Status Report - 23 October 2018

[Salty seadog 125]

Not much else to add ontop of other sentiments here other than I'm pretty shocked and also very disappointed with this SR.

 

First impressions are everything. If you release this game on console as a 1.0 build (aka feature complete full game), the backlash you will rightly receive will be be overwhelming. All the videos on youtube and negative press will end up being a No Mans Sky 2 scenario, because it is exactly the same situation (promised all these extra features, then delivered a game missing most of the core baseline elements. I mean you're going to release the game missing the throw animation? are you serious?). To be very blunt, you work far to slowly as a studio to pull out the comeback card 9-12 months from launch too. Games like NMS, Destiny 2, For Honor, and R6S were able to to successfully pull out a mighty comeback, because they were able to create and stockpile a HUGE amount of content and rework entire game systems from the ground up in what was probably an insane slog of crunch time. Enough effort in these cases it could almost be classified as an entire games worth of work. Are you capable as a studio of your size, of doing this? Because if you cant, it means you have ONE shot to nail this launch out of the gate, and not leave any loose threads around this games edges for the media and customers to pull at. You already have the disadvantage of starting with negative press due to this games long and bumpy development cycle, so your detractors WILL be vultures when they critique the state of this launch. 

 

Also, do you think releasing in this particular window is a good idea? Why would I (or anyone on the fence) buy Dayz at Christmas with the strongest absolute unit lineup of  games releasing in the next few months. (Shdow of the tomb raider and Titanfall tried this, and titanfalls studio has been disbanded I think, and their game was AAA, excellent and meticulously polished.) You cant compete with AAA games, you need to find a window where gamers are dying to pickup a new game. Wouldn't it be better to find a gap in the market where there is a lul in interesting games, and where many people on the fence might pick it up because there isn't many new games out? Like Id guess mid next year, a good bit after Anthem where there will be a few quieter months. This is where smaller studios can make a name for themselves, because they dont have to compete with AAA games for customers, and they also get TONS more free gaming press as all they journos and youtubers are looking for interesting games to cover for their own publications and channels. An excellent feature complete and polished launch in this window seems smarter than going head to head with Battlefield, RDR2 (with reviews looking like a 10/10 AAA game), Anthem, COD,  Fallout 76 (a direct competitor?) and a few others, especially when you are releasing half a finished game, as a small studio, in this same window, and advertising it as "complete" (aka v1.0). I'm not a marketing guy, so take my opinion with a pinch of salt, but Ive seen enough Devs make this mistake thinking they will get those sweet sweet Christmas sales, and tank their own franchise because they released in between a flood of AAA titles.

 

I don't know if there is some other motive you have not mentioned that is forcing you to release now? So I wont speculate on that. I want to see this game succeed, and I genuinely hope you do. But if I were you, I would forget about releasing this game soon. I would make sure I have everything that has been posted on the trello board or Dayztv, or in any gif or status report since, in the game, and functional. DONT launch with a giant content or core game mechanics backlog, as you will lack free devs that can fix bugs and hopefully implement some extra content when this board get flooded with excited new gamers (if the launch is good) that have good ideas for the game.  In your case, I think you will need an active team of devs ready to brainstorm solutions to allow mods on console or establishing the framework to do so, and convincing Sony you are capable of doing this without bricking their console. If you are still trying to implement the the ability to throw a rock 4 months after launch, it wont help your case with them.

 

Anyway, they're just my thoughts. I hope you reconsider what you are about to do, I think you are making a giant mistake releasing now, but I wish you the best of luck either way. Cheers.

[Maxzymator 26]

Opinions. They're like buttholes - evebody has one. So here's mine.

   All this shitstorm was not a surprise for me as wasn't a surprise what led to that shitstorm. I guess I knew that it would be exactly like that, like, a year ago. Ofcourse I was hoping that its gonna take less time, ofcourse it is frustrating to wait for so long and get another delay of something you thought is right behind the corner.
 

   But as I said - it wasn't as unexpected for me as it seemingly was for many others. And I'll tell you why. It's really simple - right from the get go, from the times, when vast majority of today's disgruntled customers weren't even born, Bohemia Interactive was doing things exactly like that - within time their every game was an absolutely different one than it was at release. So every goddamn title that they ever published went the same way - some arbitrary line is drawn and called 1.0. Then, years past, after numerous patches, enhancements and addons (majority of which are free, btw) we're having an excellent game, unlike any other. Operation Flashpoint v1.0 is nothing like it was three or four years later at v1.96. Arma 2 v1.68 is a completely different game than Arma 2 v1.0. One thing - this "1.0-line" is usually a buggy, god-awful, unplayable mess. My Arma 2 1.0 memories are still waking me up at nights =)).

