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

[grimlok 77]

Here we go, officially solved http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/223250-quarterly-status-report-quarter-1-2015/

 

Q1 2015

• Basic vehicles
• Advanced loot distribution
• New renderer
• New Zombie AI
• Basic stealth system (zombies and animals)
• Diseases
• Improved cooking and horticulture
• Advanced anti-hack system (Dynamic BattlEye)

Q2 2015

• Advanced vehicles (repair and modifications)
• Advanced animals (life cycle, group behavior)
• Player statistics
• New UI
• Player stamina
• Dynamic events
• World containers
• New physics system

Q3 2015

• Traps
• Barricading
• Character life span + soft skills
• Animal predators + birds
• Aerial transport
• Console prototype
• Advanced communication

Q4 2015

• Animal companions
• Steam community integration
• Construction (base building)
• Beta version, expected price €34.99 / $43.99.

Now I've gone and scratched off everything that I can recall they actually did.  So, as you can see, we're still technically in the first quarter if you want to go by what's been accomplished.  As the devs have stated over and over and over, everything is subject to change due to complexity and things breaking so I believe we are in the 3rd quarter and right on schedule.

 

Bolded red text to simulate sarcasm.

Edited August 4, 2015 by leader.one

[scriptfactory 620]

... we're still technically in the first quarter if you want to go by what's been accomplished ... I believe we are in the 3rd quarter and right on schedule.

 

If someone had told me DayZ would reach beta by mid- to late-2016 I would have bought the game anyway. But the initial beta date was Q4 2014. Then it was Q1 2016. Neither of those dates will be met. There is nothing "right on schedule" about this project...

[grimlok 77]

If someone had told me DayZ would reach beta by mid- to late-2016 I would have bought the game anyway. But the initial beta date was Q4 2014. Then it was Q1 2016. Neither of those dates will be met. There is nothing "right on schedule" about this project...

Where the hell are you getting your dates from??  Lol beta 2014??  Start of beta by the end of 2015 and out of early accrss by mid 2016.  Jesus, make more shit up.

 

Also, I re-edited my post again because you obviously didn't pick up on the sarcasm about being on schedule

Edited August 4, 2015 by leader.one

[scriptfactory 620]

Where the hell are you getting your dates from??  Lol beta 2014??  Start of beta by the end of 2015 and out of early accrss by mid 2016.  Jesus, make more shit up.

 

Also, I re-edited my post again because you obviously didn't pick up on the sarcasm about being on schedule

 

I bought the game December 2013, I think. It seems like a loooooong time ago but I am pretty sure that is when I bought it. I thought that, at the time, the estimated date of beta release was Q4 2014 because that is what Rocket said.

 

“The roadmap [for the beta] is end of the year, but we don’t want to release the beta on, like, December 12 or whatever,” he said. “The beta date would either be prior to the end of the year, so November or something, or it would be pushed to January or February with more QA."

 

http://www.vg247.com/2014/02/25/dayz-standalone-estimated-for-2015-console-versions-still-being-discussed/

 

 

 

I totally didn't pick up on your sarcasm. :)

[Essonimex 21]

@OP

So where can i read up about this new engine they are supposedly working on? Last i heard they were just updating the ancient piece of crap engine we have now, and just rename it Enfusion. I am very excited for this new engine now, please, share some info.

Dont worry.


I will wait.

Thats all we have left, waiting.

[sachad 1016]

@OP

So where can i read up about this new engine they are supposedly working on? Last i heard they were just updating the ancient piece of crap engine we have now, and just rename it Enfusion. I am very excited for this new engine now, please, share some info.

Dont worry.

I will wait.

Thats all we have left, waiting.

 

Well, I would suggest you go and actually play the alpha and have some fun while you wait, but from the passive-aggressiveness in your post, I can deduce that that's probably not going to work out for you. 

[Hicks_206 (DayZ) 4297]

Jesus.. this thread. *facepalm*

[vfxtodd 123]

When people lower themselves to prepubescent ramblings about where a product SHOULD be in its primordial development, I have to wonder what they're doing with their personal time. Is my life so empty of value and activities, I have to attack the progress of a video game not meeting standards I have no idea of their meaning.

 

I could give a flying fandango about "roadmaps". DayZ is a product being developed by humans, not gods. They can't alter time and space to force the progress of development into a specific time frame. That would be...what's the word?....Unrealistic. 

 

I'm watching a new rail line being built in the city I live in with great anticipation. I look forward to its completion because it will allow me to travel to parts of the city without having to deal with the insane traffic of Los Angeles, California. I heard that they are "ahead of schedule". They recently tested the tracks by running a train over the tracks across the new route. Originally, the "opening" date was summer of 2016. Now, some people may assume that the rail will be opening SOONER because of the mere mention of the "ahead of schedule" statement. Should I realistically expect the system to be available sooner? I think not. And who knows what issues may arise, now that they've started the testing phase. I've never built a railroad system in my life. I have no idea of what issues are involved in the construction of such a system. What if, for some reason, the opening gets pushed back to winter of 2016, or later? Should I get angry? Should I cry foul? No, I don't think I should.

