alpha, character wipe, impact testing progress, priority of debugging etc

[diuwhysoserious 0]

I know that everyone has different answers. But I'm not expressing about the in-game mechanics.
I would like to talk about the "alpha" meaning to this game.
I understand that every part of this game has bugs, some are huge some are minor as its naming as "alpha".
To me, I really expect experiencing glitches during playing and this is what we are expected to find to improve it.

In the post I would like to focus on a major "bug" about character wipe.
I know everyone would tell me that it is more than normal and you shouldn't complain anything about it as it is ALPHA.
Yes. I'm really appreciated the stability insofar of the game at least we can play for days and suddenly server problem wiping days of endeavour of trying to survive. I'm not complaining anything about the wipe problem.

I would like to focus on the purpose of playing it with potential character wipe. 
Dying under zombie attacks, infection with no cure, or even killed by bandits are totally fine for me as it's what the game is about. But not character wipe.
I think posing it to the "suggestion" is the purpose of mine thinking about the development of DayZ.

New features are very much appreciated such as cooking and hunting and more mechanics like throwing stuff.
To me, these should all be built on a STABLE foundation which players are encouraged to try NEW things.
So far, I feel like players are KEEP doing the business of muck around cities, towns, bases to get fully equipped and comforting with a potential UNSTABLE situation which is character wipe. 

Someone may say hey there are experimental servers that allow players to try out new features.
So what the point of categorising servers into "experimental" and "regular"?
I do reckon that the company wants us to be entertained to an acceptable extent of glitches (such as zombies passing through walls and suddenly appearing behind your back which you don't expect when you close the door of the house to achieve sense of security). 
To me, acceptable extent is hardly including "character wipe" which breaching the "stable foundation" of the development. 
Say for instance if the game explicitly states that alpha DO wipe your character every time you log out a server in the disclaimer, if there is no such development for a character, what the point of "testing" it?

Sorry for not saying things concisely and precisely, but I do reckon that testing based on continuous development.
Quantifying the testing progress into a scale (0-100), if character wipe appears in somewhere between the scale, how can players test everything (100) of it?
For example, if a character being played for 50 hours will suddenly die out or can not be loaded due to corrupted data due to a bug of storing data. And the wipe happens at 35 hours, then players would never experience the 50 hours problem.

Wrapping up everything being said, just simply, why not PRIORITISING the fixing of character wipe AND continuously developing new features?

I'm not so attached to my characters that being gone so many times after I have spent more than 50 hours of playing and I really appreciated to seeing changes and improvements since buying it on Feb. BUT it doesn't mean wiping characters is no big deal because I think this seriously impacts the testing progress.

Thank you for reading this, please comment below and let me know what do you think about that:)

[Element47 2481]

i have the impression that many think that "testing" is only valid if you can experience the whole game.

 

 

"testing" can mean merely logging in, thus testing the function and stability of the authentication system under load. "testing" can mean picking up one to three items to test how inventory syncs to hive. your character progression is irrelevant in such context. "testing" can mean just running around cities - not doing anything else besides running - to test client-server sync of player position in complex environments.

 

so please be aware, that your character progression, your gameplay experience, your entertainment have actually very little value at this point.

 

so if you suffer fro a character reset issue - a bug that is not really frequent but recurring now and then - then its unfortunate for you, and important that you report it to the feedback tracker. but its not something extraordinary, and especially nothing that would require secondguessing the development priorities.

[diuwhysoserious 0]

i have the impression that many think that "testing" is only valid if you can experience the whole game.

 

 

"testing" can mean merely logging in, thus testing the function and stability of the authentication system under load. "testing" can mean picking up one to three items to test how inventory syncs to hive. your character progression is irrelevant in such context. "testing" can mean just running around cities - not doing anything else besides running - to test client-server sync of player position in complex environments.

 

so please be aware, that your character progression, your gameplay experience, your entertainment have actually very little value at this point.

 

so if you suffer fro a character reset issue - a bug that is not really frequent but recurring now and then - then its unfortunate for you, and important that you report it to the feedback tracker. but its not something extraordinary, and especially nothing that would require secondguessing the development priorities.

I see your point. What I perceived is "testing" can be declined to a very basic meaning.

In terms of a strict and textual approach to the word "testing", I agree that anything more than that are totally valueless.

However, I inclined to argue with a contextual one which the company is more visionary and comprehensive than that and with that being said,

I think those basics are not restricted to grounds like logging in/out or running around towns, BUT do include "character progression" which is the entire aim of this game - surviving as long as you can (if a character can't survive not because of any in-game features but a bug, this bug undermines the aim of this game which if its not a feature then should be fixed asap).

This bug is substantive and substantial, and purpose of testing is debugging, when knowing a bug existed without intention to debug it, is meaningless.

What I was trying to say in the first place is a well known bug is existed. Prioritising the fixing of it would drastically reduce this meaninglessness for the entire purpose of testing - debugging of this alpha early access.