 

The fact that fists are OP doesn't actually matter that much to me at this point. It is pretty silly, I'll admit, but the results can be quite amusing. As long as they DO actually balance it properly later on, it's fine. Given how shit the melee combat is in general, I don't think that fixing the wonky damage values is particularly urgent. They do need to completely overhaul the physics for melee combat and player movement, otherwise the finished product will look pretty amateurish compared to its competition - and in a full-price standalone game, that isn't acceptable. But I don't mind if they aren't doing it right now, as long as some content in some area of the game does keep coming. And it is.

 

So I think it's fine. Yeah.

[DelayedReaction 18]

the "GAME" hasn't been released.  An "early access alpha" was released and in all fairness, was probably released in order to placate the masses of people wanting to play it...

 

I've seen it before on many games... people cry out for access to the game, they claim that they "don't care what state it's in" they "just want to play it"...

 

So the devs oblige and then open themselves up to a veritable s***storm of abuse from the same people that claimed they didn't care what state it was in.

[xalienax 621]

the "GAME" hasn't been released.  An "early access alpha" was released and in all fairness, was probably released in order to placate the masses of people wanting to play it...

 

I've seen it before on many games... people cry out for access to the game, they claim that they "don't care what state it's in" they "just want to play it"...

 

So the devs oblige and then open themselves up to a veritable s***storm of abuse from the same people that claimed they didn't care what state it was in.

Even mods that get alot of atention are subject to this. As a dev you get flack either way. Its only made worse by the devise nature of trying to make a game thats being sold as a progression from an existing experience.

[Demoth 366]

better res than my sig but lel

Difference is, this game never promised to be a super polished experience. It was basically a kickstarter crowd funding project with the warning that the end result could go in any number of direction.

Paying for this alpha is a huge gamble. So far the dev team has made strides in delivering what they promised, but time will tell if it will be released as something worthwhile to play.

But when you link pictures like that, it makes me wonder why you would even buy into an alpha if you hold that mentality.

[IroPslam 25]

Difference is, this game never promised to be a super polished experience. It was basically a kickstarter crowd funding project with the warning that the end result could go in any number of direction.

Paying for this alpha is a huge gamble. So far the dev team has made strides in delivering what they promised, but time will tell if it will be released as something worthwhile to play.

But when you link pictures like that, it makes me wonder why you would even buy into an alpha if you hold that mentality.

>Strides in delivering what they promised..

yup, I do enjoy my large collection of flat hats to suit my Irish look because that's what I was definitely hoping from the devs..

Also what does that picture have to do with me investing into the game? The picture is relating to the typical ITS ALPHA BRO RESPECT THE HALL MANG fanboys, nothing to do with the devs although I could find millions of pictures representing the devs if you want me to? Of course since of your superior mentality, you may not enjoy them ;/

[pillock 850]

Difference is, this game never promised to be a super polished experience. It was basically a kickstarter crowd funding project with the warning that the end result could go in any number of direction.

Paying for this alpha is a huge gamble. So far the dev team has made strides in delivering what they promised, but time will tell if it will be released as something worthwhile to play.

But when you link pictures like that, it makes me wonder why you would even buy into an alpha if you hold that mentality.

 

 

It's not that much of a gamble. It was only £20. I think I've got that much value out of the game already.

 

I've pre-ordered some games in the past for more money than this, and they have turned out to be fucking terrible - and finished products without much further development.

Edited April 30, 2014 by Pillock

[iongaming33@aim.com 137]

TL;DR version:

OP can't read disclaimers.

I think you're misreading the post. I enjoy the game and certainly can read the disclaimer , I just believe releasing the game, disclaimer or not, might've been a bit premature.

[pilgrim* 3514]

We shall fight on the beaches,

we shall fight on the landing grounds,

we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,

we shall fight in the hills;

we shall never be de-alpha'd

 

 

 

ed: a day later, man I thought someone would have spotted the quote by now

what planet is this?

Edited April 30, 2014 by pilgrim

[pillock 850]

I think you're misreading the post. I enjoy the game and certainly can read the disclaimer , I just believe releasing the game, disclaimer or not, might've been a bit premature.

 

I don't see what the negative outcomes there have been of releasing the alpha to the public when it was.

 

By doing this, they have made a shitload of money, which will help BiS (and maybe enable the execs to buy themselves new Porsches or whatever), and also enabled them to speed up development of the game by hiring a large number of new staff to work on it, which is good for them and us.

 

Also, by achieving the level of coverage and exposure, there is now more incentive - if they needed extra to begin with - for the developers to get the game right. If it was a minor title which only a handful of fanatics knew about, it could be allowed to fail without major reputational consequences for the developers and publishers. But it isn't: DayZ is massive now. It'll be a massive embarrassment if it flops now, or fails to realise what's been promised. And that is also good for us punters. It's not a guarantee, but I think it counts for something.

[Demoth 366]

>Strides in delivering what they promised..

yup, I do enjoy my large collection of flat hats to suit my Irish look because that's what I was definitely hoping from the devs..

Also what does that picture have to do with me investing into the game? The picture is relating to the typical ITS ALPHA BRO RESPECT THE HALL MANG fanboys, nothing to do with the devs although I could find millions of pictures representing the devs if you want me to? Of course since of your superior mentality, you may not enjoy them ;/

My point about the picture was it seemed (to me) you were showing a /v/ level of cynicism. . . Which is fine. I am a bit skeptical with any game studios claim they are going to offer a <buzzword> experiencr with <buzzword> level of <buzzword>.

So I apologize if you don't fall into that jaded category. But a lot of people bitch that all game devs are marketing drones, yet they constantly fall for all the hype.

[xalienax 621]

My point about the picture was it seemed (to me) you were showing a /v/ level of cynicism. . . Which is fine. I am a bit skeptical with any game studios claim they are going to offer a <buzzword> experiencr with <buzzword> level of <buzzword>.

So I apologize if you don't fall into that jaded category. But a lot of people bitch that all game devs are marketing drones, yet they constantly fall for all the hype.

you know. All of us (myself included) are in a way at fault for paying for an alpha.

 

When it initially when up on steam, there was limited information about what rockets end vision would be, there was no reall time table provided, yet like "drones" everyone one of us here with play time in the SA went and paid on day 1 for a protuct with that nice incomplete warning on it, No roadmap, feature list, or time table provided.

[EvilTigerAce 131]

I don't really mind the 'slow' working rate, but

 

fix the friggin' zombie pathfinding and glitching

Edited April 30, 2014 by EvilTigerAce

[JKS-Alex 79]

Try to play it when this will go away then you can complain:

 

 

i can't see any eta in this disclaimer so i dunno why there are so many players annoyed by the alpha status..

the funny thing is that people click" i understand" every time they play, but do they really understand?!?  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

Edited April 30, 2014 by JKS-Alex