Stable Branch - 0.55 Discussion

[Tatanko 5591]

For anyone who is wondering:

 

 

 

He has made it clear that this is just a temporary "solution" until 0.56 is released to Stable.

[liquidcactus 719]

Has anyone been on in the last couple of hrs since the servers are back up ? did anything change for stable, who is finding anything eg food!

[Kirov (DayZ) 585]

I noticed more than enough cans. Was today's maintenance related to any kind of fix? I found zucchini seeds for the first time in .55, however the bow and fishing still don't work.

[Tatanko 5591]

did anything change for stable

Was today's maintenance related to any kind of fix?

It would seem that everything done during maintenance was server-side. No client update was pushed as far as I can tell. What this means, is that nothing at all should be different from yesterday other than how and where loot spawns. There was mention made by Hicks in yesterday's Status Report that some "newer items" won't be spawning, presumably because they were never configured for the old non-central loot system that we are now once again using. If I had to guess what those items are, I would say: .308 Winchester rounds, Bear Trap, Land Mine, and Chainsaw.

[gsfilmer 71]

It would seem that everything done during maintenance was server-side. No client update was pushed as far as I can tell. What this means, is that nothing at all should be different from yesterday other than how and where loot spawns. There was mention made by Hicks in yesterday's Status Report that some "newer items" won't be spawning, presumably because they were never configured for the old non-central loot system that we are now once again using. If I had to guess what those items are, I would say: .308 Winchester rounds, Bear Trap, Land Mine, and Chainsaw.

I can confirm landmine is spawning at UH-1Y crashes.

[Tonyeh 454]

AK74's are back in the game as are hunter backpacks.

 

Long barracks seem to be spawning things again.

[odin_lowe 3686]

AK74's are back in the game as are hunter backpacks.

 

Long barracks seem to be spawning things again.

AK74 were not gone, the AK101 was away from the loot tables. But the 74 and 74u were spawning at police cars (dynamic) and UAZ wrecks. Found many in 0.55.

[S3V3N 1402]

Thanks god I found a sweet 70 rounds for the M4 in no time by searching Balota airfield and Prison island next. Also found an AKM on Prison Island. And food, tons of tons of food. Tents seem to be less frequent, as I found only one in Cherno and searched longer than usually for it. Backpacks however spawn again in great numbers, in the hangars and military prisons. Good loot so far. Even found a supressor at a police car!

 

My friends trusted in persistence and didn't go online yesterday, so nobody packed any of our tents. Which is sad, because we had a military tent and they are much harder to find again now (without serverhopping). 

 

Lot of people were serverhopping again and I would really like to say to those people: you suck! Play the damn game, stop looting the same spot on 20 different servers. It's not even funny. 

[polini 65]

It would seem that everything done during maintenance was server-side. No client update was pushed as far as I can tell. What this means, is that nothing at all should be different from yesterday other than how and where loot spawns. There was mention made by Hicks in yesterday's Status Report that some "newer items" won't be spawning, presumably because they were never configured for the old non-central loot system that we are now once again using. If I had to guess what those items are, I would say: .308 Winchester rounds, Bear Trap, Land Mine, and Chainsaw.

I found some .308 winchester ammo boxes, 1 bear trap, and one guy above me found a mine. Not a chainsaw at the moment.

On a side note, the police cars are in the same spot than yesterday.

(Im playing in a private server)

[BrainlessZombie 190]

I found some .308 winchester ammo boxes, 1 bear trap, and one guy above me found a mine. Not a chainsaw at the moment.

On a side note, the police cars are in the same spot than yesterday.

(Im playing in a private server)

 

Chainsaw is still in, also invisible fruits and veggies (private server).

 

I kind of liked the struggle, i think im out untill exp 0.56 kicks in, later guys!

Edited April 15, 2015 by BrainlessZombie

[Hicks_206 (DayZ) 4297]

The point is they keep giving us the wrong times on every update. And then no notice about why something is delayed. Officially the update should have been done at 11:00 CET. Now it is 13:30 CET and still no change. I prefer to get a later date that is correct than one that is early but everyone knows will never be met. 

That is a fan site. It has nothing to do with Bohemia Interactive, or the DayZ development team.

