DayZ Development progress makes no sense

[WhiteZero 72]

Not the argument. You assume this is the argument of OP. The Argument is the "Open Alpha" and how the devs are implementing the elements of the game in a haphazard and erratic fashion. For example, spending over 8 months getting the lid on a compass lid to open and shut and not worrying about working zombies, hit detection, a new engine,hacking player caps, map size ect ect

 

Your logic seems to be that because something hasn't been fully addressed in a public patch that they are not working on it? Thats a very flawed assumption. As I've pointed out elsewhere around here, Eugen has confirmed several times on Reddit (One, Two) that the issues with zombies are multi-facted and are indeed being addressed, if not already fixed internally.

 

This generally seems to be something too many people misunderstand: Just because something isn't included in a patch does not mean it's something that the developers aren't actively working on.

[stielhandgranate 480]

Your logic seems to be that because something hasn't been fully addressed in a public patch that they are not working on it? Thats a very flawed assumption. As I've pointed out elsewhere around here, Eugen has confirmed several times on Reddit (One, Two) that the issues with zombies are multi-facted and are indeed being addressed, if not already fixed internally.

 

This generally seems to be something too many people misunderstand: Just because something isn't included in a patch does not mean it's something that the developers aren't actively working on.

 

I really don't agree with the idea that we have to go to reddit to get dev news, also from what I understand although the hacker and duper issue has spanned months, the devs have only taken note of it recently. I don't expect an instant fix to all problems, but the zombies have been broken for several patches while the devs seem to harp on the idea of refining the loot dynamics as if that is the most pressing issue at the moment. Public announcements on current issues (perhaps including them in the "WARNING,ALPHA" screen) would put minds at ease.

[RAM-bo4250 213]

Not the argument. You assume this is the argument of OP. The Argument is the "Open Alpha" and how the devs are implementing the elements of the game in a haphazard and erratic fashion. For example, spending over 8 months getting the lid on a compass lid to open and shut and not worrying about working zombies, hit detection, a new engine,hacking player caps, map size ect ect

 

Dale, first, thank you for your service.

 

How do you know the devs are implementing the elements of the game in a haphazard erratic fashion? Companies don't behave like military companies. Military companies do not research and development. They test. Does each and every soldier know the details of what is being developed as far as say an AFV being developed. My argument may be a little flawed here as I don't know exactly what they do tell you. From what I have read, the Bradley had a lot of misconceptions and problems associated with development and deployment but the individual didn't really know of any deficiencies in it's development and deployment until said deployment and testing phase. Again my argument may be flawed. We are in a time when most of what is being done now, was done in secret. All I'm trying to say is we can not really make an informed and educated decision of how things are proceeding because it's all new procedures. We were allowed into a period of development that historically was done in secret and by a select few. From what I've read Dayz is basically being built from the ground up borrowing concepts etc from the mod.

 

Do you know the developer, Battlefront? I'm sure you're at least aware being a soldier, maybe. They make the Combat Mission titles. From the end of CMx1, the first inception of their homebuilt engine, to CMx2 titles, took I believe, approximately 10 years to develop their new engine. Scope I know is way different. I think they have a company of 5+ (unk for sure but tiny). 

 

Just explain to me, in just after maybe 9 months (give or take), anyone can make a judgement of haphazard, erratic fashion? It may be true. I don't know. No experience whatsoever (0) with making games. But neither do you. Bottom line. We all have to wait until it is finished to see if it's a good thing. And kicking the mule isn't going to get it to move.

Edited September 7, 2014 by RAM-bo4250

[FragBeer 7]

The longer developtment takes, the more money they lose. Everey copy is sold on sale. They could get twice the money for the endgame, but when they finish producing it, every soul that want the game already got it on sale..

Edited September 7, 2014 by FragBeer

[RAM-bo4250 213]

The longer developtment takes, the more money they lose. Everey copy is sold on sale. They could get twice the money for the endgame, but when they finish producing it, every soul that want the game already got it on sale..

Not every soul. There are those who don't do alphas. Gopher, for one.

[WhiteZero 72]

I really don't agree with the idea that we have to go to reddit to get dev news

Yeah there needs to be a more "realtime" issue tracker that is more accessible than the Feedback Tracker. There is however the DevTracker where you can easily read up on what the devs are saying across social media.

[trtk 81]

If it actually led to loss of revenue and could be proved you would be opening yourself up to a libel suit.

 

lmao

[RAM-bo4250 213]

lmao

Really? You really think that I meant in this situation. Writing some crap on a game forum, really. This is getting exasperating. 

