PSA: Game development takes a while, but...

[Beizs 186]

Engine development takes longer, normally. Much longer.

I have seen a lot of people complain about how slow DayZ is being developed, in their eyes, and I think that, honestly, the opposite is true.

Most original games take two or three years to build, even using a completed engine and just adding on to it with mechanics, asset creation and similar tasks. This means that the game development and release alone takes two years or so for most games.

DayZ is not most games, firstly. The servers are smaller than most other MMO's, but DayZ is absolutely comparable, development wise, to other MMO(rpg)'s. MMO's tend to take even longer to develop - more like four or five years at a minimum.

But the DayZ dev team isn't even just developing an MMO in the normal way... They're pretty much rebuilding an entire engine while developing the game on this incomplete engine. Look how far the game has come over the last year and a half. You might claim that it's the same, like many, but to name just a few things:

Network bubble, increasing performance.
CLE, completely changing the looting system.
Animals
Hunting
Farming
Fishing
Crafting
Large scale map changes
Zombie AI
Animal AI
Tonnes of different items
Countless bug fixes
Incredible Anti-Cheat improvements
Vehicles
Persistence

And that is a just few of the more visible things. Under the hood, there's the physics engine, the multi threading, 64 bit support and new renderer to name a few things that they've been working on almost this whole time. A lot of this is coming fairly close to completion/initial testing release, too.

When you actually compare the development of DayZ to anything else, taking in to account the fact that they are building an engine at the same time, for an MMO, it is downright ridiculous to claim that development is slow.

Look in to it if you don't believe me. They're actually going pretty damned fast, especially considering that nothing quite like DayZ has ever been done before.

Edited August 3, 2015 by Beizs

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello there

 

OP whilst I appreciate your sentiments (and for the moment I will leave this open), rest assured, everyone, we will monitor this thread and will hand out infractions if it just descends into rant and raves from either fans or haters.

 

Feel free to discuss and disagree but keep it civil and keep it constructive!

 

Rgds

 

LoK

[Beizs 186]

Yeah, I'm aware that this could cause arguments/flaming and would be more than happy for it to be locked it it does.

I just really think that people who are complaining about the rate of development just need to think about it a little more.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Beizs

[Bigbadchuck 97]

Most people who don't work in a field where you actually create something from nothing have no idea the time involved to create your product. I am an electrician in the real world and wire refineries and gas treatment plants. It's the same thing. If you want the end product to be great you must spend the time to ensure it is. If you rush a game like this in delevopment it will be a crappy game, just like if I rush a project and take short cuts a gas refinery could burn down.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Bigbadchuck

[ColdAtrophy 1850]

You are pretty spot on OP. I'm surprised the hordes haven't descended on you.

 

 

I'm guessing orlok's appearance must have scared them off.

[gannon46 788]

yeah i feel the same i hate reading in other forums for games where some ass hat says day has been in dev for 2-3 years i don't even bother arguing anymore i know the game will get finished and i honestly don't care if it takes them 3 more years or more. it will be done when its done and when it is it will be glorious

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

You are pretty spot on OP. I'm surprised the hordes haven't descended on you.

 

 

I'm guessing orlok's appearance must have scared them off.

Give it time.  They need to fuel the hatred first.

 

As to the OP, you are pretty much spot on except in comparing this to mmorpgs.  Anyway, no matter how much you praise the Dev team, there are far more angry and bitter people out there who want to shit on everything positive.  Good luck with this topic

[Beizs 186]

Give it time. They need to fuel the hatred first.

As to the OP, you are pretty much spot on except in comparing this to mmorpgs. Anyway, no matter how much you praise the Dev team, there are far more angry and bitter people out there who want to shit on everything positive. Good luck with this topic

With the MMORPG thing, obviously they don't need to set up instancing, quests, skill trees etc, but the basic infrastructure for DayZ, I imagine, is very similar to some of the setup I've seen for MMORPG's.

Think network bubbles, completely free/sandbox/open world, large map (though small by MMO standards), random events, CLE, etc. The main thing, however, is that DayZ is massively server side. Like, a surprising amount, from what I've seen. This is where it's really very much an MMO(rpg) in terms of development. The devs moved as much as they feasibly could, from what I've read/been told, server side to remove/minimize the ability for cheating. Networking is one of the largest factors in DayZ's back end development, as it is with any other MMO.