 

It opens when it opens. Before I know it, it will be opened. So, I wait with great anticipation. Looking forward to traveling across the city and avoiding insane traffic delays. Fun times lie ahead. For my city, and for DayZ.

[Baker. 1484]

Jesus.. this thread. *facepalm*

Agree with 99% of this^

 

But I felt klesh asked a fair question in a respectful manner. Is there a chance that you or another member of the team could address his concerns. 

 

To everybody else: 

 

For those of you that don't know him, Klesh is the quintessential player. One of the guys who I always felt "gets it" when it comes to what DayZ is all about. And it looks like we may be on the road to loosing him, and that would dishearten me with the project more than anything I can think of.

 

Watch this:

 

EDIT

 

I don't care Klesh, I love your cherno journo. Zero fux.

Edited August 4, 2015 by B@ker

[hellcat420 212]

Jesus.. this thread. *facepalm*

yea, it needs more poopsmears.

[Beizs 186]

I no longer have the time to go through and research everything I say in replies and ensure that I'm getting everything 100% correct (or as close to that as I can) now, so I'm gonna go ahead and step away from the conversation. Still feel exactly the same way as in the original post, but I don't wanna sit here going purely off of memory and typing up rushed replies and potentially doing more damage than good. If others still want to talk about the general topic etc here, feel free (and try not to get the thread locked if you actually do want a discussion), but there's more than I can be bothered to reply to - or reliably reply to with a decent degree of accuracy even if I wanted to.

 

It was stated several times (even on this forum) that DayZ has NOT been in development for 3 years. It's now coming close to 2 years.

 

Starcraft 2 was in actual development for more like 5-6 years rather than 7 (if we're talking Wings of Liberty).

Based on that I question the other data you're presenting. Remember that a gap between the releases of a game and its sequel does not equal development time.

 

Though I appreciate the positive thing you're trying to do here. I just tend to go all OCD on these things, sorry about that.

Did I say that it's been in development for three years anywhere? I'm actually very aware that that's not the case and have been since long before I started this thread. Apologies if I did say that anywhere.

 

One of my key points is that we got this game pretty much at the beginning of its development, which is far from the case with any project people try to compare it to.

 

@OP

So where can i read up about this new engine they are supposedly working on? Last i heard they were just updating the ancient piece of crap engine we have now, and just rename it Enfusion. I am very excited for this new engine now, please, share some info.

Dont worry.


I will wait.

Thats all we have left, waiting.

Nowhere did i state that there's a new engine coming. They are replacing the renderer and physics engines - those are the entirely new parts. The engine, in the way you're talking about it (the entire thing, including the renderer and physics engines), as a whole, is essentially an improved (vastly, vastly improved) version of the engine we started with.

 

However, as you clearly didn't bother to actually read what people were saying when talking about new engines, and your post was dripping with passive aggressiveness, I'm sure you'll pay little to no attention to my reply.

 

Also, updating an engine to a large extent can absolutely make it a new engine. Look at... well... just about any mainstream engine - Unreal, Unity, CryEngine etc are all now iterated upon and improved versions of their original forms. At a certain point, it's classed as a 'new' engine.

 

Jesus.. this thread. *facepalm*

Eh, I still stand by my original post and think that it's something that was well worth saying (and think I got most of the stuff right there). I think the conversation was also pretty constructive in this threads original lifetime. However, I admit that since it was necro'd, it's broken down a bit and is now pretty full of speculation (which I'm absolutely guilty of too) and borderline flaming.

Edited August 4, 2015 by Beizs

[blacklabel79 949]

tl;dr

 

its finished when its finished.

 

I have fun with it and take breaks.

 

welp

[Baker. 1484]

I don't get people telling the dev team to "Just use UE4" I'm sure there is a desire to develop their own IP. Why would they abandon their own work after so many years when it is clear they have the ability to refine these technologies to a workable level. The engines BIS use suit their purposes, you would be hard pressed to find a modern game that rivals the scope and scale of even Arma 2 let alone their more modern titles so I can imagine that there are elements of these engines that excel beyond what UE4 can offer, even if its only for "under the hood" mechanics. 

 

But, from the outside looking in it appears that there is minimal inter project reciprocity. Most of BIS's games (to the end user at least) appear to use the same game-play dynamics and demand the same optimizations. So why have different groups of engine coders? 

 

What does the Arma 3 engine lack that we need to develop this "Enfusion" engine. Is it less work to re-code those parts of the TOC engine that we find undesirable than to port the DayZ assets to the older brother of the engine the game was originally coded for? Pwnoz0r ported the original mod to the Arma 3 engine and it ran nearly as well as the mod and looked wonderful. Is BIS like so many companies out there and their corporate culture is to blame? Is it ruled by rival chiefs and factions that covet and resent each other? Is it watermarked with rash decisions made by leaders with misplaced authority? Or is there something I'm missing?

