Dayz Reviews on Steam

[bfisher 561]

It's kinda like going on tripadvisor and reading reviews of a vacation. Some people you just can't please. If it's a genre of game you are interested in, the best thing you can do is try it out for yourself. Reviews make for a good laugh sometimes though!

 

 

Right, but if everyone is saying the same negative things about a hotel, you might not want to stay there.

 

Reminds me of the last company I worked for.  Always talked up how they were "cutting edge" and what a "great culture" they had.  Well if a company of 500 people has over 100 negative reviews on Glassdoor and a rating of 2.5 / 5 and they all say the same thing, maybe things aren't so great.

 

2 years is a long time to develop a game which was basically already built.

[stonecutter357 17]

I have been alive for all the video games and dayz is the biggest disappointment to date.

[wedgienelson@yahoo.com 2]

Hi Guys,

 

out of boredom I've read some reviews of dayz on steam and was shocked.

Just only negative rants, hundreds of them.

So I decided to write one, too. A realistic, positive one!

Because even if there are points in the game which are criticisable and the development progress seems to be slow paced, I had tons of fun with the game in its actual state and furthermore i have trust in behemia and think they'll make a great game.

So my request to you guys who love the game as well, show it some love on steam! Take some minutes and give it a realistic review!

 

N.

I read them also, most recent are negative because people are waking up and realizing they were probably duped into buying a game that will never be finished let alone ever move out of alpha, there is no motivation to finish the game

[Killawife 599]

That kinda depends on how you look at things. If the way you look at things is this: We want money, when we got the money, people can go fuck themselves. then that kinda makes sense. I don't see any of that sentement coming from the Dev department though. But its a very small crew. Things take time. I simply believe that they are doing as good as they can but they may have taken on more than they can handle. Thats why its been delayed. They should have simply said from the start, this will take a lot of time, be patient and not say it likes its gonna be done anytime soon.

 

 I've disscussed this lively with people on youtube and in the steam forum but its pointless. Some people have simply decided for themselves how things are and no facts are going to change that.

 I particularly like the so common quote: " the mod was so much better" which is just plainly wrong. I can believe that the EXPERIENCE one had in the mod was better, but most likely becuase it was new and interesting things happened that you hadn't seen before. Its the same thing as saying that gaming was so much more fun on the old Commodore 64, which is was, in a way, becuse you didn't know any better. Load it up today and you will be severly dissapointed. The mod was a laggy, buggy, severely limited game, which is not anywhere even close to where Dayz Sa is today. But its impossible to get anyone to understand it, they have already decided.

[DemonGroover 8836]

I have read this thread. Would definitely read again.

10/10

[mercules 1290]

to be fair tho- You'd also be well justified to negativelty review the design/production process and speed of progress of that furniture maker if you felt they weren't meeting expectations. The minute you take money for something, people have every right to criticize.

But that ISN'T What people are doing. What is happening is that people are judging the shape of the chair based on how it is shaped before it is carved, "I wanted a more rounded chair and this thing is square legged." ie. they are judging the zombie implementation based on how they are currently functioning not the finished product.

In addition you may have a "right" to complain about how long the development is taking, but that doesn't mean you would be justified in complaining about the time. You basically expected a polished Mod. Others built the polished Mod already. Tweaks and mods of the mod actually built some really great things out of DayZ Mod, but it went as far as it could go with the systems it had. It was polished but had some big flaws that would have cracked had they polished it further.

The zombies never worked well throughout the life of the mod. They were more of a giveaway that you were in a location than an actual danger.

The graphics were poor in comparison to the SA.

Loot spawns were exploitable and poorly setup.

Most buildings in any of the small towns were unenterable making them worthless. We would bypass 90% of them.

There are so many flaws that SA has either resolved or is promising(we will see if they can deliver) to resolve that the Mod is laughable in comparison.

Because they have to fix those issues it will take time. Some people don't get that and just want their nostalgia glazed idea of what they think the Mod was.

 

2 years is a long time to develop a game which was basically already built.