So, sure, in terms of actual gameplay, DayZ is absolutely nothing like an MMORPG. But I maintain that it's pretty much one in many ways looking at it from a purely developmental standpoint.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Beizs

[derLoko 30]

I agree with most of what you said - but nothing changes the fact that people were told that DayZ would be in beta in 2014, and now it's nowhere near what most gamers would consider "beta", and compared to other games, things are indeed moving very slowly. Nobody forced Bohemia & Rocket to use the Arma engine. Or to start with a public paid alpha on Steam instead of releasing a closed alpha for fans only. Or to announce a 2014 beta instead of playing it safe.

 

So if you were trying to say that "considering the circumstances, DayZ development isn't slow" - i agree.

 

If you were trying to say that "DayZ development isn't slow, anyone who disagrees is wrong/uninformed/dumb" - then you are simply refusing to see the critics' perspective.

[Beizs 186]

I agree with most of what you said - but nothing changes the fact that people were told that DayZ would be in beta in 2014, and now it's nowhere near what most gamers would consider "beta", and compared to other games, things are indeed moving very slowly. Nobody forced Bohemia & Rocket to use the Arma engine. Or to start with a public paid alpha on Steam instead of releasing a closed alpha for fans only. Or to announce a 2014 beta instead of playing it safe.

 

So if you were trying to say that "considering the circumstances, DayZ development isn't slow" - i agree.

 

If you were trying to say that "DayZ development isn't slow, anyone who disagrees is wrong/uninformed/dumb" - then you are simply refusing to see the critics' perspective.

 

Please link me to where it was said that DayZ would be in Beta in 2014? I have never seen anything along those lines, and would be genuinely interested to see that.

 

As to comparing it to other games, show me any game that was developed faster than DayZ, with a similar scale. As a quick example Skyrim took ~4 years to develop without a single bit of multiplayer. GTA V took 4 years too, with a larger budget and larger team, again. Those games are both of a similar scale to DayZ, though DayZ is actually more of an undertaking in my opinion. While it has no storyline, which saves a lot of development, it's entirely online and has many MMO traits that generally take a lot longer to develop than anything in either of those two games, which were developed with an absolute tonne of money and huge development studios, let alone the fact that Skyrim was built on Creation engine, which was developed separately. The GTA V engine, to my knowledge, was new, but, again, was developed separately, making it a lot faster to make.

 

DayZ is being developed incredibly quickly, considering the engine is being developed at the same time by the same general team. Even without considering the engine, honestly, considering the scale of DayZ, it's not being developed slowly at all.

 

DayZ is planned to hit beta and the end of 2015, which is incredible considering the size of the game and the size of the team. I'm not saying people are idiots for thinking DayZ is being developed slowly. Most people don't understand how games are developed and the normal timeline. But that doesn't change the fact that they're just wrong.

 

EDIT: After searching, the only thing I found from anybody at Bohemia referencing DayZ hitting beta at the end of 2014 was this: http://dayzdev.tumblr.com/post/72473656344/dayz-three-weeks-on-the-road. Here, they didn't even say that it would hit beta in 2014... They said that there was no way that it would reach beta before the end of 2014... This was at the start of 2014, which was just after the SA had been released and before they'd decided to do a bunch of things that would make the game a hell of a lot better in the end, but take a bit more time.

 

Also, about that line 'Nobody forced Bohemia & Rocket to use the Arma engine. Or to start with a public paid alpha on Steam instead of releasing a closed alpha for fans only. Or to announce a 2014 beta instead of playing it safe.' Really? Nobody forced you to buy the game before it was fully released. In fact, the devs actually advised not to. That logic is completely contradictory to your standpoint. Also, had they not done those things, it would have been literally impossible for them to develop a good game. Not use the Arma engine..? They'd be in the same position they are in now, building a new engine... But this time, from scratch, without any play-ability for at least a year or two. Not release a paid alpha? They'd have far less funding and take longer to make a game that wasn't as good.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Beizs

[stinkenheim 249]

if the Early Access release of the SA hadn't been so successful then yes, we could say that the development was slow. However, due to the success it meant that rather than polishing the mod they were able to create an entirely new beast. In essence the goalposts were moved because so many people bought into the concept allowing them to redesign a dated engine and expand on their initial ideas.