[trtk 81]

Really? You really think that I meant in this situation. Writing some crap on a game forum, really. This is getting exasperating. 

 

[q.S Sachiel 470]

trtk is probably pseudonym for a borderline troll already on the forum.

 

Posts misleading/fallacious stuff under the guise of 'opinion' (waits for response)

Posts dictionary/thesaurus info as supporting evidence for his belief, without further elaboration then distances themselves from original post, saying that it's not even their understanding of the definition

diminuitises opposing points of view with 5 word texts, still not adding to conversation of defending/developing original fallacies posted.  Feigns nonchalance.

creates implication that other people are doing the wrong thing through picture posts.

 

100% trollolololol.

Enjoy.

This thread will burn harder than the Bismarck and the September rant topic combined. Just you watch :)

[trtk 81]

trtk is probably pseudonym for a borderline troll already on the forum.

 

Posts misleading/fallacious stuff under the guise of 'opinion' (waits for response)

Posts dictionary/thesaurus info as supporting evidence for his belief, without further elaboration then distances themselves from original post, saying that it's not even their understanding of the definition

diminuitises opposing points of view with 5 word texts, still not adding to conversation of defending/developing original fallacies posted.  Feigns nonchalance.

creates implication that other people are doing the wrong thing through picture posts.

 

100% trollolololol.

Enjoy.

This thread will burn harder than the Bismarck and the September rant topic combined. Just you watch :)

 

dunno why you'd accuse someone of wrongfully exploiting an innocent thesaurus while you make this post

[Doomlord52 62]

If it's not going to be fun - you don't release it. I don't know what you were expecting. If they really wanted to keep a player base, why would they release something that you couldn't enjoy?

 

We don't have a god-given right to control development just because we bought a game that's in a state that the developers call "pre-release". To say that the community and playerbase has had no say in development is simply false, but to say that we need to have direct control and that the developers are obligated to listen to us is wrong. Patches, updates, whatever you want to call them, are newer versions of the game. They feature content that has not yet been added to the regular game. That's the development process. There are very few early access games that truly add everything in the most basic form when it's implemented for developer testing, most of the time you have a semi-refined product added.

The developers have taken plenty of suggestions from the community, but again, they don't have to do everything the (supposed) "majority" wants, and they'll rarely conform to the wants of a specific person, i.e., you. Sure, when the devs decide to add a Rossi R92, you never actually got a hand in whether it should be added, but after it gets added, if people discover that it shoots way too inaccurately for a gun of that type, they'll fix it. The fact that most of the content is decided on doesn't mean you don't get to help, but you can't act like you deserve a huge saying in it.

The fact that bugs have been persistent isn't just a black-and-white issue either, many of them are low priority and some of them are more complicated than you'd think.

 

You can point out bugs that haven't been fixed, but there are many times more bugs that HAVE been fixed.

 

 

"The point is, an alpha isn't supposed to be fun or even that interesting (gameplay wise) - it's supposed to be barely functional. When I first saw the page, and the giant disclaimer, I thought that we'd finally get a truly open alpha. However, obviously, that's not the case."

That's never been set in stone, anywhere, ever. It's a general rule of development that goes through in most alpha-phase stages of products. Early-access alpha is a relatively new concept and developers are experimenting with new ways of delivering said product. One of which is delivering an interesting experience to the users, and that partially stems from the fact that releasing a game that has most of the large stuff, but almost no detail, typically dissuades users and gives the product a lower chance at making sales later on in development, whereas giving people a bunch of new stuff to look forward to actually draws in more and keeps them playing. I mean, the amount of money made has proven that it's worked for at least some people.

 

So yes, you are playing a truly open alpha, just not the one you expected. I, for one, am satisfied, and it seems quite a few others are with that. Your complaints are meaningless.

"If it's not going to be fun - you don't release it". That's not what an Alpha is. An Alpha you release whatever build you're working on. It might be crazy buggy, it might break random things, it might not even work on half the systems out there because of some random hardware conflict. If your main concern is releasing a "fun and working" game to the public, then you're not releasing an alpha product. You're releasing some sort of quasi-under-development game. If that's the case, then everyone needs to stop calling it an 'alpha' and saying 'bugs are there because it's an alpha'. It's not: it's a commercial game that goes past QA - any bugs that get past are because QA didn't do their job.

Early access alpha and alpha are supposed to be the same thing. Both are alphas, except in one case you pay to test the game, and as a result, get to keep said game after release.

