For those complaining about the development time of DayZ

[DannyDog 532]

16 minutes ago, comikz said:

And sometimes people feel that either it be constructive or not, they're going to get penalized for it anyways, I mean just as I am typing this, I feel that since I am not being super up-beat and cherry about everything DayZ SA related, that I will get in trouble for speaking my mind.

This is me as well. Sometimes i write out entire paragraphs of my opinion on a topic and end up feeling like either it won't be worth, or it will be interpreted wrong or i'd get shit for it. So i just ctrl+a delete.

A lot others wont feel this way but i know a few that do. Sucks :/

Edited October 26, 2017 by DannyDog

[BeefBacon 1185]

5 hours ago, IMT said:

The Steam reviews shows this difference. The Steam reviews are meant to be targeted at the game itself, not the development of it. So if they give the game a bad review, they mean that the game is bad.

Yup, pretty much all the negative reviews talk about the development time - though some do talk about bugs and things, and I consider those to be more legitimate criticisms. Even PUBG is having a similar issue, where it's getting negative reviews because of the anti-cheat system (where players get banned for stream sniping) even though it's probably not even affected 1% of the playerbase. Very few negative reviews talk about the actual content of the game - those that do bring up server issues and poor performance. Again, these are valid criticisms.

There very much seems to be a theme of meta reviews, where negative reviews will often focus on the behaviour of the developers rather than the actual content of the game. It'd actually probably be pretty interesting to see the nature of reviews aggregated into some sort of statistic, just to see what the focus of user reviews actually is. Maybe there's some academic study on it somewhere. Probably not.

[pilgrim* 3514]

4 hours ago, comikz said:

I I feel that even with the new player control coming out in the next patch, that, zombies need to be more zombie and less Conor McGregor. (Meaning slow and stupid, a task sure to be handled, but not that hidden mma fighter in the shadows.)\

Don't forget that a lot of the zombies are ex marines and special intervention forces who caught the disease - which is why there are so many guns and ammo littered around - the plague got them but their trained deadly reflexes are the last thing to rot away.. some of them might go on attacking you after you blow out their "thinking" brains before they even fall over. Maybe aim for the base of the neck and brain stem to sever the nervous system instead shooting or hitting the front of the forehead?  Or just WORRY about how dangerous and uncertain zomb encounters can be.. you know they can one-hit kill ya stone dead? Take CARE around those poor suffering critters they can sometimes be VERY DANGEROUS in UNEXPECTED strange ways. One day you might be surprised by one that remembers how to open doors, or meet one wandering around with a grenade or a butcher's knife.  

[Dancing.Russian.Man 1631]

4 hours ago, comikz said:

However I want to point out, that most criticism about this game/developers/host company, is met with the usual, "Early release", "Alpha", "Are you a game developer". People aren't given the option to explain themselves, and are usually penalized by the powers that be for it. I understand that non-constructive criticism gets us no where, but sometimes people have a hard time expressing their distaste for something, and go with a blanket statement, such as the one you gave, "Ambient sound sucks", because to them, that is how they express it.

And sometimes people feel that either it be constructive or not, they're going to get penalized for it anyways, I mean just as I am typing this, I feel that since I am not being super up-beat and cherry about everything DayZ SA related, that I will get in trouble for speaking my mind.

I'm not really sure where you get the impression that any negative posts get someone on trouble -- at least as far as Official and Steam forums go. Sure, you might get some other regular users disagreeing with you and overreacting, but I don't recall any case of a moderator taking action just because someone isn't happy with something and the more you throw in little quips like "fanboy" or "white knight," the more likely you are to get a moderator involved because that's always seen as flamebait at best. That said, nothing you've posted in this thread comes even close to "getting in trouble" in my eyes.

More of my rambling aside, all you need to do to be constructive is to explain the "why." When you do that, at least people can discuss/argue about the why rather than attack each other over surface-level issues.

4 hours ago, DannyDog said:

This is me as well. Sometimes i write out entire paragraphs of my opinion on a topic and end up feeling like either it won't be worth, or it will be interpreted wrong or i'd get shit for it. So i just ctrl+a delete.