As such, the process isn't slow, it's standard. Nothing too special, but the development of the game is progressing nicely it just needs the 'heavy lifting' of the rebuilt engine to be finished to really give an idea as to how much progress the game has made, at the moment so much time and expense has been spent developing the engine alongside everything else that the major improvements won't be readily noticed until these changes are in game.

[Beizs 186]

if the Early Access release of the SA hadn't been so successful then yes, we could say that the development was slow. However, due to the success it meant that rather than polishing the mod they were able to create an entirely new beast. In essence the goalposts were moved because so many people bought into the concept allowing them to redesign a dated engine and expand on their initial ideas.

As such, the process isn't slow, it's standard. Nothing too special, but the development of the game is progressing nicely it just needs the 'heavy lifting' of the rebuilt engine to be finished to really give an idea as to how much progress the game has made, at the moment so much time and expense has been spent developing the engine alongside everything else that the major improvements won't be readily noticed until these changes are in game.

 

100% spot on. So many people say 'BUT THEY MADE LOADS OF MONEY!', expecting that to make it faster. But they didn't want to make a mediocre game quickly. With the funding, they decided to go for an incredible game in a normal (though I still think they're being pretty fast, considering the scale and the fact they're rebuilding the engine) time frame.

[Etherious 907]

LOL I am really surprised the "professionals" haven't came out and talked out of theirs butts yet. xD

[derLoko 30]

EDIT: After searching, the only thing I found from anybody at Bohemia referencing DayZ hitting beta at the end of 2014 was this: http://dayzdev.tumblr.com/post/72473656344/dayz-three-weeks-on-the-road. Here, they didn't even say that it would hit beta in 2014... They said that there was no way that it would reach beta before the end of 2014... This was at the start of 2014, which was just after the SA had been released

 

Granted, it was something like "no sooner than" end of 2014 (and it was right on the Steam store page the whole time). But this is nitpicking now - the point is that a lot of features that were announced for 2014 and/or outlined in the roadmap took much longer than originally estimated. Many features still aren't in the game to this day, or have simply disappeared from the roadmap (bikes, boats, snow...). Some people are fine with that, others not so much. Both is entirely understandable imo. 

[Kirtd0g 8]

During my time playing DayZ I have encountered a lot of people under the age of 16. I can't help but feel that these people haven't had time to experience the world and learn how things work, let alone the game development process. I have no problem or qualms with the speed of the process and accept that it'll be ready when it's ready.  

[emuthreat 2837]

I once likened this development process to an auto mechanic changing the fuel system, transmission, and exhaust, while re-upholstering the interior;  while allowing the customer to drive around in the vehicle.  It seemed to go over well.

[Beizs 186]

Granted, it was something like "no sooner than" end of 2014 (and it was right on the Steam store page the whole time). But this is nitpicking now - the point is that a lot of features that were announced for 2014 and/or outlined in the roadmap took much longer than originally estimated. Many features still aren't in the game to this day, or have simply disappeared from the roadmap (bikes, boats, snow...). Some people are fine with that, others not so much. Both is entirely understandable imo. 

 

With things disappearing from the roadmap, it's more of a case of things being written more broadly. Bikes and boats fall under vehicles. Snow falls under weather. Not everything is going to be listed in the roadmap - that would be ridiculous.

