Can we skin and eat Zeds soon please?

[Irish. 4886]

That way all of those tasty crafting items are available.. also meat.

And when we kill hoards of zeds inside a house, we can chop them up to get those pesky dead bodies out of our way.

We could poison fellow cannibals on April fools day with tainted zed meat.

Apply guts to face and hands to allow you to "walk among the infected" without being detected.. and other fun things.

[veshcula 13]

26 minutes ago, lrishjake said:

That way all of those tasty crafting items are available.. also meat.

And when we kill hoards of zeds inside a house, we can chop them up to get those pesky dead bodies out of our way.

We could poison fellow cannibals on April fools day with tainted zed meat.

Apply guts to face and hands to allow you to "walk among the infected" without being detected.. and other fun things.

Apply guts to face and hands to allow you to "walk among the infected" without being detected.. and other fun things. <- probably something that'll be added in version 100.3.23.4.78 because devs... lol

no man.. doubt that'll ever happen in game.. nor the chopping up zombies.. something called the game engine.. hasn't been working since day one.. and probably never will.. with all the features their trying to add in.. just saying.

cool dream you're havin' right there.. but come on dude.. keep it real...

[Irish. 4886]

2 minutes ago, veshcula said:

Apply guts to face and hands to allow you to "walk among the infected" without being detected.. and other fun things. <- probably something that'll be added in version 100.3.23.4.78 because devs... lol

no man.. doubt that'll ever happen in game.. nor the chopping up zombies.. something called the game engine.. hasn't been working since day one.. and probably never will.. with all the features their trying to add in.. just saying.

cool dream you're havin' right there.. but come on dude.. keep it real...

...? 

[veshcula 13]

11 minutes ago, lrishjake said:

...? 

in ordinary folks tongue: that'll never happen because the game engine can barely hold itself together at this stage.. what good would adding something like you're suggesting do the game.. apart from making for more clunky game mechanics/shit that breaks/more trouble for the devs.. and did I mention more stress on the engine that's struggling already?

[Irish. 4886]

22 minutes ago, veshcula said:

in ordinary folks tongue: that'll never happen because the game engine can barely hold itself together at this stage.. what good would adding something like you're suggesting do the game.. apart from making for more clunky game mechanics/shit that breaks/more trouble for the devs.. and did I mention more stress on the engine that's struggling already?

You need to do research. Seriously. 

[Whyherro123 2283]

And then you develop Hepatitis. Or some supernasty intestinal parasite.

You do realize the infected are filthy, right? They likely don't just have the "zombie disease", but are running around with infected wounds, old blood, fecal material, etc.

So yeah, you could eat the infected, then you are guaranteed to get sick. Sure, whatever.

[veshcula 13]

1 hour ago, lrishjake said:

You need to do research. Seriously. 

listen... dayz... is NOT the most fluid game on the market.. nor is it the best working game in the past decade.. lets agree on that.. 
thus.. adding MORE stuff will NOT (at this point) make it better... 

be fair.. you don't need to 'do research' to know dayz is a LOOOOONG way from being what we HOPE it will someday be.. I mean.. 40 patches! 40 patches dude.. until 1.0... AFTER 1.0.. 5 more YEARS! to do what exactly?
zombie HORDES are all fine and dandy.. but they should first get stuff to work.. before they add 100 new features.. then 85 break... they fix 10.. they break 3 they fix 5 they break 1 (rinse and repeat) endless problem upon endless problem.. is what you get when adding 100's of features..

i mean? eating zombies?
'game audio'? rings a bell? the ingame voip is terrible quality in general... 
21st century.. where's true HD audio? when you need it?

Edited May 15, 2016 by veshcula

[Parazight 1594]

Let's agree that DayZ isn't a game yet.  Let's agree that Veshcula has no idea what to expect from an early access product.

[BeefBacon 1185]

On 15/05/2016 at 7:25 PM, veshcula said:

listen... dayz... is NOT the most fluid game on the market.. nor is it the best working game in the past decade.. lets agree on that.. 
thus.. adding MORE stuff will NOT (at this point) make it better... 

be fair.. you don't need to 'do research' to know dayz is a LOOOOONG way from being what we HOPE it will someday be.. I mean.. 40 patches! 40 patches dude.. until 1.0... AFTER 1.0.. 5 more YEARS! to do what exactly?
zombie HORDES are all fine and dandy.. but they should first get stuff to work.. before they add 100 new features.. then 85 break... they fix 10.. they break 3 they fix 5 they break 1 (rinse and repeat) endless problem upon endless problem.. is what you get when adding 100's of features..

i mean? eating zombies?
'game audio'? rings a bell? the ingame voip is terrible quality in general... 
21st century.. where's true HD audio? when you need it?

...I don't think you get it.