A lot others wont feel this way but i know a few that do. Sucks :/

Pretty sure almost everybody experiences that feeling in general. I certainly almost-post more than I post.

Edited October 26, 2017 by Dancing.Russian.Man

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

The long stretches between patches can really test a supporters resolve. I CAN'T WAIT to going back to checking SteamDB for evidence of new builds over my morning coffee every weekday.

I wonder sometimes if I'll enjoy DayZ as much when I don't have things to bork.

Maybe I have a little more patience than I thought? Maybe I have the same benefit of perspective that *pilgrim spoke of. (2k+ hours mod+SA = money well spent)

When they mentioned ideas to scrap things initially and make a dream boat engine/game I was really excited by the news and prepared for more dev time mentally. But then it seemed they had to decide to scrap MORE things, I was less excited (though happier for better quality) and more more deflated because I knew it could possibly add months more to the project.

Some of the waiting for infected numbers to be properly addressed was absolutely excruciating for me as non-PvPer.

When they came out after a long long long time and said that they were going to have to go back to a dynamic infected spawn mechanic instead of a server based spawn mechanic I was absolutely fucking furious that we waited all that time to come to that conclusion..... for a zombie game! It seemed to me that had they come to the conclusion sooner they could have spent all that time improving how they spawn in at the very least. I'm really concerned about "pop-in" for infected spawning or people watching for spawn to detect movements like in the mod.

A long time ago I made the decision to be pragmatic with my feelings RE: a game I spent $30 on.... I have other games to play and breaks from DayZ keep the game feeling fresh when you return. When it comes to building anything "large" I do believe it's also pragmatic to add significantly to initial time estimates given and this has helped me stay level headed.

Anyway, why can't I pour the powdered milk into a can of peaches yet, and stir it with my finger?

Edited October 26, 2017 by ☣BioHaze☣

[Irish. 4886]

I could care less about time.. think about this:

How many games have you played for beyond 1 year? 2 years? 4 years? Now we're talking about the same game, not part 2 or new DLC and shit.. the same old game, for over 5 years? That is DayZ for me. No other game, comes close. I play most games for 1 month, and move on.. yet somehow, here I am.. waiting for the magic that this game will bring once modding hits, and the creativity of the masses make it the most popular online PC game again. 

I can wait.. its simple for me. 

Edited October 26, 2017 by Irish.

[[Gen]Adzic 241]

5 minutes ago, Irish. said:

I could care less about time.. think about this:

How many games have you played for beyond 1 year? 2 years? 4 years? Now we're talking about the same game, not part 2 or new DLC and shit.. the same old game, for over 5 years? That is DayZ for me. No other game, comes close. I play most games for 1 month, and move on.. yet somehow, here I am.. waiting for the magic that this game will bring once modding hits, and the creativity of the masses make it the most popular online PC game again. 

I can wait.. its simple for me. 

That's the thing pal, some people aint played this for 1.. 2.. 4 years, they've instead been WAITING that long. There is a major difference between playing and waiting. I'll be happy when this monumental wait is well and truly over, truth be told. If by that point I still can't get into it, then so be it, at least I'll no longer be waiting.

[Irish. 4886]

3 hours ago, [Gen]Adzic said:

That's the thing pal, some people aint played this for 1.. 2.. 4 years, they've instead been WAITING that long. There is a major difference between playing and waiting. I'll be happy when this monumental wait is well and truly over, truth be told. If by that point I still can't get into it, then so be it, at least I'll no longer be waiting.

You do realize that is insane right? Its not waiting if you are not actually waiting.. what people not playing are doing is observing. Waiting is what you do when you know when something is coming.. 

 

..see what I did there :P

[blackberrygoo 1416]

5 hours ago, Irish. said:

You do realize that is insane right? Its not waiting if you are not actually waiting.. what people not playing are doing is observing. Waiting is what you do when you know when something is coming.. 

 

..see what I did there :P

It makes sense ; he’s waiting to play the game when it’s in a complete state . I have to agree that it’s maddening waiting for the game , but honestly it’s even worse playing it ... getting frustrated at the state of the game day after day because all you want to do is have fun but most of the time all you can do is loot and rp with those that don’t shoot on sight .

