Santa fox derails Exp Topic (fixed).

[Santa fox 53]

I can't help but wonder, if the dev's wouldn't have gained more from keeping DayZ an internal testing game, rather than letting the public play it.

[ebrim 998]

I can't help but wonder, if the dev's wouldn't have gained more from keeping DayZ an internal testing game, rather than letting the public play it.

 

Hmm... good question.

 

One way to think of it: would the project even have been possible without Early Access funding?

 

Another: how much do the devs want player feedback to define the game?

 

(I don't actually know the answer to either of these questions with any high level of confidence but I think they are good points to consider.)

 

-----------

 

Personally speaking I'm very glad they took the route they did as even without many of its release features and despite the bugs this is one of my favorite games. I've long since got my money out of the product and more. (this isn't very hard to do with video games which are per hour absurdly cheap forms of entertainment)

Edited May 26, 2015 by Ebrim

[533dk 34]

I can't help but wonder, if the dev's wouldn't have gained more from keeping DayZ an internal testing game, rather than letting the public play it.

 

They wouldn't have to hear all the trash talk about the dev's and so on. Thought about that last night when i was in a stream and these kids started to bomb the chat about how bad dayz is and why the dev's don't fix the issues that currently is in the game. 

I wonder what these kids would say if dayz weren't available to the public to test.

[Santa fox 53]

They wouldn't have to hear all the trash talk about the dev's and so on. Thought about that last night when i was in a stream and these kids started to bomb the chat about how bad dayz is and why the dev's don't fix the issues that currently is in the game. 

I wonder what these kids would say if dayz weren't available to the public to test.

 

Well, as it currently is, we are paying for something that is completely broke, more or less, with server up-time being less than stable. While other games in alpha, have reached far longer than DayZ has. I can't help but wonder, if the DayZ devs had kept it internal, if not the whole having to fix server crash bugs, client crash bugs etc etc, wouldn't have sped up production.

 

And given how the game may, theoretically, never get out of Alpha while still taking our cash for it, it also seems like an quite bad deal for the players. Not saying they would do that, though, given how other survival games, in similiar and/or exact same style, have gone far longer in their production, in less time.. Kinda makes you wonder.

[Veyda 195]

And given how the game may, theoretically, never get out of Alpha while still taking our cash for it, it also seems like an quite bad deal for the players.

 

I wouldn't mind if the game stayed Alpha throughout all of 2016 and even 2017, if that meant that more mechanics were added to make it THE survival simulator.

By which I mean a game that gives you a hardcore, authentic experience that's applicable IRL, a game you could bounce your survival ideas off before risking your own tush in a not-so-virtual SHTF scenario.

A civilian VBS, if you will.

For that, it doesn't need to be balanced or 'fun', just FUN.

[barnabus 1708]

Well, as it currently is, we are paying for something that is completely broke, more or less, with server up-time being less than stable. While other games in alpha, have reached far longer than DayZ has. I can't help but wonder, if the DayZ devs had kept it internal, if not the whole having to fix server crash bugs, client crash bugs etc etc, wouldn't have sped up production.

 

And given how the game may, theoretically, never get out of Alpha while still taking our cash for it, it also seems like an quite bad deal for the players. Not saying they would do that, though, given how other survival games, in similiar and/or exact same style, have gone far longer in their production, in less time.. Kinda makes you wonder.

Double edged sword here, I believe they wanted player input during early access, without early access no player input and no one gets to bitch about the game until they buy a substandard 1.0. 

 

Look at what happened to Star Wars Galaxies after the release of the "New Game Enhancements".  The NGE were the direct result of a focus group composed of people who had never even played the game. Before the NGE becoming a Jedi was a goal and very tough quest to even get the chance to begin the training for it.  You had to master many professions, with the NGE Jedi became a starting profession for cripes sake.  NGE changed the entire feel and play of the game overnight without ANY input whatsoever from the players and it came just days after a major add on was released that most players pre-purchased before NGE was even announced.  SOE ended up refunding everyone who purchased that update.  Then the game went on to die a very slow and very agonizing death with server merges becoming routine.  They even had a "Rewards Program" for players dedicated to destroying old player houses and structures that had been abandoned after people quit the game.  It was a huge fiasco and earned a lot of hatred for SOE, justified or not.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Barnabus

[Demonica 311]

Personally, when I bought the game, I really wanted to see it develop from the absolute raw basics to a finished product. I kept hearing people say "OMG Rocket left, it's all going to shit now, wtf are we gonna do??" and I also heard people still trusting the folks that kept developing the game.

