New renderer - When will we see it or at least get some kind of timeline?

[thewire 88]

seems that when a game can make 40 million before its complete and the market for it is saturated with an unfinished game, the motivations to complete it are undermined.

And the excuses why are exquisite.

 

they are doing something, but their rate of progress is laughable.

Exactly. They always throw out the disclaimer alpha beta this. We all know it's alpha but when they keep dragging it on and keep it in development forever then what?right

[grimsonfart 49]

So... at least 3 - 4 years? I sure hope you didn't have trouble finding a development cycle of 2 years good buddy. Sounds like DayZ is right on track.

 

 

 

 

Now why would I compare the development times of AAA games? Gosh darn it, I can't think why I would do a thing like that.

Ok, i admit 2-3 is on the short side, make it 3-4..

[Parazight 1599]

lol you little pathetic troll kid. just lol.

Sorry, but no amount of whining or name-calling that you inject into this thread will make it any less than totally worthless.

[q.S Sachiel 470]

OP: Beta is expected not before 2016 Q1.  I'd anticipate that the renderer begins integration either at begining or before finish of beta, so that the testing can apply to client specific hardware.  This means that I doubt you'll see it before Q1 2016, and probably not in a more functional state until Q2/3 2016 at earliest (my prediction).

@grimsonfart

 

So having so easily parted with your money you're worried about the speed of development?

They have your money man, it matters not if it releases today or in 10 years time.

 

Wouldn't you be more worried about the quality of the game, something that would legitimise your wait, not the actual wait its self?

 

Sure, i have my worries etc, but what you're doing is akin to banging your fork and knife on the table screaming 'where's my dinner' while you mother makes you a beautiful lamb roast.

Maybe the thought of dayz releasing within your lifetime is the one true thing keeping you going in life?

 

but please... better things to gripe about (and accuse optimistic people of being fanboys / baloon ponies over).

 

That being said, some of the sugar has been blown off my cake, and i am becoming more skeptical whilst still trying to be optimistic.

But we can be critical of BI's performance without calling them crooks yes?

 

Many points (tired as they are) such as the financial incentive to perform after such a successful pre-release are valid, and should things go the way i hope they don't then i'll surely voice my concern and hold them to account, but i still feel it's impatient at the moment, given the frequency and consistency of updates we're seeing.

 

If this was some starforge BS then it'd be another story, but given the immediate and impatient outcrys that this community has (continued to) sustain, the words are losing their weight.

 

Let them run their dev cycle, critique the final product, and if you don't see a final product in another 2-3 years then your bawling will be bittersweet instead of just bitter.

 

(and as a final aside)

What i fail to understand is that time and time again, there are ad-hominem attacks from the somewhat radical skeptics that people are wrong for cheering on, white knighting or championing a product they've supported on faith.  Fair enough you're jaded or just impatient, but if you really are correct and we've all been swindled, what benefit do you really stand to make dissing the product at every turn?  If it's really that much of a wound, scrape together a class action, or accept it as a sunk cost and walk the hell away.  It's a hypocrasy to suggest that people less jaded than you are wrong for supporting a product that they paid to support while you try to recuit negative opinion for the exact opposite side of the same coin...

 

again: skepticism may be keeping BI honest at the end of the day, but it doesn't need to be overtly negative or personal.

Edited October 8, 2015 by q.S Sachiel

[VIPEREYE1 17]

My biggest gripe is the lack of anything to do in between fire fights with other players. I always wanted to see players spread out across the map, this finally happened with the recent update, now i spend my time wandering around aimlessly, fully geared, and bored as hell, i cant imagine hiking out to NWAF again for the 4th time.

 

Fingers crossed for "really good zombies"  like blow your mind wow what a difference kind of zombies. I expect more then what the mod had in terms of game play. Technically this project could of been "Dayz 2" Dayz SA is even on the same map as the older dayz mod. We played the mod already, it's already been done. Like some people have mentioned it's like we have been playing this for 3 years now and its losing its magic for long term players.