You can skin and eat players. You can skin and eat animals. He's saying we should be able to skin and eat zombies.

I personally don't see the point. Lore-wise, if there is a lore, zombie flesh should be so tainted it'd be lethal to eat. I mean, I don't have any particular problem with it, I just don't know what it'd add to the game.

On 16/05/2016 at 5:39 PM, Parazight said:

Let's agree that DayZ isn't a game yet.  Let's agree that Veshcula has no idea what to expect from an early access product.

Agreed.

Edited May 18, 2016 by BeefBacon

[veshcula 13]

On 16-5-2016 at 6:39 PM, Parazight said:

Let's agree that DayZ isn't a game yet.  Let's agree that Veshcula has no idea what to expect from an early access product.

listen mate... I damn well know what to expect from an early access game..

- doesn't work like it should
- 'due to change/subject to change/may change' is in every update
- takes loads of time to get stuff done
- doesn't work like it should
-  isn't optimized/perfect in any way
- doesn't work like it should
- takes a shit ton of time to get going, let alone finish
- doesn't work like it should

^ did I mention.. stuff isn't working like it should and everything is subject to change?

[poodude28 0]

5 hours ago, veshcula said:

listen mate... I damn well know what to expect from an early access game..

- doesn't work like it should
- 'due to change/subject to change/may change' is in every update
- takes loads of time to get stuff done
- doesn't work like it should
-  isn't optimized/perfect in any way
- doesn't work like it should
- takes a shit ton of time to get going, let alone finish
- doesn't work like it should

^ did I mention.. stuff isn't working like it should and everything is subject to change?

And this is what happens when people don't read what's going on, I'm getting 60 fps in every city in patch 0.60 (experimental) the game is making progress, so you can take isn't optimized in any way out of your points sir.

[Parazight 1594]

8 hours ago, veshcula said:

listen mate... I damn well know what to expect from an early access game..

 

Wait, you don't really think that there's 40 patches left because the current build is called ".60", right?

[-Gews- 7443]

I'm not interested in their meat. Just their bones. It would be a great source for "boned arrows".

[veshcula 13]

7 hours ago, Parazight said:

Wait, you don't really think that there's 40 patches left because the current build is called ".60", right?

in the logic that is mathematics... there ARE... 0.60+0.40=1.0 knowing they've gone from 0.28 up to 0.60 in 2 years and 5 months.. it'll take a good while before we're done here..

maybe not 40 exact patches.. but 30 at LEAST well we all know how long they took to go from 0.59-0.60 because rendering engine etc. etc. etc.
so any big future changes will probably take JUST as long... (since everything is subject to change on no-notice action...

it'll take a few more years (at this rate) until we're getting somewhere.. 

lets say they're going to bust out 30 patches until 1.0 

average work time.. (incl. exp testing) 3 months... mathematics still stands in this subject.. so 3x30=90 months
90:12= 7.5 years.

lets say you're right... they bust their ass so they'll do 2 months per patch.. really busting their balls working over time.. you name it.. 

2x30=60 months
60:12= 5 years

so all in all... they (according to mathematics still need to do 40 patches.. they bring it down to 30 patches cause they skip 10 versions..
we'd still be looking at 5 YEARS of development time.. (adds up to the already 2.5 years that this game is in dev. 5+2.5=7.5 years 

[veshcula 13]

10 hours ago, poodude28 said:

And this is what happens when people don't read what's going on, I'm getting 60 fps in every city in patch 0.60 (experimental) the game is making progress, so you can take isn't optimized in any way out of your points sir.

this depends on your setup... 

what are you using?

intel core 6700k (skylake)
16 gigs of DDR4
a 970 gtx 
Asus gaming motherboard
500 gig SSD
128 gig SSD
3 TB HDD 

^ jup then you'll get 60 fps EVERYWHERE in EXP everything on very high.. the biggest anti aliasing gpu hog wouldn't bring your FPS down.. 

in case you're running something that most gamers use (like myself)
Intel i7 3770k
16 gigs of DDR3
a GTX 660TI (will be replaced in september with a GTX 1070 pascal GPU) 
gigabyte Z77-D3H motherboard
128 gig SSD (OS only!)
2 TB HDD 

^ in case you're running this.. with everything on very high.. the biggest anti aliasing gpu hog WILL bring your FPS down.. 

because this is not yet optimized for standard use...

and since you can 'run' this game on a much lower setup than I have.. it shouldn't be a problem..

I average 42 fps with minimum dips to 28 and max FPS of 63 (everything on high/very high)

[Parazight 1594]

Nice math there.  Too bad non-linear progression doesn't really work that way.

