The problem of DayZ SA - thread #999

[micalo 13]

every other month I have a discussion about this with my brother:

 

what is really happening in DayZ, is there actually some real progress, and are there chances it will be finished at all?

 

In this discussion I like to point out how well an other early-access backer-founded game is doing - it's a pleasure to read star citizen status updates, and exciting to follow the little pieces of released content...

 

one difficulty of DayZ is surely, that "the game was already there, so give us some bug fixes and we are happy!"

of course it cannot work like that, and I do not want to complain here about the numerous bugs still present in the game...

but (yes, it is one of those but's...) it is the way the game is presented that makes me doubting that the persons in charge have a clue what they are doing.

 

how many official pages are there about DayZ?

 

there is a developer blog at http://dayzdev.tumblr.com/last entry  April 18., it does not point to another blog/forum whatever - did the development just stop?

I can imagine the developers have more important things to do than to blog, but dont just leave it like that 

 

there is dayz.com/dev-hub which is apparently the same as www.dayzgame.com/dev-hub, and who would expect https://store.bistudio.com/products/dayz to point to at least to one of them? It states:  "We estimate that reaching Beta version with all key features present will take more than one year from current stage. " but wise enough they did not give a date for this statement.

 

www.dayzgame.com shows a "Development Timeline" - no, it is a calendar, where someone sloppily added one re-occuring entry for "scheduled maintainance" until May 2016 - probably they don't know what a timeline is?

But no, there is this other timeline (.../dev-hub), which has a marker for the Beta version sadly in distant future, but fair enough, delays in sw-development happen. 

 

But uuuups- it reveals how DayZ is moving into 2015 (sic!), with Q4 we are already in the beta, riding our air vehicles...

 

and that the new renderer was planned to be finished half a year ago... wait, according to the status report from October 15.:

 

"As of this report the Engine team is focused on post processes and making sure that we have visual parity (making sure the visual quality is at least the same as the original renderer). Once that is done they'll be focusing on optimizations and multi threading. This will require a good amount of QA time before it hits experimental, but as we've said before - we need to have a visible improvement on performance when it hits experimental."

 

I understand it is more exciting to build a new renderer on your own than to do other coding tasks, but was it really necessary for this game, why o why just don't use/license an existing one and use this effort for other issues? ( or is this just bi-studio politics?  )

 

players were looking forward to store things in tents, and have better means to cross the islands than running - but no, we find new ways how you can force feed each other with rotten food or bqq from your friends corpse, and start presenting new ideas like that probably in the future you could get a disease from that, or you would need to build your own tooth brush to prevent your teeth from rotting in your mouth.

 

no, at this point all these new ideas how to have an even more complicated life, and half-yearly updates on the status of the renderer do not make me excited at all.

 

...

These discussions usually end with him noting that beside all of these problems he already had more fun with DayZ SA than with SC or other finished games,

and it is true.

 

it is just the way the game and its progress is presented is disastrous does not help to encourage confidence in the project.

 

(edit: disastrous is certainly too harsh)

Edited October 21, 2015 by micalo

[Yuval 221]

where are all the comparisons to arma 3 mods gone to?

[micalo 13]

where are all the comparisons to arma 3 mods gone to?

I don't know about arma 3 mods, I have only played the dayz mod, because it was a nice zombie apocalypse, that's why I supported the SA game

(it was a mod, so expectations lower, and there are already enough threads discussing how good/bad it actually was )

[emuthreat 2837]

It might be your level of understanding and perspective that leads to those disastrous results.  The game is perfectly playable as-is, and it's a great time to learn the ropes because the Zeds are on vacation.  They took a Mod of ARMA 2, and decided to adopt it, and make it into it's own game in a new engine created while the game still lives, with new parts swapped into it while everyone can still play.  It is our job to comfort this Frankenstein's Monster, and help to make it into something that can be loved rather than being shunned and stoned.  Have some patience.  And perhaps use some of that patience to read all of the status updates from 2015; they will help give scope to the nature of the project.  Once certain key elements are in, prepared content can be included, while other longstanding issues are finally capable of being addressed.