 

Most of us all have this expectations that one day some thing revolutionary is going to happen with Dayz SA, but in reality, its original vision is just a re done version of the mod. Which for most people is pretty boring, People want a change, they want to see the game to move forward not stagnate.

 

The choice for the developers to refuse adding advanced infected was pretty depressing, The animal A.I for the bear looked amazing, this gives me hope. As of right now there is not much incentive to keep a long time player interested in the game. We need some thing to keep us busy late game. And i don't mean hording guns for your base, more like defending your base or your self from hordes of zombies that dont sound like a rusty trash compacter, immersive fun to fight, scary, zombies.

[Funkmaster Rick 373]

Hey, Grimsonfart.

 

You seem particularly frustrated with BI's progress on the DayZ SA. Your experience with game development, from the art department, would seem to provide you a solid basis for comparison, but let me take a moment and tell you why you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. I'm only going to make one assumption, and that assumption is that your experience involved what one might call the 'traditional' development process. Feel free to correct me if my assumption is wrong.

 

DayZ SA is nothing like that. Oh, there are vestiges of the old style, sure, familiar phrases like 'alpha' and all that. Don't let this fool you.

 

This is an entirely different animal. It's like comparing orangutans to ants, lizards to apples, or dolphins to assholes who talk on their phone at the theatre.

 

You're used to internal-only alphas. That's been the industry standard since forever. But the industry has been a decade or two behind the social changes hitting our world, and it's only in the last five to ten years that we've been seeing some serious effort to catch up. The Early Access, open alpha, continual beta, and other such recent trends are a part of that catching up process. Your experience with game-building didn't involve the massive community that the DayZ SA has, it didn't involve metric fucktons of continuous feedback via forums, bugtrackers, and social media. It didn't involve the same level of very public oversight that BI deals with on DayZ, and it certainly didn't involve the same sort of highly public backlash whenever even a tiny portion of the community is dissatisfied.

 

Remember, we live in a world where the contents of your Facebook account can be grounds for firing, where accidentally getting caught in an Instagram pick some idiot took at a party where you're visibly nearby someone else doing drugs can get you fired, where one picture of you puking on the sidewalk after a night of drinking could ruin your career.

 

Regardless of how much your boss trusts you, making a game under these conditions has got to be goddamn stressful: every time the community raises public objections to your design decisions and work, you risk having your boss pull you into a meeting where he basically tells you that you've fucked up - not on your game development, no, but on the public perception of your game development. We live in a world where most gaming companies are putting even more emphasis on secrecy and carefully-controlled hype management.

 

And in that world, we have BI trying something interesting, something fairly new, and doing a decent job of it. But every time they get their players' hopes up, they risk a backlash that could put pressure on their job. I suspect BI is a better company than that, as evidenced by the fact that they haven't shifted their development focus in response to every complaint that got a lot of public support on Reddit or these forums. But the risk is still there. I'm all for transparency and openness in the business world, but I don't have an issue understanding their decisions to not release stuff till it has hit certain benchmarks, even if its just to cut down on the complaints. They're still experimenting, they're still branching and looking at new options as they come up, but they're also constrained by the fact that there's a community they're trying to keep happy, too. It's why the 'stable' builds are so stable, but it's also why they play their cards close to their chest - it's fairly new terrain, and it's a knife that can cut both ways; the internet and its denizens are still catching up with these changes, too.

[Roger_Shrubz 19]

Well I pray we get zombies before/or for halloween,

This would re-ignite my flame for DayZ, maybe I could see myself doing a 12 hour indulgence of DayZ when the zombies are back :)

[Yuval 221]

DayZ rewrites the whole RV engine. Enfusion will serve as the base engine for future BI titles such as ArmA 4 probably.

Besides that, who cares about how many years was DayZ under development? It's all about the journey not the destination, right? (It isn't)

[robophant 102]

Sorry, but no amount of whining or name-calling that you inject into this thread will make it any less than totally worthless.

 

and yet ppl are discussing the topic... shoo, back under your bridge!