[Kirov (DayZ) 585]

It would seem that everything done during maintenance was server-side. No client update was pushed as far as I can tell. What this means, is that nothing at all should be different from yesterday other than how and where loot spawns. There was mention made by Hicks in yesterday's Status Report that some "newer items" won't be spawning, presumably because they were never configured for the old non-central loot system that we are now once again using. If I had to guess what those items are, I would say: .308 Winchester rounds, Bear Trap, Land Mine, and Chainsaw.

 

I found one land mine, two chainsaws, loose Wincherster rounds and a box of them. Still frustrated as hell by the lack of cooking pots and/or the fact that frying pans don't work and/or pots are even needed for cooking.

 

"Sir, why do want cooking pots to be so rare? Right now it's easier to find 2 cars than to cook."

"You want to know why? Because fuck cooking pots. Fuck them right in the eye. No pot will spawn on my watch and that's a promise. Also, fuck you for even asking."

 

There, it must have been something like that.

[S3V3N 1402]

A warning again: My server just restarted and the camp we build in the past hours has disappeared. Luckily enough I am mistrusting enough by now to keep everything important on hand. This wasn't what I expected though. I expected only the loot to be rolled back to legacy, but apparently we can't build camps again. I have to ask: really? REALLY? Why does every update have to break what was good about the other?

 

Why could you not just keep the current persistent camps working and figure out how to deal with the bugs on experimental servers? Oh right! It's because you have a strange development philosophy which always pushes the least broken experimental version to stable, while experimental servers are always a version ahead. What you don't see or don't want to see is that you just keep transfering more and more bugs from experimental to stable that way, making stable less stable with every update. Seriously, think about the difference between your stable and experimental builds...

Edited April 15, 2015 by S3V3N

[Dennus (DayZ) 123]

That is a fan site. It has nothing to do with Bohemia Interactive, or the DayZ development team.

Come on Hicks, that's a little bit to easy.

 

Numerous times in the past the devs have given us times and/or dates for updates that haven't been met, resulting in postponing the update.

I, for one, don't mind the wait, but if you are going to set a date, I'm expecting that you will make it.

So my advise would be to be a bit more reserved in giving us times and/or date for updates.

[Dennus (DayZ) 123]

 Oh right! It's because you have a strange development philosophy which always pushes the least broken experimental version to stable, while experimental servers are always a version ahead. What you don't see or don't want to see is that you just keep transfering more and more bugs from experimental to stable that way, making stable less stable with every update. Seriously, think about the difference between your stable and experimental builds...

Sigh... it starts with 'A' and ends with "lpha'.

[ebrim 998]

Come on Hicks, that's a little bit to easy.

 

Numerous times in the past the devs have given us times and/or dates for updates that haven't been met, resulting in postponing the update.

I, for one, don't mind the wait, but if you are going to set a date, I'm expecting that you will make it.

So my advise would be to be a bit more reserved in giving us times and/or date for updates.

 

Officially according to what? He just told you that they have nothing to do with the site that you're getting the "official" time from.

[Dennus (DayZ) 123]

Officially according to what? He just told you that they have nothing to do with the site that you're getting the "official" time from.

Im referring to the twitter messages the devs themselves post

[S3V3N 1402]

Sigh... it starts with 'A' and ends with "lpha'.

My point wasn't about the Alpha. I know it's an Alpha and I embrace that fact. The problem is Dayz is essentially a double or triple alpha development. We have the stable, which is essentially the best working version of the latest experimental. Then we have the experimental, which is ahead of the stable by one build, but eventually will become the stable. And then we have the Hotfixed Stable, which is essentially every stable version of late, because the experimental versions are still bugged. Every sensible person must realize that this way you will never get a working stable. This is simply not how experimental versions should be handled. They aren't even experimental versions, you might as well call all versions "stable" under this predicament.

 

Stable versions should be kept running for weeks or months and actually be stable. They are for enjoying the game or what there is to enjoy of it. Experimental versions are usually completely different from the stable ones and should be used for adding content and testing content (With the chance and knowledge that all may be lost to the player). It makes no sense to always make the latest experimental version the new stable one, when it isn't stable. There is an obvious flaw in developing like this and the only reason I could think about why it is this way is because Bohemia themselves cannot afford to put up experimental servers for everyone who will want to play it. And they don't want to put experimental versions on other servers but their own, so we don't...hmm, I actually don't know why they wouldn't want that. I just know this isn't a great way to develop and has a ping-pong effect for the devs, since they are always working on several versions at the same time. 