 

Next, you'll be asking for BI to make their books available so that we can be sure where every penny is going so those complaining about being ripped off will know that hey, "I'm not being ripped off." This request is a little over the top. A weekly blog with team leaders telling of their work and where they are heading is not enough for you? They are leaning over backwards to allay people's fears and expectations.

 

Doomlord, one of these days you are going to have to look yourself in the mirror and say, I am being impatient.

 

Kicking the mule isn't going to make it move.

 

edit: Found the bug-tracker. It's horrendously out of date.

 

Really? A public bug tracker is too much to ask? Here's Arcen Game's bug tracker. It's updated daily. Here's the Planetary Annihilation 'task list', which is also updated frequently. And hey, here's the ARMA 3 bug tracker. Asking for a public, live bug tracker isn't that much to ask. It's actually pretty common with developers who want to keep the community in the loop, and also want to give fast and accurate feedback as to what they're doing with the complaints/suggestions/bug reports from the community.

 

Really, all I'm asking for is that the DayZ dev team be as transparent as other dev teams. That's not too much to ask.

To all this "we're not truly testers" jazz: Yeah, maybe we're not. At least not the front-line testers. You don't release a totally un QA'ed update to over 2.5 million people. If they did, we'd have even more ridiculous "the game is broken" complains in the community. I'm glad they have internal QA to make sure we still have something playable on the Exp/Stable branch. Do you really want to be playing with an unfinished replacement renderer right now? Something that very few players could give the proper technical feedback on to the developers. Not me.

 

Simply reporting issues on the Feedback tracker is "participating in the development cycle," as bug-chasing is part of development, plus all the metrics gathered. They never told you you'd be participating in the design process. However, I've seen several developers respond to suggestions with a "thats a great idea" attitude. At the end of the day, the DayZ team are the actual professional developers and designers, so I'm glad that not every bit of repugnant feedback that comes from the community is actually considered. I think the actual constructive feedback is considered, however.

 

In the Week of August 25th Status Report, Hicks did say that they are planning to be more transparent about the development process with us, which is great. Aside from the occasional Twitter or Reddit post I don't think we get quite enough insight into what they're doing behind the scenes, though the weekly Status Report is a great step forward with that.

Well, you should released un-QA'd updates in an Alpha. If it were a true alpha, there wouldn't have been 2.5m sales so far, and the development would have been a LOT faster, since QA wouldn't be a thing. It would also justify the communities rampant "IT'S ALPHA DON'T COMPLAIN" replies to people saying its buggy. The community essentially has two choices, it's either a true alpha (which it's not, since it's not nightly/weekly, and it's QA'd) or it's a fully-fledged product which goes through QA - in which case the whole "IT'S ALPHA" thing doesn't hold any water. It would also mean that literally everyone (devs included) need to stop calling the thing alpha. It's not.

 

I'm also not asking to participate in the design process. It's their game and their vision - I'm just a customer. But to participate properly, I need the proper tools. There's no console to check logs in-game, so we can't report that way. There's very little in terms of game-feedback, like a poly-count display, light count, shadow count, etc. There's nothing to show the breakdown of a frame so we can say "hey, electro spends way too much time on lighting", or "why does looking at this wall still cost 2,6000 draw calls". The tools to do so exist (RenderDoc, for example), but because it's a commercial product, and NOT an alpha, it's got anti-cheat, which means you'd probably get banned for it (since RenderDoc works by injecting itself into DirectX).

 

Just explain to me, in just after maybe 9 months (give or take), anyone can make a judgement of haphazard, erratic fashion? It may be true. I don't know. No experience whatsoever (0) with making games. But neither do you. Bottom line. We all have to wait until it is finished to see if it's a good thing. And kicking the mule isn't going to get it to move.

It's not that hard. We're still missing features that were supposed to be in for Q2, and we're instead getting stuff like re-textures and bugfixes.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Doomlord52

[RAM-bo4250 213]

 

 

 

Really? A public bug tracker is too much to ask? Here's Arcen Game's bug tracker. It's updated daily. Here's the Planetary Annihilation 'task list', which is also updated frequently. And hey, here's the ARMA 3 bug tracker. Asking for a public, live bug tracker isn't that much to ask. It's actually pretty common with developers who want to keep the community in the loop, and also want to give fast and accurate feedback as to what they're doing with the complaints/suggestions/bug reports from the community.

 

 

Am I being punked? Seriously. You mean the bug tracker that is currently available? That looks exactly like at least the ARMA 3 bug tracker?

Where's the cameras?

 

I am not going to post the location of the bug tracker because I would think a business owner who makes $200,000.00 a year would be smart enough to locate it on their own.

 

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Now I'm not so sure.