 

Seriously now, I took an almost 5 months hiatus from DayZ because I realized it would not bring me as much fun at the current state it was at then and decided to return just a couple days ago. It helped! Much progress has been made, I have been able to rediscover features of the game I really liked, I started reading up on the Development and what has happened.

 

I don't say this to be rude or anything else, and I understand that there are a ton of folks getting frustrated and feeling like they're not getting what they paid for, but really, I seriously recommend that you take a hiatus. Just go do something else for a long period of time, then come back and look at it with fresh eyes.

 

I didn't even keep up with the community anymore because I wanted to be surprised by all the changes and new stuff that was gonna be in, and I enjoyed the heck out of it.

 

What I'm getting at is this: Give it (and yourself) a break and don't get mad. It just makes you... angry. Then come back once you realize you kinda miss it.

 

You'll be surprised, and yes maybe underwhelmed by some features.

 

But maybe it'll get you going to give DayZ a second chance when YOU are ready. Not when the game is ready ;-)

 

Edit:

 

Something else that I just thought of: If you are getting mad about the bugs and timelines and whatever else irks you... Is it because the game really means a lot to you and you want to see it on the right track? Or are you just blowing off some steam? Cause if you keep playing AND complaining... there's gotta be something wrong here.

 

Constructive discussion? Yep, I'm all over it. But bashing the game and the Devs is not gonna help anyone, least of all the players.

Just an afterthought / brainfart.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Demonica

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

^I took about 6 months off from DayZ myself for similar reasons.

 

I make concerted efforts to avoid burnout on DayZ because I know it's a 10 year plan (maybe less for me but you see my point).

 

The more features, the more I'll keep sinking time in.

 

Personally, I came back in earnest a few months ago, playing more and more as things improved, and these are pivotal times for new tech and game mechanics.

 

You chose a good time to return!!

[Demonica 311]

Thanks Haze, I had the same feeling when I first jumped back in. As things are now (not only in game but in RL as well) I'm not gonna make any promises as far as sticking around goes, but it certainly feels great to be welcomed back into the community from folks that still remember me.

 

So if I vanish into thin air, remember it's not you. It's me :P

 

Welp, I'll see y'all tonight, I did switch back to stable for now and just hang out :)

[Santa fox 53]

I have taken time off DayZ, as well, and while it has certainly helped, I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have been a wiser choice to keep it closed, until at least, say, Beta, and then add on things that people would like to see.

 

Infact, DayZ is the one game I have played for nearly 1000 hours, and have gotten more joy out of than most other games, but at the same time, it has been extremely frustrating to, at times, not be able to play it, when servers are down for no reason, or when characters die for no reason, or suchlike, especially when these bugs seem to re-appear.

 

I do have faith in that the game will be released, but I can't help but wonder if releasing it for alpha-testing was such a good idea, after all, that is all.

[Veyda 195]

I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have been a wiser choice to keep it closed, until at least, say, Beta, and then add on things that people would like to see.

 

I'm not sure you fully understand the software development lifecycle.

Beta is usually the bugfixing, balancing and polishing stage. Adding anything major at that point is rather complicated and counterproductive, will require refactoring or even rewriting a lot of code, and will likely shift the entire project to the right by weeks, if not months, for every core mechanic introduced this late.

:facepalm:

[LordBlackwolf 656]

I have taken time off DayZ, as well, and while it has certainly helped, I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have been a wiser choice to keep it closed, until at least, say, Beta, and then add on things that people would like to see.

 

Infact, DayZ is the one game I have played for nearly 1000 hours, and have gotten more joy out of than most other games, but at the same time, it has been extremely frustrating to, at times, not be able to play it, when servers are down for no reason, or when characters die for no reason, or suchlike, especially when these bugs seem to re-appear.

 

I do have faith in that the game will be released, but I can't help but wonder if releasing it for alpha-testing was such a good idea, after all, that is all.