Edited April 15, 2015 by S3V3N

[Hicks_206 (DayZ) 4297]

Come on Hicks, that's a little bit to easy.

 

Numerous times in the past the devs have given us times and/or dates for updates that haven't been met, resulting in postponing the update.

I, for one, don't mind the wait, but if you are going to set a date, I'm expecting that you will make it.

So my advise would be to be a bit more reserved in giving us times and/or date for updates.

The guy asked a question about whomever does the updates on DayZTV.com.

[Hicks_206 (DayZ) 4297]

My point wasn't about the Alpha. I know it's an Alpha and I embrace that fact. The problem is Dayz is essentially a double or triple alpha development. We have the stable, which is essentially the best working version of the latest experimental. Then we have the experimental, which is ahead of the stable by one build, but eventually will become the stable. And then we have the Hotfixed Stable, which is essentially every stable version of late, because the experimental versions are still bugged. Every sensible person must realize that this way you will never get a working stable. This is simply not how experimental versions should be handled. They aren't even experimental versions, you might as well call all versions "stable" under this predicament.

 

Stable versions should be kept running for weeks or months and actually be stable. They are for enjoying the game or what there is to enjoy of it. Experimental versions are usually completely different from the stable ones and should be used for adding content and testing content (With the chance and knowledge that all may be lost to the player). It makes no sense to always make the latest experimental version the new stable one, when it isn't stable. There is an obvious flaw in developing like this and the only reason I could think about why it is this way is because Bohemia themselves cannot afford to put up experimental servers for everyone who will want to play it. And they don't want to put experimental versions on other servers but their own, so we don't...hmm, I actually don't know why they wouldn't want that. I just know this isn't a great way to develop and has a ping-pong effect for the devs, since they are always working on several versions at the same time. 

*facepalm*

You've got access to development builds through the Early Access program. Development builds with HEAVY warnings surrounding them, the start of the title, the purchase of the Early Access program on Steam.

Let me make this clear, seeking mastered builds is outside the scope of what this offering is. I call this out clearly in the latest Status Report and I've gone over it so many times on the forums, Steam forums, my twitter and so on that sometimes I forget which topic I'm posting in.

 

The Early Access program provides you with development builds of the project, not access to a feature, or functionally complete game. As this year progresses, more and more parts of the Enfusion engine and its accompanying technology will be merged into the main branch. This means things will break, sometimes things will break -hard-. We utilize the experimental branch to flesh out any catastrophically game breaking issues (think client crashes, server freezes, high repro progression loss, and so on) and at the end of the month the most stable development build gets pushed to Steam for all of you to poke, experiment, and have fun with. Testing is done in three tiers, each tier scaling up in load and volume. Internal, Experimental, Main (Stable) - and make no mistake. All three branches are for testing.  

[Kirov (DayZ) 585]

*facepalm*

You've got access to development builds through the Early Access program. Development builds with HEAVY warnings surrounding them, the start of the title, the purchase of the Early Access program on Steam.

 

I think the worst thing that could happen is for the dev team to feel rushed and release an unfinished thing. Take your time with publishing a game that's supposed to offer literally thousands hours of replayability.

[OrganGrinder 89]

Let me make this clear...

 

I hardly feel it is necessary for you to explain the development process to those who choose to see it in their own vision.  Kinda makes me mad that devs should have to defend their process at all, even if it is just clearing up misconceptions.  You are gracious for taking the time.

[S3V3N 1402]

Yes, they are all versions for testing. I read that before. But shouldn't there be some point in calling a version stable? I see different versions every week, but none of them I'd call stable. I often find the experimental versions to be just as stable as the stable one. My point is not about you giving names to things they are not, my point is that this may harm the longterm development more than you realize. For you keep developing a stable version that changes too quickly to be called anything but experimental 2. My point is there should be a stable version (somewhere), which we can play and be sure about (no guesswork about what works and what does not!); and this version should not get touched in months. Even if this version will be reduced and have fewer features, we can at least enjoy it.

 

I like Dayz, lot of good things to say about it, but your builds are the most chaotic I have ever seen in a game development. It goes one step ahead and two steps back. You simply move too fast to put everything into stable at the time. I don't know if that is by budget restraints, but what I said weeks ago still holds true: Dayz is not ready to become a beta at the end of the year.