[micalo 13]

It might be your level of understanding and perspective that leads to those disastrous results.  The game is perfectly playable as-is, and it's a great time to learn the ropes because the Zeds are on vacation.  They took a Mod of ARMA 2, and decided to adopt it, and make it into it's own game in a new engine created while the game still lives, with new parts swapped into it while everyone can still play.  It is our job to comfort this Frankenstein's Monster, and help to make it into something that can be loved rather than being shunned and stoned.  Have some patience.  And perhaps use some of that patience to read all of the status updates from 2015; they will help give scope to the nature of the project.  Once certain key elements are in, prepared content can be included, while other longstanding issues are finally capable of being addressed.

already while you were writing this I realized that disastrous is too harsh, and leaves a not-at-all constructive note...

 

but I think the game could do much better if they put more effort in presenting it, and to clearly define the focus and step-by-step goals of the game would have helped a lot to shape expectations

 

and most of the issues I have pointed out could be solved quickly...

Edited October 21, 2015 by micalo

[Calvin Candie 189]

I am sad that I cannot play my favorite game for over half a year now.

I bought a new computer just for DayZ. AMD 8 core processor, Radeon R9 290x, 8 gigs of RAM and an SSD. My frame rate is 20-30 fps and in Cherno its 5-15 fps. I liked the game better when alpha was released. Ran better with less bugs.

I help run a small community. Ppl are leaving DayZ for Ark, for H1N1(!) and for other games.

If they (devs) ever get to fullfil their promises of development, I will be a very happy man.

But looks less and less probable. I hope the Devs prove me wrong.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Calvin Candie

[boneboys 7988]

I've no idea what this is about or why you have taken the time posting something that you have obviously not taken the time to study (even though I've no idea what you are on about).

^{_{Mumbles something about Hicks's Q&A over the weekend and that presentation does not equal realisation !}}

 

Carry on for now...

[micalo 13]

I've no idea what this is about or why you have taken the time posting something that you have obviously not taken the time to study (even though I've no idea what you are on about).

^{_{Mumbles something about Hicks's Q&A over the weekend and that presentation does not equal realisation !}}

 

Carry on for now...

 

I agree that presentation does not equal realisation, but if realisation lacks, it is important that you show that you a) have a plan, b ) know how you can achieve it...

 

if you have a blog, you should update or quit it, if you present a timeline, it should be a timeline, and you should update, or remove it

 

mumbles why bother answering to a thread if you dont take the time to read it

Edited October 21, 2015 by micalo

[scriptfactory 620]

I like your follow-up post, micalo.  :) There is nothing disastrous about this project but there are some disappointing factors, in my opinion.

 

and to clearly define the focus and step-by-step goals of the game would have helped a lot to shape expectations

 

Rust and ARK have released entire visions as well as short- and long-term goals. Rust has made an elaborate mind-map and Garry is super transparent with the users. ARK has one of the best development teams that actually shape the game based on user input. Hell, both games do that. ARK is just way better with community communication. It is smashing the survival game market at the moment.

 

And the users appreciate it: http://steamcharts.com/cmp/252490,221100,346110#6m

 

It seems that Bohemia is scared of releasing too much information for whatever reason. No idea what is going on, to be honest. But clearly defined goals and game design transparency is #1 on my wishlist.

 

But who am I? No one. If they haven't presented us with this info by now I doubt it will ever happen. Let's see what changes when they finally update the roadmap.

[Konfucious K 183]

I am sad that I cannot play my favorite game for over half a year now.

I bought a new computer just for DayZ. AMD 8 core processor, Radeon R9 290x, 8 gigs of RAM and an SSD. My frame rate is 20-30 fps and in Cherno its 5-15 fps. I liked the game better when alpha was released. Ran better with less bugs.

I help run a small community. Ppl are leaving DayZ for Ark, for H1N1(!) and for other games.

If they (devs) ever get to fullfil their promises of development, I will be a very happy man.

But looks less and less probable. I hope the Devs prove me wrong.

 

I have the exact same  specs on my pc as you do and I am able to run the game on mostly max settings and record gameplay at the same time and hit FPS averages of 17-30 in cities and 80-160 in countryside.