 

Is this for real? Did I post a bug report in a non-existent bug tracker? Perhaps in another dimension? This is too much.

Edited September 8, 2014 by RAM-bo4250

[RAM-bo4250 213]

I can't stop thinking about what Doomlord posted. Somebody please rescue me from this alter universe I am in.

 

I don't mind looking a little dumb on this or not comprehending but am I reading it right on the question about a bug tracker asked by Doomlord?

 

I'm an adult. Tell me. I don't see it. I'm willing to have egg on my face.

[Parazight 1594]

The team can't pour all of it's people on top of one project. It doesn't make any sense. That's why some devs are working on beta type stuff while others are still doing alpha things. I think the OP is hung up on semantics.

DayZ is also a new game genre that's being developed in a whole new way. Give 'em some slack, eh?

Edited September 8, 2014 by Parazight

[RAM-bo4250 213]

The team can't pour all of it's people on top of one project. It doesn't make any sense. That's why some devs are working on beta type stuff while others are still doing alpha things. I think the OP is hung up on semantics.

DayZ is also a new game genre that's being developed in a whole new way. Give 'em some slack, eh?

Parazight, sorry for the confusion if this wasn't directed at me. I was referring to the fact that Doomlord asked why isn't there a bug tracker like in the 3 games he mentioned.

 

If it wasn't directed at me I'm sorry. I think Doomlord spiked my drink.

[Chaingunfighter 917]

"If it's not going to be fun - you don't release it". That's not what an Alpha is. An Alpha you release whatever build you're working on. It might be crazy buggy, it might break random things, it might not even work on half the systems out there because of some random hardware conflict. If your main concern is releasing a "fun and working" game to the public, then you're not releasing an alpha product. You're releasing some sort of quasi-under-development game. If that's the case, then everyone needs to stop calling it an 'alpha' and saying 'bugs are there because it's an alpha'. It's not: it's a commercial game that goes past QA - any bugs that get past are because QA didn't do their job.

Early access alpha and alpha are supposed to be the same thing. Both are alphas, except in one case you pay to test the game, and as a result, get to keep said game after release.

 

There's no "supposed to", there's just what's typically done. Don't want to call it alpha? Fine, call it "Omega" version, because it's not the full-release game, it's what the developers call it. Bugs are there because the game is still in development. Why is that so hard to get through your head?

"Alpha", "Beta", "Going Gold", "Whatever the fuck mode", they're all meaningless terms meant for nothing other than project organization. Just because they don't follow the general stance, or in this case, what YOU and YOU ALONE say, does not indicate that it's somehow no longer early in development.

 

If you're going to use your logic, then you may as well say that any early-access alpha is just a commercially released game, because the alpha release is what people play. Stop being so vitriolic.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Chaingunfighter

[mercules 1290]

 

Really? A public bug tracker is too much to ask? 

 Gosh if only someone somewhere had a link.... like maybe in their signature.... someone who might have already posted in this thread... if only. 

[ChainReactor 922]

 Gosh if only someone somewhere had a link.... like maybe in their signature.... someone who might have already posted in this thread... if only. 

 

Gosh yes that would be handy. Eventhough it would be even better if they just stickie a thread in the most visited subforum around here where they also could write a litte how-to about it.

Edited September 8, 2014 by ChainReactor

[Doomlord52 62]

Am I being punked? Seriously. You mean the bug tracker that is currently available? That looks exactly like at least the ARMA 3 bug tracker?

Where's the cameras?

 

I am not going to post the location of the bug tracker because I would think a business owner who makes $200,000.00 a year would be smart enough to locate it on their own.

 

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Now I'm not so sure.

 

Is this for real? Did I post a bug report in a non-existent bug tracker? Perhaps in another dimension? This is too much.

Yes, the hidden cameras are to your left. No, It's pretty dead, though. I mean, bug #363, from last year, which is incredibly basic (pressing hotkeys doesn't always work) is STILL listed as new. The devs haven't even acknowledged it: If it's not a bug, then close it, if it is assign it. It's not rocket science, it's using the tools you want the community to use. Do I expect every single report to be acknowledged? No. But the #3 most voted for bug report from last year? Yea, probably.

 

There aren't even the full patch notes under the change log section. It shows two 0.27 builds and one 0.44 build.

 

There's no "supposed to", there's just what's typically done. Don't want to call it alpha? Fine, call it "Omega" version, because it's not the full-release game, it's what the developers call it. Bugs are there because the game is still in development. Why is that so hard to get through your head?