Its literally killing me and others (sorry 2 dudes at NWAF on the DUG US server , but you shouldn’t have shot at my silly loot whore friends) waiting for the full game to come , right now I’m just looting for as long as I can bear and when I encounter other players it’s an instant shootout - it’s like the whole community has lost hope and fell back into the  COD shooter mindset (which I truly believed was going away when dayz was on a roll before the .61/.62 patch debauchery).

Long story short , when soft skills , advanced cooking , electricity and basebuilding comes in this game will change for the better and will finally feel like it’s worth playing the time it takes to get that little bit of fun via encounters of any kind , but until then i can safely say that it hurts to wAit for dayz but it also hurts to play the damn game unless you get lucky with some fun fights like I did tonight . 

Give .63 now please , no more waiting . Oh ya and Aug Steyr is OP .

Edited October 27, 2017 by blackberrygoo

[DannyDog 532]

11 minutes ago, blackberrygoo said:

it’s like the whole community has lost hope and fell back into the  COD shooter mindset (which I truly believed was going away when dayz was on a roll before the .61/.62 patch debauchery).

It's not that they lost hope, its because pvp is the only thing that stays fun after you've done everything 100 times.

[IMT 3190]

19 hours ago, comikz said:

I don't get the point of you quoiting me, since I fully understand and support what you just said.

However I want to point out, that most criticism about this game/developers/host company, is met with the usual, "Early release", "Alpha", "Are you a game developer". People aren't given the option to explain themselves, and are usually penalized by the powers that be for it. I understand that non-constructive criticism gets us no where, but sometimes people have a hard time expressing their distaste for something, and go with a blanket statement, such as the one you gave, "Ambient sound sucks", because to them, that is how they express it.

And sometimes people feel that either it be constructive or not, they're going to get penalized for it anyways, I mean just as I am typing this, I feel that since I am not being super up-beat and cherry about everything DayZ SA related, that I will get in trouble for speaking my mind.

So I will be constructive with my following criticisms from now on, but be prepared for more rambling. (Since I suffer from sometimes not being able to form my thoughts in a proper manner.)

1. The loot system/table in this game needs revision, I feel the current level of available resources from your typical spawn area, needs to be elevated so that people can get a proper foot hold to be able to begin the trek to the better loot spots. Because I for one don't enjoy picking three dozen apples to try to get full/hydrated only to freeze to death moments later because the only thing available to wear is damaged/soaked dresses and track suit bottoms. (I know this can be customized based on server, but there needs to be a solid loot baseline that you can't go below.)

2. Zombie fight mechanics are frustrating to say the least. It is horrible to be walking along and see some zombie do some falcon punch manuever from several feet away while sliding at you, and hit you, while you start bleeding. I feel that even with the new player control coming out in the next patch, that, zombies need to be more zombie and less Conor McGregor. (Meaning slow and stupid, a task sure to be handled, but not that hidden mma fighter in the shadows.)\

There's more, but I am short on time this morning, and can't invest more time into my reply, surely, I would go on if given the opportunity to do so.

I probably quoted the wrong post. It was aimed at your post before the one I quoted. And if you still don't get why I aimed at that post specifically, maybe you should read it again.

And if people only give criticism like "ambient sound sucks" then maybe Early Access isn't meant for that person. The purpose of Early Access is that people give the developers feedback about the direction the game is going and the game itself. Feedback which only contains "ambient sound sucks" doesn't mean anything for the developers. They need to know what's wrong, why it's wrong, what can be improved, how can it be improved, etc.

People will never get bashed if they give civil constructive criticism. They also will not get penalized for this as long as they're civil and constructive.

Personally, I will never bash someone who takes their time to write a message with their opinion or feedback. I might disagree with it, but I will always react in a civil way to it.

And I do disagree with your first point. I believe there shouldn't be mountains of canned food or other stuff near the spawn points. First of all, the coastal death match game will be back again and inland will be dead again. And second, I think it will simulate that a lot of people already went through there and picked most of it clean, which is what they actually did.