[trigg89 6]

Used to be an avid poster on the forums a while back (lost account details/ old email so had to create a new account) 

 

But I have been lurking in the forums over the last few weeks to see what the state of the game is and where it has got to. (including looking at the change logs)

 

I have to say I am saddened and disappointed by the feeling of these forums compared to a year or two ago. The vitriol and bile being spewed at my time of being active on the forums was mainly directed at The War Z (or infestation survivor stories). We all had a massive laugh at the state of the game, the adding of a samurai sword to placate the players when the game was in such a sorry state etc. Hell I had fun posting facts on the war z facebook page, which although all true got me banned from posting there again.

 

We all had a massive laugh at the expense of the war z about how shoddy and broken it was (and by the looks of it still is, i just popped up a youtube vid). All in the knowledge that dayz would never go down that route. Although not as extreme, dayz seems to have taken a turn for the worse. I have only played a few hours of the standalone, investing it in but not expecting anything till beta release. Yet I have kept up to date with everything, and it feels its been one step forward then one back. I wont deny some progress has been made, but it seems to be painstakingly slow and jittery. 

 

I was also shocked to hear that Z's had been taken out and everyone keeps saying, oh but its a good thing, you can now get to grips with the core elements of the game etc. I am sorry but what codswallop. Its a zombie survival game, and if someone says "well its alpha" i think i will scream. I have seen plenty of solutions floating about the forums that would be more than ample.

 

Either way roughly 50% of what was promised this year has either dropped off the roadmap entirely or been missed. Its sad as it was a game i so fervently backed from day one. Simply put and my two pennies worth, this game will not be completed, will not make good on the promises and there will be a lot of butthurt people, myself included. Regardless of the scope of the game progress is too slow. The market is now saturated with games making faster and more impressive progress on smaller budgets. Simply put it feels the dayz boat has sailed.

[Konfucious K 183]

Nobody said Infected being removed are a good thing. But most have tried to just look at it as a positive opportunity. I truly do not know anyone that is not eagerly anticipating their return very soon.

 

Also, your innate knowledge of the development process without being able to comprehend that some things are temporary is contraindicative at best. Just because solutions are available does not mean they are effective, sustainable or the immediate concern. Anyway, it is going to be fixed sooner rather than later, so really a non-argument.

 

Finally;

 

 

I have only played a few hours of the standalone, investing it in but not expecting anything till beta release. 

 

And yet here you are?! Ignoring the fact "a few hours" is hardly enough time to explore a tenth of SA, you've even reneged on your very own roadmap to judgement. 

[obi_lipnik 18]

I have to agree somewhat with the OP - the format of this early access game is very different from the beta (playable demo) format of the early access the industry has gotten us accostumed to..

 

This game is being presented to us a bit like it is presented to Beta testers and QA teams, except it is completely playable (by that I mean that the whole game is being presented, not just segments and/or isolated mechanics, like it would be in a QA environment) and I think that perhaps the backers (the consumers) were just not used to this sluggish pace of development when changes to the game engine are being implemented ... I don't doubt that the whole development team is on board for finishing this game and that the truly interested and involved players get to contribute and are noting the progress as evident - but I also don't doubt that the average consumer was in their right to be disapointed when they were able to pay for a product two years (and counting) before it was fully disclosed (or finished) to them..

 

On another note, I count myself as a defender of this game and the developer team, but the progress is very slow and its getting hard debating with friends on weather the development is headed to a halt or getting ready to speed up...

For example, the other day when discussing some Arma 3 mod with a group of people I sometimes play it with one of them said:"I like this mod, feels good... Makes me wish DayZ SA didn't die.", and I would reply:"But it's not dead.. The development is ongoing.", to which he replied:"Oh? Really! I haven't checked it out since May, I thought it died... So are vehicles in and usable and how's the basebuilding going? What about modding stuff?" ..... What do I tell this guy? I told him what was added and I couldn't convince him the game was even worth the download to check it out... how do I convince someone to buy it first then?..