See, they don't just work on one aspect of the product, implement it, and then move on to something else.  Various facets of the game that will be released many patches from now are already being worked on.  It's like a painting.  You don't completely finish the top half of it before working on the bottom half.  It's a collective piece that gets worked on as a whole.  Your incredibly flimsy napkin math might be able to represent linear progression, but that doesn't really apply to game development.

 

Irishjake's suggestion is growing on me.  -Gews-'s suggestion of boned arrows is practical enough on its own to warrant discussion on it.  I think the option to force feed infected flesh to other survivors could be a thing.  Maybe.  I'm not sure. 

I've never been in an actual zombie apocalypse, so it's hard for me to see myself deciding that smearing dead human tissue all over myself is necessary for survival.

[BeefBacon 1185]

9 hours ago, veshcula said:

in the logic that is mathematics... there ARE... 0.60+0.40=1.0 knowing they've gone from 0.28 up to 0.60 in 2 years and 5 months.. it'll take a good while before we're done here..

That doesn't mean there are 40 patches left. There could be more. There could be less. The devs aren't going to get to patch, I don't know, .89 and then realise they've finished, so they go "quick, let's release 11 1kb patches so we can get to 1.0". They're not going to get to 1.0, realise it isn't finished and then just release it because "it's 1.0, that means it's done!"

There have been 30-odd versions so far - .28 was the first EA version. The rate that updates have been released has varied greatly. There have been weeks that have seen two new versions. There have been months that haven't seen any. .60 has introduced a massive component to DayZ. The next few versions will add more massive components - the audio engine, player controller, new AI and so on. Development seems slow because new features are reliant on these massive projects. Now that these projects are nearing implementation we will start seeing tangible progress in the core game. 

You've taken the time it's taken so far, and then you've decided that 1.0 is the end point, so you've filled in the gaps assuming that development will progress at its current rate - a rate that you know is severely slowed for reasons I've outlined. A statistician you are not.

 

In regards to the OP, I didn't address the guts thing before. If doing it pretty much guarantees disease, I don't see why not. Then again, the zombies aren't undead, they're infected - that doesn't mean they're stupid. They're not rotting corpses, so I don't see why covering yourself in rotting corpse would be an effective disguise. 

Edited May 19, 2016 by BeefBacon

[Whyherro123 2283]

9 hours ago, BeefBacon said:

That doesn't mean there are 40 patches left. There could be more. There could be less. The devs aren't going to get to patch, I don't know, .89 and then realise they've finished, so they go "quick, let's release 11 1kb patches so we can get to 1.0". They're not going to get to 1.0, realise it isn't finished and then just release it because "it's 1.0, that means it's done!"

There have been 30-odd versions so far - .28 was the first EA version. The rate that updates have been released has varied greatly. There have been weeks that have seen two new versions. There have been months that haven't seen any. .60 has introduced a massive component to DayZ. The next few versions will add more massive components - the audio engine, player controller, new AI and so on. Development seems slow because new features are reliant on these massive projects. Now that these projects are nearing implementation we will start seeing tangible progress in the core game. 

You've taken the time it's taken so far, and then you've decided that 1.0 is the end point, so you've filled in the gaps assuming that development will progress at its current rate - a rate that you know is severely slowed for reasons I've outlined. A statistician you are not.

 

In regards to the OP, I didn't address the guts thing before. If doing it pretty much guarantees disease, I don't see why not. Then again, the zombies aren't undead, they're infected - that doesn't mean they're stupid. They're not rotting corpses, so I don't see why covering yourself in rotting corpse would be an effective disguise. 

Considering how, in real life, many predators are actually attracted to blood and offal, not driven away, I really don't understand why people think it would prevent them from getting attacked.

[Whyherro123 2283]

On 5/19/2016 at 8:49 PM, -Gews- said:

I'm not interested in their meat. Just their bones. It would be a great source for "boned arrows".

In real life, I personally think that bone arrows suck big fat donkey dick.

Not that they are ineffective as arrowheads, they are not, they are just as effective as stone, glass, or steel. It is just that they take so FUCKING LONG TO MAKE.

It takes this guy 10 minutes to make one arrowhead, using a bandsaw and a beltsander. Imagine (don't, I've done it, it takes hours) how long it would take grinding the thing down by hand.

 

I still think bone arrowheads should be removed, and they get replaced by glass or stone, preferentially glass. I have made perfectly functional glass arrowheads in 5 minutes. Were they pretty? No, but they worked, and it took me much less time than bone arrowheads.

 

[Irish. 4886]

I dont know what happened here.. I blame the school system.

[[DGN] Johnny 115]

8 hours ago, lrishjake said:

I dont know what happened here.. I blame the school system.

Common Core.

[Irish. 4886]

4 hours ago, [DGN] Johnny said:

Common Core.