The thing about releasing it in it's alpha form as opposed to a beta form is that not only can players give feedback on the direction the game is heading as well as providing suggestions for things they'd like to see in game but also to be able to catch bugs that might otherwise be missed until beta.

[Demonica 311]

I understand what you mean Santa, but either way, it won't do much good closing it now ^^ It's Alpha-released and the Devs have to deal with it as much as we do.

 

See, I kinda just go with the flow, and if you read some of my other posts I have been doubting my own judgement of buying so early as well as that of the Developers. And just like you, I am getting so, so much enjoyment out of the game as well as the community, that in the end it just seems worth sticking with it.

 

I have almost 3000 hours logged and it's really like cheesecake or chips or chocolate - you know it's not all good for you, but you eat it anyway ;-)

 

And now I'm hungry and I have to go get a snack. Dammit. ^^

[ebrim 998]

I have taken time off DayZ, as well, and while it has certainly helped, I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have been a wiser choice to keep it closed, until at least, say, Beta, and then add on things that people would like to see.

 

Infact, DayZ is the one game I have played for nearly 1000 hours, and have gotten more joy out of than most other games, but at the same time, it has been extremely frustrating to, at times, not be able to play it, when servers are down for no reason, or when characters die for no reason, or suchlike, especially when these bugs seem to re-appear.

 

I do have faith in that the game will be released, but I can't help but wonder if releasing it for alpha-testing was such a good idea, after all, that is all.

 

This is a bit odd though to be terribly concerned with. As you say, you've played nearly 1000 hours and have enjoyed it, even if at times it has been frustrating. Had they done as you offer none of that would have existed and there's no guarantee the end result would have kept your attention or given you the same amount of enjoyment. It just seems an unnecessary trip down the dark and craggy road of counterfactuals where the only thing that we can be sure would not happen is the 1000 hours of play you've already taken from the production.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Ebrim

[Santa fox 53]

I'm not sure you fully understand the software development lifecycle.

Beta is usually the bugfixing, balancing and polishing stage. Adding anything major at that point is rather complicated and counterproductive, will require refactoring or even rewriting a lot of code, and will likely shift the entire project to the right by weeks, if not months, for every core mechanic introduced this late.

:facepalm:

 

Given how I actively involve myself in game development, by producing stuff myself, I am well aware of the different stages of production. Simply because I put something into a beta, though, does not mean it is hard/impossible to add/remove or fix things. It merely gives the testers a better overview of what has been added, where I am going with a project, and they can thusly comment on what should be changed, to better fit what they like.

 

 

 

I understand what you mean Santa, but either way, it won't do much good closing it now ^^ It's Alpha-released and the Devs have to deal with it as much as we do.

 

See, I kinda just go with the flow, and if you read some of my other posts I have been doubting my own judgement of buying so early as well as that of the Developers. And just like you, I am getting so, so much enjoyment out of the game as well as the community, that in the end it just seems worth sticking with it.

 

I have almost 3000 hours logged and it's really like cheesecake or chips or chocolate - you know it's not all good for you, but you eat it anyway ;-)

 

And now I'm hungry and I have to go get a snack. Dammit. ^^

 

True, and more just thinking aloud, given the recent trouble with Experimental and the fact that things seem to be progressing slower, as public servers, players and so forth have to be taken into account during development cycle.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Santa fox

[barnabus 1708]

I have taken time off DayZ, as well, and while it has certainly helped, I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have been a wiser choice to keep it closed, until at least, say, Beta, and then add on things that people would like to see.

 

Infact, DayZ is the one game I have played for nearly 1000 hours, and have gotten more joy out of than most other games, but at the same time, it has been extremely frustrating to, at times, not be able to play it, when servers are down for no reason, or when characters die for no reason, or suchlike, especially when these bugs seem to re-appear.

 

I do have faith in that the game will be released, but I can't help but wonder if releasing it for alpha-testing was such a good idea, after all, that is all.

I have over 3000 hours in and the only game I can compare that to is Star Wars Galaxies, not quite 3000 but pretty damn close.  Being unemployed sucks.  I dream about DayZ for cripes sake.

[boneboys 7988]

Don't do that...