 

As for things taking longer than stated, that has happened a few times, sure. But the roadmap is, essentially, written as 'best case'. That's rather obvious to most, I feel, and saying that the devs should be able to follow a timeline perfectly is ridiculous. Nothing that I can think of was delayed that much (it's mostly been one or two patches later), besides the renderer, which was down for Q1 of this year. That was delayed for a good reason. One that benefits us. (DX11 and 12 support, rather than 9 and 11)

 

I'm not saying that critics can't criticize the game, but it's also just as important for people to be able to point out the flaws in their argument. The idea that the game is being developed slowly is unfounded and just the opposite of reality. It's that simple. What the devs hope for is irrelevant in that, because it just is. It's not really nit picking, you're trying to fault the devs in any way you can, and I'm simply rebutting your arguments. They never said that it was going to be released as beta in 2014. They always maintained the roadmaps as goals, not fact (literally the only way they could lay out a roadmap that was set in stone would be if they could see the future). They've developed this game a whole lot since initial release and they've done it quickly. That's all I'm arguing for.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Beizs

[randomspawn 215]

With things disappearing from the roadmap, it's more of a case of things being written more broadly. Bikes and boats fall under vehicles. Snow falls under weather. Not everything is going to be listed in the roadmap - that would be ridiculous.

 

As for things taking longer than stated, that has happened a few times, sure. But the roadmap is, essentially, written as 'best case'. That's rather obvious to most, I feel, and saying that the devs should be able to follow a timeline perfectly is ridiculous. Nothing that I can think of was delayed that much (it's mostly been one or two patches later), besides the renderer, which was down for Q1 of this year. That was delayed for a good reason. One that benefits us. (DX11 and 12 support, rather than 9 and 11)

 

I'm not saying that critics can't criticize the game, but it's also just as important for people to be able to point out the flaws in their argument. The idea that the game is being developed slowly is unfounded and just the opposite of reality. It's that simple. What the devs hope for is irrelevant in that, because it just is. It's not really nit picking, you're trying to fault the devs in any way you can, and I'm simply rebutting your arguments. They never said that it was going to be released as beta in 2014. They always maintained the roadmaps as goals, not fact (literally the only way they could lay out a roadmap that was set in stone would be if they could see the future). They've developed this game a whole lot since initial release and they've done it quickly. That's all I'm arguing for.

I just don't see the reason for this thread at all. People that are happy will still be happy, and those that aren't will still be upset. Yes, we all know how projects work, and we also know that if you give a deadline to a computer programmer/team, they will likely miss that deadline by 50% or more. It's the way it is. Programmers spend too much time drinking Mountain Dew and eating pudding, and not enough time coding... :D

[Beizs 186]

I just don't see the reason for this thread at all. People that are happy will still be happy, and those that aren't will still be upset. Yes, we all know how projects work, and we also know that if you give a deadline to a computer programmer/team, they will likely miss that deadline by 50% or more. It's the way it is. Programmers spend too much time drinking Mountain Dew and eating pudding, and not enough time coding... :D

Well, in my experience, quite a few of the people I've argued with over the development rate of DayZ have actually changed their minds in the end, once presented wth all of the facts.

If I can get one person to understand and stop shitting on the game/giving the devs crap with this thread, that's a victory in my books. I feel like the fact there's been no negative replies so far on this thread is actually proof of my success in explaining it - there is definitely people who often complain about this topic who are active on the forums.

Honestly, I just really wanted to get this off my chest in a clear, concise manner once and for all. In the future, when I see people bitching about it, rather than typing out several paragraphs each time, I can just link them to this. :P

But yeah, there are some people who just won't be happy either way. But there is definitely a few who will change their minds when properly presented with the facts.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Beizs

[RagedDrew 209]

[snip]

I just really think that people who are complaining about the rate of development just need to think about it a little more.

It doesn't matter what you say and do, people will complain, I'd bet my last pound that the ones who are complaining about the time it's taken would still be complaining about something if the DEVs released a fully working game tomorrow. Some people just need to complain, their lives would be empty otherwise.

[xalienax 621]

+1 to OP.

I don't agree with many choices the devs have made, but ultimately, I had to accept I just can't tolerate the current state and have left the SA until release or late beta. Maybe it will deliver what I like, mabye it wont. In the mean time, I have the more hardcore & vanilla Mod servers and Elite: Dangerous to keep me occupied :) No Point in wasting afternoons 'shitposting' with anger directed at people who enjoy/appreciate something that I just don't.

 

As i have said in my 'going away' post- Spending so much time in the mod has left me with a very narrow view of what i will consider a 'good dayZ'. it might be a great survival game, but if it doesn't remind me of the times i Had in the vanilla mod i wont like it, because that is the benchmark against i will always compare anything bearing the name 'DayZ'.