2+2=%

[[DGN] Johnny 115]

On 5/20/2016 at 10:04 AM, lrishjake said:

2+2=%

2+2= "That's Racist"

[Kronons 98]

On 5/19/2016 at 3:13 AM, veshcula said:

in the logic that is mathematics... there ARE... 0.60+0.40=1.0 knowing they've gone from 0.28 up to 0.60 in 2 years and 5 months.. it'll take a good while before we're done here..

maybe not 40 exact patches.. but 30 at LEAST well we all know how long they took to go from 0.59-0.60 because rendering engine etc. etc. etc.
so any big future changes will probably take JUST as long... (since everything is subject to change on no-notice action...

it'll take a few more years (at this rate) until we're getting somewhere.. 

lets say they're going to bust out 30 patches until 1.0 

average work time.. (incl. exp testing) 3 months... mathematics still stands in this subject.. so 3x30=90 months
90:12= 7.5 years.

lets say you're right... they bust their ass so they'll do 2 months per patch.. really busting their balls working over time.. you name it.. 

2x30=60 months
60:12= 5 years

so all in all... they (according to mathematics still need to do 40 patches.. they bring it down to 30 patches cause they skip 10 versions..
we'd still be looking at 5 YEARS of development time.. (adds up to the already 2.5 years that this game is in dev. 5+2.5=7.5 years 

Veshcula first and foremost why are you so mad? Apparently you are not well versed in game development. You have to understand a lot of games today take anywhere from 5-10 years of development before they are released. Depending on the difficulty it can vary. For example Fallout 4 was released late 2015. But development started back in 2010. Almost 6 years of development before it was released. Even to this day they are still developing DLC and fixing bugs. Now as you said about Dayz Standalone has only been in development for almost 2.5 years as you stated. Which is not very long at all for this type of game or the gaming industry. The reason early access was invented was to first and foremost help fund the project. Secondly to help with development. By having the community involved the developers would not have to guess what the community wants, instead they would know exactly what the community wants due to working with each other. Because they are having to do 2 jobs instead of one it seems the development. But you have to understand the traditional route taken would be to have the development studio be development orientated only and once the game is done. The studio would transition to a service type studio. Because the team of Dayz decided to go the route of early access. They have to do 2 jobs. I hope you gain some sympathy for the work they have to do.

Regarding your linear time line for development. As parazight stated is correct. Development work is not linear in big companies like Bohemia. They don't have all the developers working on one feature, bug, etc...They have what you would call dedicated teams. Each team is assigned certain tasks to complete. I.e. engine team, graphics team, sound team, bug team, etc...All the teams are working in unison to develop the game to hit 1.0. Some teams maybe working on features for 0.61 while others are already working on features for 0.81. At this moment we don't know how the road map would look. But I have no doubt they would lump patches together. For example they can go from 0.61 to 0.63 in a few weeks or less because the work has been finished by said teams.

Now it has been confirmed by Brain Hicks, Dayz would have a very high chance to hit 1.0 at the end of 2016 or the beginning of 2017. He was confident which says a lot. Now if you do the math that can be 5-8 months of development before we hit 1.0. So in that time frame they would have to hit 39 more revisions to hit 1.0. You may think that is a short amount of time for that many revisions, but keep in mind. The previous patches 0.60 and earlier dealt with rewriting the engine, creating new modules, implementing new core systems, etc...Once the foundation is solid. It is a simple task to add features on top of the core systems. As we get closer to having all of the core components implemented development would pick up and we should see more revisions. A good analogy would be, if you are building a house. The most time taken would be for the design, framework and foundation of the building. After the core tasks are complete a house can be built pretty fast. Such as template walls, easy installation windows, etc...It would not take the workers very long to build and finished the house. The same goes for game development. Once the engine and core components are finished. It would not take the developers very long to implement new features.

All in all open your mind and enlighten yourself. A game is not made over night or in a few years. It takes a lot of time. Enjoy the game and if you are not then quit for a while and come back in a few month or a year. Maybe then you can see the bigger picture. 

On 5/19/2016 at 10:26 AM, Parazight said:

Nice math there.  Too bad non-linear progression doesn't really work that way.

See, they don't just work on one aspect of the product, implement it, and then move on to something else.  Various facets of the game that will be released many patches from now are already being worked on.  It's like a painting.  You don't completely finish the top half of it before working on the bottom half.  It's a collective piece that gets worked on as a whole.  Your incredibly flimsy napkin math might be able to represent linear progression, but that doesn't really apply to game development.

 

Irishjake's suggestion is growing on me.  -Gews-'s suggestion of boned arrows is practical enough on its own to warrant discussion on it.  I think the option to force feed infected flesh to other survivors could be a thing.  Maybe.  I'm not sure. 

I've never been in an actual zombie apocalypse, so it's hard for me to see myself deciding that smearing dead human tissue all over myself is necessary for survival.