Your second point, they mentioned in the most recent status report and/or the one before that one that they want to do a massive overhaul of the AI. So we'll have to see and wait I guess. I kind of would like to see the infected kind of like the zombie's from The Walking Dead, slow and not much of a threat but in numbers they should be not taken lightly. Meaning that whenever you sneak around them or take them on at once, you're fine but if you shoot your loud gun, you're going to have a bad time. I'm eager to see how they're going to change the AI/

15 hours ago, BeefBacon said:

Yup, pretty much all the negative reviews talk about the development time - though some do talk about bugs and things, and I consider those to be more legitimate criticisms. Even PUBG is having a similar issue, where it's getting negative reviews because of the anti-cheat system (where players get banned for stream sniping) even though it's probably not even affected 1% of the playerbase. Very few negative reviews talk about the actual content of the game - those that do bring up server issues and poor performance. Again, these are valid criticisms.

There very much seems to be a theme of meta reviews, where negative reviews will often focus on the behaviour of the developers rather than the actual content of the game. It'd actually probably be pretty interesting to see the nature of reviews aggregated into some sort of statistic, just to see what the focus of user reviews actually is. Maybe there's some academic study on it somewhere. Probably not.

I still don't think a Steam review about how bad desync is, how bad bugs are, etc. are valid criticism at this point. The game is still in development so nothing is final or set in stone. Which means that there might be a lot of desync now but perhaps 0.63 there are no desync problems anymore. The review will still be there but the issue is gone. Since a lot of people (including me) use the (Steam) reviews to see if the product is any good. If it's cluttered with reviews about desync or bugs while the issue is solved might scare away potential buyers.

I believe that Steam should separate Early Access reviews with reviews after release.

[Gobbokirk 546]

12 hours ago, Irish. said:

I could care less about time.. think about this:

How many games have you played for beyond 1 year? 2 years? 4 years? Now we're talking about the same game, not part 2 or new DLC and shit.. the same old game, for over 5 years? That is DayZ for me. No other game, comes close. I play most games for 1 month, and move on.. yet somehow, here I am.. waiting for the magic that this game will bring once modding hits, and the creativity of the masses make it the most popular online PC game again. 

I can wait.. its simple for me. 

2 years there is a couple more but 4+ I can only think of 2... SWG and WAR... Damn you MMOs and stealing my free time :)

That's as "full time" games as I call it. Not the once or twice a month, that list is longer :p

The 4+ years games are a rare breed for sure, the fact that this still keeps me interested as a concept since the mod came out puts it in the rare gem box for sure though.

Even if my hours aren't really "up there" yet.

3 hours ago, DannyDog said:

It's not that they lost hope, its because pvp is the only thing that stays fun after you've done everything 100 times.

The human factor gives longevity for sure... Doubt CS would still be played if it was always against bots :)
Toss in the randomness of other players and the entertainment span skyrockets.

[sneakydude 480]

just release 1.0 already, then i don't have to keep reading these stupid topics.

HAHA someone has to say it.

[Guy Smiley 534]

39 minutes ago, sneakydude said:

just release 1.0 already, then i don't have to keep reading these stupid topics.

HAHA someone has to say it.

Explain how it's a stupid topic?  Is it because you can't fathom the fact that game development doesn't happen overnight and actually can take multiple years?

Edited October 27, 2017 by Guy Smiley

[sneakydude 480]

2 hours ago, Guy Smiley said:

Explain how it's a stupid topic?  Is it because you can't fathom the fact that game development doesn't happen overnight and actually can take multiple years?

We talked about this 100's of times already. We all know it takes 5+ yrs to develop, and it will be done when its done... Which has been trademarked here in the dayz forums. Lets get some status updates each week then we can see how far the development is. Silence is not a good thing at this stage of development. Which is another topic that has been mentioned many times. The lack of information to the community.

[Gobbokirk 546]

14 minutes ago, sneakydude said:

We talked about this 100's of times already. We all know it takes 5+ yrs to develop, and it will be done when its done... Which has been trademarked here in the dayz forums. Lets get some status updates each week then we can see how far the development is. Silence is not a good thing at this stage of development. Which is another topic that has been mentioned many times. The lack of information to the community.