See above. That wasn't a game that would go on. It was "built" but it had issues like this...

 

You are saying all they need to do now is put some new siding on and it's done. The devs understand that if they don't do something with that crack it will just cause the house to fall apart. 

[HavocOne 2]

Steam reviews are mostly memes and uninformed nonsense from kids that thought they were buying a finished game or the Overpoch Standalone.

if only BI had made it abundantly clear what EA was all about,but the steam store page is a bit vague about what to expect,and "when" 

[sneakydudes 278]

OK let me ask you this,

 

If we didn't have reviews, would you purchase a game called nether? i did because i reviewed videos.

If you have followed its progress you would clearly know, it has changed hands over 3 times now, and restored back to factory defaults.

 

How did this get through the hands of Steam?

without reviews, I would be set in this position again and again.

 

Even though some are trying to review a game in its alpha stages, they clearly are not seeing what happens from patch to patch. Its rather difficult to judge a game, by running around and playing for 10 hours.

 

We make the game what it is, and in due time it will be up for positive reviews again. You watch how fast things change around once the word gets out there about the games completion. I believe everyone here is trying to make a very solid game.

[wacktopia 57]

Shouldn't be allowed to review a game that hasn't been released yet.

 

This. 

[SniperV (DayZ) 43]

Some people are unhappy with SA, get over it.

 

 

Shouldn't be allowed to review a game that hasn't been released yet.

 

Right, lets just gather all the people that don't agree with your opinions and take away their freedom of speech.

[scriptfactory 620]

The primary complaints on Steam about DayZ seem to be a stagnated development progress (in comparison to equivalent games), poor performance, and a game design concept that wildly differs from DayZ Mod. Based purely on those points the negative reviews are fairly valid.

[Ben_uk 24]

I think if I wrote my true feelings on Dayz, I would probably be banned here.

 

Lets say that my views aren't that different from the majority of those recent Steam reviews I have just been reading.

[HavocOne 2]

Hi Guys,

 

out of boredom I've read some reviews of dayz on steam and was shocked.

Just only negative rants, hundreds of them.

So I decided to write one, too. A realistic, positive one!

Because even if there are points in the game which are criticisable and the development progress seems to be slow paced, I had tons of fun with the game in its actual state and furthermore i have trust in behemia and think they'll make a great game.

So my request to you guys who love the game as well, show it some love on steam! Take some minutes and give it a realistic review!

 

N.

dont worry about it,even the reviews has a big fat "early access review" label on it,so everyone reading it knows its a review of a "work in progress" no big deal.and if people dont know the meaning of "early access" its BIs own fault.

Edited December 30, 2015 by HavocOne

[Pandema 352]

Shouldn't be allowed to review a game that hasn't been released yet.

 

Thought I'd swing back in for round two with this.

 

If SA weren't a product that you had to fork over real world moneys for, then yeah, it wouldn't need a review system because you could just download it for free and give it a whirl.

 

But no, it costs something like 35 bucks now. People have a right to know about the state and quality of a product if they're supposed to pay for it. And Steam gives a better platform for reviewing, because lets face it, if you don't like a game you're not going to hang out on the forums or its subreddit and talk about how shit it is, you're going to write a review somewhere and pretend it doesn't exist.

 

 

Steam Review is far less biased than the echo chambers that are the games official forums.

[Killawife 599]

I'm not sure about that. Just look at the reviews. The absolute majority are one sentence reviews like "game totally suck balls" and the like. Only a few of the negative reviews are actually worth reading and most of those are FULL of errors. I've replied to a few but its pointless to even try so I won't any more. If people don't want to like this game, so be it.

 

 I must however bring one thing up. I found on the Dayz haters team forum a thread by a guy trying to put Hicks in a bad spot by trying to show how badly he treated him, even though you could easily se that what he was proposing was not true. I replied to some of the comments on youtube with pure facts and the responses were almost moronical. Check it out:

 

Edited January 6, 2016 by Killawife

[synystr 118]

People aren't writing bad reviews because its fashionable. The game has made no progress in two years. Sure, they added more weapons and hats, but the game is fundamentally flawed. Still. 