 

Rockstar took 4 years to make GTA V. And they have done it before, four times actually. Both games (GTA + Dayz) are sandbox titles and both suffer from typical sandbox problems and glitches, which can often lead to hilarious results. However, Rockstar had a team of 400 people and a budget of god knows how much. They build on PC but planned for Consoles and PC. In short: they did brilliantly and planned past the initial release! So, which of the afore mentioned qualities is it you lack? The budget, the manpower or the organisation? I guess it is a bit of them all. I can tell you this: the sooner you admit Dayz won't reach beta in 2015 and the sooner you start relaxing and getting the team back on a true course (not a fictional one), the more understanding the fanbase will be. This game you hope will happen, it won't happen in time. So now is the right time to start making changes to a development that stresses both, devs and alpha players and roll back to whatever is working at the moment.

Edited April 15, 2015 by S3V3N

[Hicks_206 (DayZ) 4297]

Yes, they are all versions for testing. I read that before. But shouldn't there be some point in calling a version stable? 

Yep! Release of the game. 1.0.

 

 

I like Dayz, lot of good things to say about it, but your builds are the most chaotic I have ever seen in a game development.

As expected, I can't think of a title of our scope that has given consumers access to builds as early as we have. The Early Access program is opt-in, and we are *very* transparent on our store page on exactly what to expect from Early Access.

 

 

 Rockstar took 4 years to make GTA V. And they have done it before, four times actually. Both games (GTA + Dayz) are sandbox titles and both suffer from typical sandbox problems and glitches, which can often lead to hilarious results. However, Rockstar had a team of 400 people and a budget of god knows how much. They build on PC but planned for Consoles and PC. In short: they did brilliantly and planned past the initial release! So, which of the afore mentioned qualities is it you lack?

Well, the time.

You didn't, and don't get access to GTA as early as we've given folks the choice to with the Early Access program. We're just over a year and a half into principle development, and I'm fairly certain on a personal level - GTA as a franchise would get *swarmed* with Early Access consumers should they ever consider to use the program.

[tux (DayZ) 325]

Yes, they are all versions for testing. I read that before. But shouldn't there be some point in calling a version stable? I see different versions every week, but none of them I'd call stable. I often find the experimental versions to be just as stable as the stable one. My point is not about you giving names to things they are not, my point is that this may harm the longterm development more than you realize. For you keep developing a stable version that changes too quickly to be called anything but experimental 2. My point is there should be a stable version (somewhere), which we can play and be sure about (no guesswork about what works and what does not!); and this version should not get touched in months. Even if this version will be reduced and have fewer features, we can at least enjoy it.

 

Not sure if this is true, but I think a big problem is that the experimental branch doesn't have enough people or servers, and not enough feedback form those players. Many new bugs are going to be found when 10x or 100x the amount of people are playing. You can't expect any changes towards the final product without hiccups along the way. Play the Mod if you want something that has all features implemented and less bugs.

 

Rockstar took 4 years to make GTA V. And they have done it before, four times actually. Both games (GTA + Dayz) are sandbox titles and both suffer from typical sandbox problems and glitches, which can often lead to hilarious results. However, Rockstar had a team of 400 people and a budget of god knows how much. They build on PC but planned for Consoles and PC. In short: they did brilliantly and planned past the initial release! So, which of the afore mentioned qualities is it you lack? The budget, the manpower or the organisation? I guess it is a bit of them all. I can tell you this: the sooner you admit Dayz won't reach beta in 2015 and the sooner you start relaxing and getting the team back on a true course (not a fictional one), the more understanding the fanbase will be. This game you hope will happen, it won't happen in time. So now is the right time to start making changes to a development that stresses both, devs and alpha players and roll back to whatever is working at the moment.

 

Comparing GTA V to DayZ SA (or Rockstar to BI) is fucking ridiculous. And to say that the dev team isn't on track, you clearly aren't paying attention to any official roadmaps or status updates, of which the devs have stated that they are on track with what they have planned.

 

You are posting everywhere about your opinions (which you are entitled to, of course), but you clearly are just reading into what you want to hear, and ignoring all of the facts that are clearly presented to you. These attacks on the dev team, calling them lazy etc., are pretty cheap. I highly doubt you have any idea what the development process for a game like this is, but that doesn't seem to stop you from vomiting all of this useless crap the opinions that you are entitled to about how they aren't doing their jobs and such.

Edited April 15, 2015 by tux