"Alpha", "Beta", "Going Gold", "Whatever the fuck mode", they're all meaningless terms meant for nothing other than project organization. Just because they don't follow the general stance, or in this case, what YOU and YOU ALONE say, does not indicate that it's somehow no longer early in development.

 

If you're going to use your logic, then you may as well say that any early-access alpha is just a commercially released game, because the alpha release is what people play. Stop being so vitriolic.

Yea, I know. This is my point, the name alpha contradicts the actions of the devs. This is literally my ENTIRE point. We don't get to Alpha test it because we don't have nightly/weekly builds and it goes through QA anyway - hence, it can't be a public alpha. However, its full of bugs, and it seems like the DayZ community LOVES to dismiss these bugs by saying "ITS ALPHA". These two contradict eachother. If we had an actual alpha to play with, then saying "it's alpha" would actually make sense. However, we don't, so it's not.

[RAM-bo4250 213]

Yes, the hidden cameras are to your left. No, It's pretty dead, though. I mean, bug #363, from last year, which is incredibly basic (pressing hotkeys doesn't always work) is STILL listed as new. The devs haven't even acknowledged it: If it's not a bug, then close it, if it is assign it. It's not rocket science, it's using the tools you want the community to use. Do I expect every single report to be acknowledged? No. But the #3 most voted for bug report from last year? Yea, probably.

 

There aren't even the full patch notes under the change log section. It shows two 0.27 builds and one 0.44 build.

 

You didn't know there was a bug tracker even though it was conspicuously posted in a few places. Now your complaining about said bug tracker. Are you making this stuff up as you go along? Is it just that you have to complain about something?

 

I know I personally put in several bug reports. When I went back to check I was told one of the bugs was already reported and that I would need to upvote said reported bug. So, at this point I don't know. It seems OK to me.

[ChainReactor 922]

Yea, I know. This is my point, the name alpha contradicts the actions of the devs. This is literally my ENTIRE point. We don't get to Alpha test it because we don't have nightly/weekly builds and it goes through QA anyway - hence, it can't be a public alpha. However, its full of bugs, and it seems like the DayZ community LOVES to dismiss these bugs by saying "ITS ALPHA". These two contradict eachother. If we had an actual alpha to play with, then saying "it's alpha" would actually make sense. However, we don't, so it's not.

 

A game is in Alpha until it's feature-complete. I don't know any other definition. Also i've yet to find a rulebook stating how exactly an Alpha has to be done, like You must release weekly updates!

 

Also, ever thought about the fact that the patches run through QA because there is already a quite big playerbase and they want to check if content is ready for a push to public before they crash the entire game until the next patch? Bugs are annoying, yes. But people kinda understand and expect that during this stage of development. Not being able to play at all for several days due to a newly implemented system not working correctly however makes people stop playing. It's not hard to understand that the devs don't want that.

 

That might also be the reason why they already signed up a team focusing on artwork and items. Sure, adding a variety of clothing, guns and stuff like that doesn't need that much of alpha-testing, but it keeps the masses entertained, makes the game feel more changing over time, and gives the players new stuff to explore beside the actually quite boring test runs of framework changes and engine rework. Do you think the playerbase would still be as big as it is when there would have been only changes to zombie pathfinding, collision detection, ballistics and loot mechanics while everyone wears the same clothes, holds the same gun and eats the same beans? I don't think so.

 

And still the game isn't feature complete, what automaticly makes it an alpha. The stage of the development cycle isnt determined by the way it is developing.

 

EDIT: Also, noone here is dissmissing the bugs, but most seem to expect and accept said bugs, and when they encounter one, there will be a short "is this already known" on the stable / experimental discussions and after that a bugtracker report or an upvote if the problem is already filed.

Edited September 8, 2014 by ChainReactor

[RAM-bo4250 213]

Gosh yes that would be handy. Eventhough it would be even better if they just stickie a thread in the most visited subforum around here where they also could write a litte how-to about it.

I don't know about the How to. Back out and go to General Discussion. The last Pinned thread reads "Bug Reports".  Hope this helps.

[ChainReactor 922]

I don't know about the How to. Back out and go to General Discussion. The last Pinned thread reads "Bug Reports".  Hope this helps.

 

Dude lol.

 

 

And yes, said pinned thread in the general discussion subforum contains a nice little manual how to use it. :)

[RAM-bo4250 213]

Dude lol.

 

 

And yes, said pinned thread in the general discussion subforum contains a nice little manual how to use it. :)

Got me. Hook , Line and sinker. LOL :blush:

 

Wow, I'm getting way too serious.

Edited September 8, 2014 by RAM-bo4250