[Coheed_IV 381]

I agree B@ker, these other engines do not match the scale. All talk ends at, "I can't see over 400 meters".

But, The mod running on A3 is still no where near the level of what SA is trying to accomplish. Everything will be on the server, without this hackers would run wild. 3-4 thousand infected all on server, over 100 players, over million spawn points, enscript, new animation system, player character. The mod comparision should end at infected local. It should be more obvious as time goes on, but A3 is a different game, besides the sound (which it will incorporate) there is not much it can do better that DayZ needs.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Coheed_IV

[Baker. 1484]

I agree B@ker, these other engines do not match the scale. All talk ends at, "I can't see over 400 meters".

But, The mod running on A3 is still no where near the level of what SA is trying to accomplish. Everything will be on the server, without this hackers would run wild. 3-4 thousand infected all on server, over 100 players, over million spawn points, enscript, new animation system, player character. The mod comparision should end at infected local. It should be more obvious as time goes on, but A3 is a different game, besides the sound (which it will incorporate) there is not much it can do better that DayZ needs.

I am aware of all this. That wasn't really the question. It was more in the vein of questioning their division of what could be shared resources, be it personnel, assets etc. 

[Coheed_IV 381]

I am aware of all this. That wasn't really the question. It was more in the vein of questioning their division of what could be shared resources, be it personnel, assets etc.

ok, yeah thought you did.

Yes, it is very interesting. I'm always interested in what will go into the Arma 3 branch from DayZ, occlusion culling? Maybe some of the A3 sound guys would move to DayZ once they're finished there. It has been mentioned in status report of sharing resources regarding sound.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Coheed_IV

[griffinz 2816]

This game dev cycle is pretty standard for games of this size (open-world, crafting, persistent)

 

Also, hello

[Baker. 1484]

This game dev cycle is pretty standard for games of this size (open-world, crafting, persistent)

 

Also, hello

Sweet baby jesus, its Griff!

[Inception. 9443]

This game dev cycle is pretty standard for games of this size (open-world, crafting, persistent)

Also, hello

This topic is about to be derailed with "holy shit it's Griff GRIFF HELLOOOOO" posts, thanks Griff

(missed you Griffy)

[Surviv0r1969 151]

They're actually going pretty damned fast, especially considering that nothing quite like DayZ has ever been done before.

 

 

id like to add another, when you see the real life pics being posted youll also see how accurate they. they are doing an amazing job.

Edited August 5, 2015 by surviv0r

[Damnyourdeadman 1045]

I agree B@ker, these other engines do not match the scale. All talk ends at, "I can't see over 400 meters".

But, The mod running on A3 is still no where near the level of what SA is trying to accomplish. Everything will be on the server, without this hackers would run wild. 3-4 thousand infected all on server, over 100 players, over million spawn points, enscript, new animation system, player character. The mod comparision should end at infected local. It should be more obvious as time goes on, but A3 is a different game, besides the sound (which it will incorporate) there is not much it can do better that DayZ needs.

 

The decison to calculate all resources server side,was indeed a wise choice!

However the Arma 2 - (RV) Server Architecture,just isn't strong enough to support a game with DayZ's scale and ambitions.

 

The ideal DayZ engine would effectively need to...

 

- Calculate a massive number of Items and their respawn mechanics.

- Calculate a massive number of infected and animal AI.

- Calculate a massive number of players.

- Calculate a massive numeber of new assets.

 

Arma 2 server architecture,was never designed to support the needs of a large scale MMO.

It was struggling even when playing against others in a vanilla deathmatch.

 

People (like me) who have been constantly (bitching) asking for an engine change since 2013,aknowledged these limitations.

The SA proves more limiting than the mod because,although it expanded on features,it still dosen't have what it takes to support a game like DayZ.

 

Unless they develop a completely modern and rehalued new server archtecture module,the game will always feel clunky and restricting to new additions.

 

Edit: Removed speculations

Edited August 5, 2015 by Damnyourdeadman

[Hicks_206 (DayZ) 4297]

The decison to calculate all resources server side,was indeed a wise choice!

However the Arma 2 - (RV) Server Architecture,just isn't strong enough to support a game with DayZ's scale and ambitions.

 

The ideal DayZ engine would effectively need to...

 

- Calculate a massive number of Items and their respawn mechanics.

- Calculate a massive number of infected and animal AI.

- Calculate a massive number of players.

- Calculate a massive numeber of new assets.

 

Arma 2 server architecture,was never designed to support the needs of a large scale MMO.

It was struggling even when playing against others in a vanilla deathmatch.

 

People (like me) who have been constantly (bitching) asking for an engine change since 2013,aknowledged these limitations.

The SA proves more limiting than the mod because,although it expanded on features,it still dosen't have what it takes to support a game like DayZ.

 

Unless they develop a completely modern and rehalued new server archtecture module,the game will always feel clunky and restricting to new additions.

 

Edit: Removed speculations

 

DayZ.com/FAQ