[trigg89 6]

Nobody said Infected being removed are a good thing. But most have tried to just look at it as a positive opportunity. I truly do not know anyone that is not eagerly anticipating their return very soon.

 

Also, your innate knowledge of the development process without being able to comprehend that some things are temporary is contraindicative at best. Just because solutions are available does not mean they are effective, sustainable or the immediate concern. Anyway, it is going to be fixed sooner rather than later, so really a non-argument.

 

Finally;

 

 

 

And yet here you are?! Ignoring the fact "a few hours" is hardly enough time to explore a tenth of SA, you've even reneged on your very own roadmap to judgement. 

 

I have seen a fair few defending the move and saying they don't care etc in avid defense of the game. Apologies though, everyone was not the right choice of words. 

 

I have looked at the road map I have seen MANY comparisons with what they have and haven't delivered on, I have looked at all the changelogs and my lack of hours is purely due to me not wanting to burn out the experience IF it ever gets released. The fact is, as i stated, they have promised a relatively meager amount and have not delivered on even half of it. That is not objective, not up for debate, they have failed to deliver on the large bulk of what they have promised and have in fact taken out a massive part of the game that made it popular in the mod.

 

The fact is i am not a programmer or a game dev, but when taken into comparison with other games, (as i mentioned but you ignored entirely) who have smaller teams, smaller budgets, are arguably bringing more to the table in a shorter space of time, goes to show that this team is either lack luster, severely understaffed or just plainly inept. 

 

Also having been someone who sunk 1000+ hours into the mod, and was shocked at how much worse the SA was within the first 10-15 hours and made me not want to play at all until beta. Now the devs said a beta would be released at the end of this year, is that going to happen with the current state of the game? No of course not. A full release in 2016 like they promised? Again of course not. These are not raging ill informed arguments, they are just facts. You can argue the complexities of game development till the cows come home, but looking at the timeline, the changes, the multiple backward steps and so forth, it is clear this game is grinding to a halt. By the time it is released (if it ever is, which i doubt), lets be honest who the hell will care? Probably only the hardcore community, most of which are moving onto better games now and will have burnt out on the game by then, basically where does dayz sit within the current spectrum of survival games, well pretty near the bottom to be honest. 

 

The dev team have to pull either finger out of this game will be condemned to a war z like fate.  

 

For reference original road map for 2015:

 

Q1 2015

• Basic vehicles
• Advanced loot distribution
• New renderer
• New Zombie AI
• Basic stealth system (zombies and animals)
• Diseases

Q2 2015

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

Q3 2015

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

Q4 2015

• Animal companions
• Steam community integration
• Construction (base building)
• BETA version, expected price 34,99 EUR / 43,99 USD

Edited October 21, 2015 by trigg89

[Konfucious K 183]

 the format of this early access game is very different from the beta (playable demo) format of the early access the industry has gotten us accostumed to..

 

It is and from what I remember this is one of a very select few games/developers that has allowed access from so early on and involved so many players at most points of the development.

 

It's pretty uncharted territory for most companies. Consumers would not normally have access to the game at any stage of development until at the very least beta as you said, and that then is only on AAA titles or in closed circumstances, so any perceptions or expectations are mute. Also, watching the game grow pixel by pixel might give the game a "watched kettle feeling" when you can play with that pixel. Thinking about it, it's actually quite normal for developers to release small screenshots and concepts for about 80% of the project term and only start showing real game-play once the game is close or hitting Beta. So everything we are experiencing is still probably more than 90% of games that ever come out until they come out.

 

 

This game is being presented to us a bit like it is presented to Beta testers and QA teams, except it is completely playable (by that I mean that the whole game is being presented, not just segments and/or isolated mechanics, like it would be in a QA environment) and I think that perhaps the backers (the consumers) were just not used to this sluggish pace of development when changes to the game engine are being implemented ... I don't doubt that the whole development team is on board for finishing this game and that the truly interested and involved players get to contribute and are noting the progress as evident - but I also don't doubt that the average consumer was in their right to be disapointed when they were able to pay for a product two years (and counting) before it was fully disclosed (or finished) to them..