Livestreaming from the office or riot!!! :)

We can find out if they really work with no pants or not :p

Oh god, I just gave myself a mental picture of a bunch of programmers with no pants... What have I done... :p

[klesh 2423]

On 10/26/2017 at 4:08 PM, ☣BioHaze☣ said:

When they came out after a long long long time and said that they were going to have to go back to a dynamic infected spawn mechanic instead of a server based spawn mechanic I was absolutely fucking furious that we waited all that time to come to that conclusion..... for a zombie game! It seemed to me that had they come to the conclusion sooner they could have spent all that time improving how they spawn in at the very least. I'm really concerned about "pop-in" for infected spawning or people watching for spawn to detect movements like in the mod.

 

That was truly devastating news indeed.  Seems like they threw their hands up and decided the problem was too tough to figure out, rather than delivering on something that was a core reason to make a dedicated standalone game in the first place.  "Mod zombies" were a dead giveaway as to whether there was already someone in a town you were approaching.  We were supposed to get thousands and thousands of permazombies on the map with their fancy new technique.  There was talk of free roaming zombie herds in the forests.  Not happy at all that they chose to abandon it.  What good is basebuilding and electricity in a zombie game with shitty zombies?

Edited October 27, 2017 by klesh

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

23 hours ago, klesh said:

 

That was truly devastating news indeed.  Seems like they threw their hands up and decided the problem was too tough to figure out, rather than delivering on something that was a core reason to make a dedicated standalone game in the first place.  "Mod zombies" were a dead giveaway as to whether there was already someone in a town you were approaching.  We were supposed to get thousands and thousands of permazombies on the map with their fancy new technique.  There was talk of free roaming zombie herds in the forests.  Not happy at all that they chose to abandon it.  What good is basebuilding and electricity in a zombie game with shitty zombies?

I'm hoping they can find a way to improve how the game handles infected populations on a grand scale. There must be some elegant way to solve this.

With any luck the late optimization passes will free up a lot of resources which may effect what the game can handle server wise.

Maybe there's a chance they'll bring back server spawned infected, or maybe there's a way to mix server spawned and dynamic spawning....

 

Edited October 28, 2017 by ☣BioHaze☣

[Solopopo 330]

This post is just nonsense and makes us all look bad. None of those games are alphas. None of those companies got paid before their games came out, and they didn't publicly post erroneous release schedules. If you are trying to make the argument that people shouldn't complain because game development generally takes a long time that's bullshit, I'm sorry. This game was released as a garbage alpha that was so bad the project needed to be completely gutted and restarted from the beginning. Yes, that is okay if it's behind closed doors and getting it right takes a while, but it's not when your game is public and you already got payed and advertised your game like it would be releasing fully within the year. Complaints are utterly justified. With that said, I am still rooting for DayZ, but I am far from delusional about it's development. Dayz does need time at this point to become what we all want it to be, but it is not right the way they went about releasing this game. The development of DayZ was hurt by the release of the alpha, not helped. We need to be honest about what's happened. Alphas are cancer. 

PS: Shenmue is glorious 

Edited October 28, 2017 by Solopopo

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

13 hours ago, Solopopo said:

Dayz does need time at this point to become what we all want it to be, but it is not right the way they went about releasing this game. The development of DayZ was hurt by the release of the alpha, not helped. We need to be honest about what's happened. Alphas are cancer. 

PS: Shenmue is glorious 

Shenmue is a classic for sure.

DayZ is one of the first open alpha releases on this scale if I'm not mistaken and originators are bound to make more mistakes.

I think it's better to look at the time comparisons on a general level and what's expected as the outcome if you want to draw parallels with other games.

So by that reasoning DayZ's progress has not been outside of an industry norm.

That's the real point imo.