 

You can choose to be blinded by optimism, or accept the reality. Funnily enough, that is also great advice for surviving the apocalypse.

[OrLoK 16186]

People aren't writing bad reviews because its fashionable. The game has made no progress in two years. Sure, they added more weapons and hats, but the game is fundamentally flawed. Still. 

 

You can choose to be blinded by optimism, or accept the reality. Funnily enough, that is also great advice for surviving the apocalypse.

or you can use facts.

L

[synystr 118]

or you can use facts.

L

 

Yes... because a person on the DayZ forum team would criticize DayZ publically.

 

Let me ask you this: If this game WASN'T the phenomenon that is DayZ, if it was a completely new game released in the current state that we find DayZ in right now with the myriad of issues with game performance, server performance, bugs, lack of genre content (zombies), would we be having this conversation right now?

 

I mean, this is a zombie survival game that barely has zombies! That would be akin to a flight sim having no planes. 

 

These people bought DayZ and have every right to express their displeasure with it. "or you can use facts." is an absolutely ridiculous response. 

Edited January 6, 2016 by Synystr

[OrLoK 16186]

Yes... because a person on the DayZ forum team would criticize DayZ publically.

 

Let me ask you this: If this game WASN'T the phenomenon that is DayZ, if it was a completely new game released in the current state that we find DayZ in right now with the myriad of issues with game performance, server performance, bugs, lack of genre content (zombies), would we be having this conversation right now?

 

I mean, this is a zombie survival game that barely has zombies! That would be akin to a flight sim having no planes. 

 

These people bought DayZ and have every right to express their displeasure with it. "or you can use facts." is an absolutely ridiculous response.

hello there

Firstly i *have* been openly critical of some development design decisions in the past, the thing is I did it without being rude and using facts as I saw them rightly or wrongly and I attempted to educate myself.

Secondly, there are other games in a very similar position and they're moving through development just fine. see Miscreated for example.

Thirdly, Alpha. As we are in development elements *will* be broken missing etc Zeds/infected are no exception to this. If a FM in a sim is broken in alpha then although it might be annoying it's more than expected.

You *can* express your displeasure if you wish, we encourage constructive criticism but using facts to back up your argument is key. Hardly ridiculous.

Rgds

LoK

[synystr 118]

hello there

Firstly i *have* been openly critical of some development design decisions in the past, the thing is I did it without being rude and using facts as I saw them rightly or wrongly and I attempted to educate myself.

Secondly, there are other games in a very similar position and they're moving through development just fine. see Miscreated for example.

Thirdly, Alpha. As we are in development elements *will* be broken missing etc Zeds/infected are no exception to this. If a FM in a sim is broken in alpha then although it might be annoying it's more than expected.

You *can* express your displeasure if you wish, we encourage constructive criticism but using facts to back up your argument is key. Hardly ridiculous.

Rgds

LoK

 

I won't reiterate myself here. Read my steam review. Figure this is the perfect thread...

 

http://store.steampowered.com/recommended/recommendgame/221100 

 

Spoiler alert: Its not filled with fluffy, happy-go-lucky optimism and rainbow farts.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Synystr

[OrLoK 16186]

Spoiler alert: Its not filled with fluffy, happy-go-lucky optimism and rainbow farts.

You see it's things like this which dont help your credibility.

L

[Rags! 1966]

I wish that Steam would give us the option to leave a "Mixed" or "Neutral" review, not just a thumbs up or down. 

[q.S Sachiel 470]

I also think the same thing, but i can understand why not.  It's boolean/Binary at the end of the day.  You either recommend or don't.  The text (option) is there to support your point and / or give an objective response if you should so desire.  you can also fanboy/haterant/ meke de funny.

 

Steam allowing a neutral position on a platform that is ultimately meant to both provide a marketing vehicle, and act as a 'check' against which games they should greenlight/stock would be a waste from my perspective.