 

Well yes and no. Functionally players are a sort of "beta tester", officially though, you have been warned. As for development, it seems pretty on schedule coming into two years. If you include regular delays which are seen across all titles in the industry that could easily stretch to three and it would still be within reasonable development times.

 

I agree with you on one very important thing though; people are just not used to being on this side of the game. In my opinion, this is what fuels most of the dissent and misunderstandings.

 

 

 how do I convince someone to buy it first then?..

 

 

BI and players tend to tell people to hold off on buying the game unless you want to actively aid development and deal with bullshit. Can't help it if some people want to throw their money at the project with no obligation or knowledge.

[Konfucious K 183]

 

I have seen a fair few defending the move and saying they don't care etc in avid defense of the game. Apologies though, everyone was not the right choice of words. 

 

 

Well these people are mad in my opinion. DayZ without infected is just nonsense. Appreciated but no apologies necessary. Glad we agree :)

 

 

 

 

I have looked at the road map I have seen MANY comparisons with what they have and haven't delivered on, I have looked at all the changelogs and my lack of hours is purely due to me not wanting to burn out the experience IF it ever gets released. The fact is, as i stated, they have promised a relatively meager amount and have not delivered on even half of it. That is not objective, not up for debate, they have failed to deliver on the large bulk of what they have promised and have in fact taken out a massive part of the game that made it popular in the mod.

 

 

 

Meagre is a matter of perspective and opinion. Saying it may not ever get released after less than two years of active development, not withstanding the delays which any reasonable person would understand from following the development notes and presentations is completely unfair. Even Indie  games would find it hard to complete a project of this scope in such a timeframe. And the scope has grown too. No one ever expected the sales they got so things got changed from a small team building around a passion to multi-national co-operative flagship product.

 

 

 

The fact is i am not a programmer or a game dev, but when taken into comparison with other games, (as i mentioned but you ignored entirely) who have smaller teams, smaller budgets, are arguably bringing more to the table in a shorter space of time, goes to show that this team is either lack luster, severely understaffed or just plainly inept. 

 

Also having been someone who sunk 1000+ hours into the mod, and was shocked at how much worse the SA was within the first 10-15 hours and made me not want to play at all until beta. Now the devs said a beta would be released at the end of this year, is that going to happen with the current state of the game? No of course not. A full release in 2016 like they promised? Again of course not. These are not raging ill informed arguments, they are just facts. You can argue the complexities of game development till the cows come home, but looking at the timeline, the changes, the multiple backward steps and so forth, it is clear this game is grinding to a halt. By the time it is released (if it ever is, which i doubt), lets be honest who the hell will care? Probably only the hardcore community, most of which are moving onto better games now and will have burnt out on the game by then, basically where does dayz sit within the current spectrum of survival games, well pretty near the bottom to be honest. 

 

The dev team have to pull either finger out of this game will be condemned to a war z like fate.  

 

For reference original road map for 2015:

 

 

 

I don't ignore what you say, just try to stick to important points and finish because, funnily enough, I was going to play the game before getting myself embroiled in this mess! ;P

 

I didn't play the mod, don't want to, from what I've heard it is a little more stable but functionally more limited. Either way, mod is not the topic, the development of this game, its speed and foreseeable future.

 

You've answered your own points in many ways. They were understaffed and overwhelmed for a period of time this year and dealing with multiple teams across diverse languages and cultures. Also, a roadmap is just a guideline not a be-all-end-all of project planning.

 

On the other hand, I agree that a lot of what was planned in 2015 has yet to come to fruition, but I'm also not sure if something being developed instantly equates to bring released to the general populace. We don't even know enough to speculate.

 

As for comparison of other games, see my above post to obi_lipnik about the time it takes to develop a game, or better yet go and check how long these projects take versus the amount of people that is working on them and compare that to DayZ SA day 1 to today.

 

However I will relent to at least one point; I can't see a workable beta before summer 2016 without some major patches being implemented and unless there is some crazy surprise in store the change logs haven't been entirely truthful. Though they still have lots of time in real-world comparative development terms.

 

Roadmap is meant for guideline purposes, not deadline. Deadlines would rarely if ever be disclosed.