Edited October 28, 2017 by ☣BioHaze☣

[Guy Smiley 534]

15 hours ago, Solopopo said:

This post is just nonsense and makes us all look bad. None of those games are alphas. None of those companies got paid before their games came out, and they didn't publicly post erroneous release schedules. If you are trying to make the argument that people shouldn't complain because game development generally takes a long time that's bullshit, I'm sorry. This game was released as a garbage alpha that was so bad the project needed to be completely gutted and restarted from the beginning. Yes, that is okay if it's behind closed doors and getting it right takes a while, but it's not when your game is public and you already got payed and advertised your game like it would be releasing fully within the year. Complaints are utterly justified. With that said, I am still rooting for DayZ, but I am far from delusional about it's development. Dayz does need time at this point to become what we all want it to be, but it is not right the way they went about releasing this game. The development of DayZ was hurt by the release of the alpha, not helped. We need to be honest about what's happened. Alphas are cancer. 

PS: Shenmue is glorious 

Uh, you do realize that those games had an alpha stage at one point, right? SMH

[pilgrim* 3514]

18 hours ago, Solopopo said:

PS: Shenmue is glorious 

Sega AM2 began work on a role-playing game for the Sega Saturn set in the Virtua Fighter world. In 1997, development moved to the Dreamcast and the Virtua Fighter connection was dropped. Shenmue became the most expensive video game at that time ever developed, with an estimated production and marketing cost near  $70 million USD, though the development cost also covered some parallel work on Shenmue II (2001). Shenmue was published by Sega for the Dreamcaster in 1999.

.. and 18 years (= EIGHTEEN YEARS =)  later ...  it's "glorious".

They took their time ..  or what?

How much has the mega-corporation spent on Shenmue since 1999  ...  in the last  <EIGHTEEN>  years ?

Edited October 28, 2017 by pilgrim*

[sneakydude 480]

18 hours ago, pilgrim* said:

Sega AM2 began work on a role-playing game for the Sega Saturn set in the Virtua Fighter world. In 1997, development moved to the Dreamcast and the Virtua Fighter connection was dropped. Shenmue became the most expensive video game at that time ever developed, with an estimated production and marketing cost near  $70 million USD, though the development cost also covered some parallel work on Shenmue II (2001). Shenmue was published by Sega for the Dreamcaster in 1999.

.. and 18 years (= EIGHTEEN YEARS =)  later ...  it's "glorious".

They took their time ..  or what?

How much has the mega-corporation spent on Shenmue since 1999  ...  in the last  <EIGHTEEN>  years ?

Business models, and how much someone spends is no indications on the game play, development or anything related. Wars costs money too, short or long wars not all can say they where ran right.

[pilgrim* 3514]

23 hours ago, sneakydude said:

Business models, and how much someone spends is no indications on the game play, development or anything related. Wars costs money too, short or long wars not all can say they where ran right.

Very enlightening - I'm totally impressed .. I don't know what you're on about but I'm sure its cool. .. er.. and have a nice day !  =SMILEY= So let me answer That with This : Britain FINALLY  finished paying back the loan from the USA they borrowed to help the totally broke Empire go on fighting WWII - guess when -  in 2002 !!  At LAST. A nice investment for the USA. ( .. and well may you ask what that has to do with anything. Some Brits will still say they won the war).  Keep posting the super-cosmic - enigmatic - comments, man, and the top o' the morning to ya.  "All's fair", right?. This comment is not intended to make sense, it's an answer to yours.

 

 

Edited October 30, 2017 by pilgrim*
~ self evident

[Solopopo 330]

On 10/28/2017 at 4:38 PM, Guy Smiley said:

Uh, you do realize that those games had an alpha stage at one point, right? SMH

I think it's pretty clear from the context that I am talking about early access alphas. 

 

On 10/28/2017 at 2:11 PM, ☣BioHaze☣ said:

Shenmue is a classic for sure.

DayZ is one of the first open alpha releases on this scale if I'm not mistaken and originators are bound to make more mistakes.

I think it's better to look at the time comparisons on a general level and what's expected as the outcome if you want to draw parallels with other games.

So by that reasoning DayZ's progress has not been outside of an industry norm.

That's the real point imo.

Early access alphas just shouldn't exist. The idea is not innovative, it's just an excuse to get paid early for something unfinished. The whole idea doesn't make sense, and goes against basic economics. If developers get paid before their product is done, they are not going to be incentivized to continue their work. We should not be embracing the idea of early access, and DayZ is in fact a perfect example of why that's true. 

Edited October 30, 2017 by Solopopo