 

I've only done 2 reviews, but there are plenty of games out there that I think are OK but would downvote because of price, as example.  Or games that I do enjoy personally, like DayZ, but would not reccomend because i don't believe they warrant a positive view at this time.  Similar to how the Devs on steam store basically say 'please DONT buy the game unless you really want to help us', it would be a negative review with a positive spin in the comment (if i decided to review it, which i won't). 

 

DayZ is a bad example as it's EA, and much more difficult to rate (objectively) as subject to change.  Something like Fallout 4 maybe.  I'd downvote because i feel it's full of bugs, has a poor game mechanic, etc, despite being fun and enjoyable.  I'd have a caveat in there that if you're die-hard fallout fan, this may not be for you.  If you like skyrim etc, then it's a probable yes.  But ultimately I'd choose no.  The text would appear positive, or with positive spins, but I couldn't honestly tell my friends to go spend their money on it, nor a stranger.

 

TLDR: in reviewing, I could get all quantitative or analytical, but ultimately will still give a 'HELL YES or NO' response wherever possible (with justification).

 

As I said in one of the previous though, it's the text that I pay attention to mostly.  The + or - ( for me) is irrelevant individually.  I will become interested in response/feedback where I am interested at first glance, and it has a negative score, or where i am not interested but people really like it. Vica versa to these two options, if you catch my drift?

 

Something may catch my eye with glitz or text, but everyone hates it.  Interested!  Scroll down and browse the humorous(without intent) rant responses, and criticise the critical responses against what 'first glance' impressions i had.  Then there's something like Undertale, despite my being a devout 'retro fanboy' and the game looking like pokemon, I don't really have too much desire.  yet people seem to lose their shit over the depth of story and emotional response elicited by the game.  Went in thinking 'nahhh' *overwhelmingly positive*, plethora of objectively positive responses with succinct justification.  Interest rising.

 

Again, it's a marketing and check/balance mechanism for steam.  Neutral scoring would be useless.  A rated system would be a compromise, but has more room for abuse/manipulation than a binary system (see metacritic either 0/10 or 10/10, despite aggregate still giving a xx/10 usually between these extremes as pure co-incidence of their mathy wizard gremlins.

 

You could argue "how does 8/10 seem more manipulative than 'positive' , or 10/10 seem better than 'overwhelmingly positive'?

One is absolute value.  10/10 means perfect which is a much stronger response (to me) than 'overwhelmingly positive', which means 'majority or almost everyone likes it, in a system where you like or you don't.

Absolute value, to me, carries a lot more weight.  Which is why i avoid IGN unless i'm really bored or want to buy into hype.  Everything there is 8/10+ unless for some reason they dont' like you... COrUGHyCouGHrCmoneyOUGH

Edited January 7, 2016 by q.S Sachiel

[Grimey Rick 3417]

I gave it a positive review. With over 1300hrs logged (had never heard of Arma nevermind played the mod) it's easily my favourite (yet incomplete) game. I can understand why some have given it negative reviews, but as always, I take other peoples opinions on things with a bucket of salt and much prefer to come to my own conclusions.

I hope most are like me and would not simply look the game over because of some bad reviews. There is now a refund system in place in Steam precisely for this, you don't like it within 2hrs? Refund. Don't then use Steam as a platform to push your own opinion as if it were gospel.

This just in, reviews are just fancy opinions.

More at six.

[synystr 118]

You see it's things like this which dont help your credibility.

L

 

This whole "buying a game on the pre-tense that it will be finished eventually" thing and being accused that my criticisms of the progress of said game are non-factual by a member of the forum team JUST BECAUSE its not blind optimistic, positive reinforcement is hilarious. Here's the deal, ok? Kerbal Space Program took 14 people 4 years to make, start to 1.0 release. It was released under the "early access" model. DayZ according to http://dayzdev.tumblr.com/page/7has been a thing for at least 3 with a team has to be upwards of 50 people. If this time next year comes, and we have a 1.0 release of DayZ, I will quote myself in a forum post titled "This is me, eating my words." If not, you bet your rear end I'm gonna be on here saying I told you so.