[Mookie (original) 799]

I really want to see DayZ make progress, and hope very much that it does. But a huge amount of impetus seems to have left the game, compared to when I started playing 18 months ago. BI's communications with the playerbase seem to lag further and further behind and I'm not alone in wondering whether this reflects a gradual disinvestment in the project. This forum itself has become less and less interesting or active in recent months.

 

This is reflected in the number of active players, which has been on a downward trajectory for much of this year. I probably have close to 3,000 hours in game, but at the moment I just can't see the point in playing.

 

Meanwhile, announcements of new content, RPGs, helicopters, etc are unlikely to be able to tempt anyone back - at least for the time being. My biggest personal dislike about the game is the huge frame rate variability and lack of optimisation (which are particularly bad if you live in the north of the map).

 

The sooner we can get the new engine and the infected back, the better.

[micalo 13]

It is and from what I remember this is one of a very select few games/developers that has allowed access from so early on and involved so many players at most points of the development.

 

It's pretty uncharted territory for most companies. Consumers would not normally have access to the game at any stage of development until at the very least beta as you said, and that then is only on AAA titles or in closed circumstances, so any perceptions or expectations are mute. Also, watching the game grow pixel by pixel might give the game a "watched kettle feeling" when you can play with that pixel. Thinking about it, it's actually quite normal for developers to release small screenshots and concepts for about 80% of the project term and only start showing real game-play once the game is close or hitting Beta. So everything we are experiencing is still probably more than 90% of games that ever come out until they come out.

 

 

Well yes and no. Functionally players are a sort of "beta tester", officially though, you have been warned. As for development, it seems pretty on schedule coming into two years. If you include regular delays which are seen across all titles in the industry that could easily stretch to three and it would still be within reasonable development times.

 

I agree with you on one very important thing though; people are just not used to being on this side of the game. In my opinion, this is what fuels most of the dissent and misunderstandings.

 

 

 

 

BI and players tend to tell people to hold off on buying the game unless you want to actively aid development and deal with bullshit. Can't help it if some people want to throw their money at the project with no obligation or knowledge.

 

I agree with you that letting players see the game so early was quite daring, and that a lot of players have difficulties to understand that.

 

this thread was not intended to be a complaint about being abused as alpha testers(because yes, we are) or robbed of money.

 

 Dean Hall had some great ideas and his dedication for his mod created something unique and  great fun,

I guess he would have made a fabulous creative director, but in my opinion it was a big error to make him the team leader.

constantly new ideas to improve the survival aspect and more sophisticated simulations, it is nice for brainstorming and innovation, but at some point you should agree what you want to achieve when...

 

the second mistake was trying to create an own graphics engine - maybe this makes sense for bi-studios, to use part of the money from dayz to create a newer engine - for the game itself it does not, and draws effort from other tasks.

 

finally, all the things i pointed out earlier might seem pedantic... who cares about an abandoned blog? - no one, as long everything runs well.

but it also leaves the impression of a lack of organisation.

 

we dont know anything about the team, I guess it`s rather small and they do their best - but they should try to focus their resources - a facebook profile, really?

in this sense I welcome the statement in the last status report that they want to do it more informal, - less can be more - but i hope they don`t skip the bigger picture completely 

Edited October 21, 2015 by micalo

[Konfucious K 183]

Well I largely agree with both your final points. But luckily for now the onus does remain on "seems" as opposed to "is". Yes the blogs dying off are not a good sign, but then having a tumblr was silly to begin with. It is a professional setup which doesn't need third-party blogging sites to deliver its message.

 

I think we actually seem to have a similar scope of the situation in many ways just different results expectations or maybe I'm still just stuck somewhere down fanboy alley. Then again you could also be professional complainers ;P so this argument could go on :D. Either way the next 6 months are absolutely crucial for DayZ, its player base and the developers. A lot of long time fans' patience is running thin whatever way it's cut as this is the time the game needs to start taking shape. It has indeed been frustrating with many aspects for me too.But at the very least I will give them a standard games development time; 3 years.