[Xbow 362]

Look in to it if you don't believe me. They're actually going pretty damned fast, especially considering that nothing quite like DayZ has ever been done before.

I agree and I might add that from a cost effectiveness standpoint DayZ has been a hell of a bargain for 30 skins. the unique features of the game even in its unfinished state have caused me to see other games as simplistic garbage. Hell, the game can be without mercy. My fully equipped character that has thrived since the last wipe was a survivor many gunfights and Zed attacks.

 

The Char succumbed to Dysentery (I guess) The doom laden message "I feel my Bowels rumbling" and rapid dehydration was a miserable experience but also a great one. Running all over the map looking for antibiotics, water purification tablets and wells while avoiding potentially unsafe water sources  as the screen slowly faded to gray and finally black and the "you are unconscious" message was awesome. I like the game a great deal.And it has come a long way in a very short time. 

 

 

have some beans Beize   :beans:

Edited May 20, 2015 by Xbow

[nebuuuu 11]

Hi guys :)

Okay then...I will break the lance and write my opinion down here (by using the Google translator and my low English skills ^^)...
At first, i think DayZ SA is still in the BIG timeframe and they can still make a very good game out of it, before it is released as final.
Only the mistakes they made as in selecting the graphics engine, the partially serious bugs as invisible zombies/players and a number of other delays such as currently the lootprobs and especially since the beginning of the performancedrops in cities (which at last seems more into focus now), have DayZ a fair bit thrown back.
The development could be significantly further and in my opinion, also have to be part, if there is a clearer course would have prevailed from the beginning.
Without Dean`s Legend to destroy and also in view of the overwhelming early success from standalone, there were surely decision problems, which are almost corrected now (it seems), but cost a lot of time and also resources and patience of the players.

Basically, I would have been expected to be implemented at this time:

• persistance of tents, cars, items on the servers (so we can build early bases)
• a minimal functioning looteconomy
• basic, simple craftingsystem like hatchet -> tree -> boards for nailing houses, as an alternative base

Sure, this things are not implemented at the latest by next year, but still lack important core elements, which I have deliberately omitted.
e.g. animals, zombies, AI, extended basebuilding, details and variety in items around, zombies, weapons, player status etc.

I have the opinion that the DayZ SA development is about 4-5 months behind, what they could be.
I fully understand that the teams working also separately from each other and therefore, for example, the weapons team can work etc. farther and faster than, for example the engine / server people.
As I said, I think it is still justifiable developmentally, but it is felt they need to catch up.
Nevertheless, there has of course not even reached the official beta and i understand that.

I hope they continue chosen path of the last 3-4 months, with the communication and transparency-policy as now.
Like the Developer newsblog/timeline-board, -forum etc., to see what really happens to make this game good.

Thank you for that@DayZ Team and Bye to all survivors.
See you soon in Cherno ..if someone is there. ;-)

Edited May 20, 2015 by Nebuuuu

[Beizs 186]

• persistance of tents, cars, items on the servers (so we can build early bases)
• a minimal functioning looteconomy
• basic, simple craftingsystem like hatchet -> tree -> boards for nailing houses, as an alternative base

 

I'd just like to point out that the only one of those three things that isn't present in experimental right now and being released next week is the base building (as in, 'boards for a house'). That kind of thing is a much, much larger undertaking and they've said that you're not actually going to be able to build buildings, similar to what you can do in Rust, because that just doesn't fit in the DayZ world.

 

However, if you're simply talking about building basic shelters etc, I don't imagine there's a lot of work left to be done with that. Really, it's just making new models for tents and adding the crafting recipes.

 

There is already a basic crafting system otherwise, which has been around for a long while and has a decent amount of depth to it so far, and persistence has been around for a fair while now.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Beizs

[Etherious 907]

I just don't see the reason for this thread at all. People that are happy will still be happy, and those that aren't will still be upset. Yes, we all know how projects work, and we also know that if you give a deadline to a computer programmer/team, they will likely miss that deadline by 50% or more. It's the way it is. Programmers spend too much time drinking Mountain Dew and eating pudding, and not enough time coding... :D

Thats the thing though, many people don't understand how these things work. They talk out of their butt first and think last.