 

 

On a sidenote; I will be truly curious to see how many complaints die down after 0.59 if everything promised is delivered. 75 player servers and large concentrations of zombies is definitely saying what we want to hear.

 

EDIT: I will add in though; all judgements on engine and in-game performance for at least a few more patches should be reserved. At least until some work is actually released.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Konfucious K

[boneboys 7988]

Used to be an avid poster on the forums a while back (lost account details/ old email so had to create a new account) 

Better PM me if you want to solve this problem...

 

https://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/93774-warz-general-discussion/?view=findpost&p=951382

[micalo 13]

Well I largely agree with both your final points. But luckily for now the onus does remain on "seems" as opposed to "is". Yes the blogs dying off are not a good sign, but then having a tumblr was silly to begin with. It is a professional setup which doesn't need third-party blogging sites to deliver its message.

 

I think we actually seem to have a similar scope of the situation in many ways just different results expectations or maybe I'm still just stuck somewhere down fanboy alley. Then again you could also be professional complainers ;P so this argument could go on :D. Either way the next 6 months are absolutely crucial for DayZ, its player base and the developers. A lot of long time fans' patience is running thin whatever way it's cut as this is the time the game needs to start taking shape. It has indeed been frustrating with many aspects for me too.But at the very least I will give them a standard games development time; 3 years.

 

 

On a sidenote; I will be truly curious to see how many complaints die down after 0.59 if everything promised is delivered. 75 player servers and large concentrations of zombies is definitely saying what we want to hear.

 

EDIT: I will add in though; all judgements on engine and in-game performance for at least a few more patches should be reserved. At least until some work is actually released.

professional complainer, hmm, sounds interesting  :D

and apart all complaints, proposed alternatives like ARK etc are lacking one important thing: zombies

dayz was always more zombie apocalypse than survival game for me...

[pjano 34]

I am sad that I cannot play my favorite game for over half a year now.

I bought a new computer just for DayZ. AMD 8 core processor, Radeon R9 290x, 8 gigs of RAM and an SSD. My frame rate is 20-30 fps and in Cherno its 5-15 fps. I liked the game better when alpha was released. Ran better with less bugs.

I help run a small community. Ppl are leaving DayZ for Ark, for H1N1(!) and for other games.

If they (devs) ever get to fullfil their promises of development, I will be a very happy man.

But looks less and less probable. I hope the Devs prove me wrong.

 

just play Day Z Exile or something like that in Arma 3. Quite a lot of people play it and it is basically another flavour of the early Day Z mods but with better graphics and Arma 3 engine

[Deathlove 2286]

Im hopping we can see more brutal survival mechanics within the years end at least start to show up as well as the aggressive and hopefully better fixed zeds for Dayz Stand Alone in general.

 

The market is now saturated with games making faster and more impressive progress on smaller budgets. Simply put it feels the dayz boat has sailed.

Which im really excited about in allot of respect. As I don't want to burn myself out on this game.

 

The Long Dark Is getting an ample amount of support and the survival elements continue to be brutal on all fronts.

 

7 Days To Die is getting new zed mechanics and remodeling with evisceration, new cold mechanics, new building mechanics, resource harvesting mechanics, etc.

 

H1Z1 is getting back on route with more zombie development, major bug fixes and world improvements.

 

Project Zomboid is getting a HUGE engine overhaul if you haven't read about it yet along with other survival mechanics to enhance the gaming experience.

 

Dying Light continues to impress and they have delayed there DLC for a much better quality production than just to shit something out right away.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Deathlove

[Valdenburg 200]

It might be your level of understanding and perspective that leads to those disastrous results.  The game is perfectly playable as-is, and it's a great time to learn the ropes because the Zeds are on vacation.

However i do not agree with the OP in general.......I really had to laugh there.

[Santa fox 53]

I can only agree with the earlier mentioned sentiments, DayZ has gone from being a game I actually want to be involved in, to being a dead game as far as I am concerned. A great idea, but as far as I am concerned, DayZ will never truly be the game that we were promised. After +1000 hours, I can safely say I will not bother with this game anymore, just as I don't bother with Nether. Plenty of other games have far outdone what DayZ set out to do, in less time, as well.