 

  Things really changed with the release of Arma 3 - it was the same shitstorm drama, btw. People was bitching and moaning about too little content in the game, about absent campaign, about stuff that was promised and then said to be unviable, about everything. But at the same time everybody was agreeing on one thing - this is the most stable, playable and bugfree release of all time for Bohemia. And look where it lead 5 years later - we have a colossal thing, a combat simulator like no other, one of the most popular PC games STILL, FIVE FUCKING YEARS LATER, tens of thousands of players everyday, its still in Steam's top 30! And its nothing like it was when it hit 1.0 mark. Its a completely different, much bigger, much better thing.

  And, again, Bohemia Interactive goes the same way, that already showed itself as a succesfull one. And, again, we'll just have to wait longer than we, players, or, I assure you, anybody else (like, developers, for example) wanted. I hope (and not without a good reason) that this game is gonna be great, preferably sooner than later =).

 

I'm finished.

Edited October 26, 2018 by Maxzymator

[Seitan 161]

2 hours ago, Maxzymator said:

Bohemia Interactive was doing things exactly like that - within time their every game was an absolutely different one than it was at release. So every goddamn title that they ever published went the same way - some arbitrary line is drawn and called 1.0. Then, years past, after numerous patches, enhancements and addons (majority of which are free, btw) we're having an excellent game, unlike any other. Operation Flashpoint v1.0 is nothing like it was three or four years later at v1.96. Arma 2 v1.68 is a completely different game than Arma 2 v1.0. One thing - this "1.0-line" is usually a buggy, god-awful, unplayable mess. My Arma 2 1.0 memories are still waking me up at nights =)).

Pretty much offtopic to this thread... as is my answer.

Well OFP or ArmA wasn't open for public 5 years before 1.0 version. I always thought that when you participate early acces game, you get the final product when it goes GOLD/1.0/BETA test over. Yea you get few updates to fix bugs. But you dont have to wait years again to get the stuff that was promised over the years of alpha stage. I really hope that BIS is not planning to use same strategy with it's next ArmA or what ever it will be called military simulator.

ArmA devs went to prison, DayZ devs go to gamesexpo's to please xbox-players. ^^

[IMT 3190]

On 10/25/2018 at 8:06 PM, RaptorM60 said:

The answer is in the post you quoted - "everybody now feels like we'll do better if we give you a 1.0 release 3, 6, 9... months later with more stuff - but after 3, 6 or 9 months, it's natural to expect even more than a mere content parity with 0.62, engine improvements, + basebuilding, for example"

Also: "especially when we keep accumulating WIP features as I described, this could well be another disappointment, just arriving another 6 months later".

This doesn't answer my question though. My question was, why are you guys going to fix bugs and polish the game (beta), release it and then implement missing features. Why don't you guys fix bugs and polish the game (beta), implement missing features, fix bugs and polish again and then release it. This way, all the features which everyone expects to be in 1.0, will be in 1.0 and no one will be pissed off or felt stabbed in the back.

By the way, when is the Playstation version getting released? After the missing features are in and the true 1.0 is done, right? Please don't tell me that you guys intend to release the Playstation version on the 1st of January 2019 when DayZ hits 1.0. That would unleash an even bigger shit storm.

Edit: saw that Playstation release isn't going to be until Q2 2019. I'd rather see it get released after all the missing features are in otherwise the 1.0 release in 2018 seems just a way to get the Playstation version out there. Best is to wait until the PC version is fully done to not make it seem that way!

Edited October 26, 2018 by IMT

[blackberrygoo 1416]

Remember when they assured us that the console development wouldn’t slow down or hinder the pc development in any way , and that the pc version would be released first ? I also remember that statement , and am pretty disappointed that they have turned around on both parts of this statement ...

I really hope they speed development up (for PC , not consoles) but it looks like us pc players (original backers) are now being bitten in the ass by the exact thing they said wouldn’t happen :/ . 

Lets hope they can at least deliver on all the features that we’re delayed at some point down the road and they don’t cut those out of the game for good when things get to crunch time again .

[philbur 476]

It is a little bit comforting to know that the majority of posts on this thread are inline with my own sentiments on this SR.

What sort of softens the internal rage I'm fostering toward these amateurs is the way they talk in their Status Reports. It's almost as if they think/feel as if they are impressing us.

It just makes me laugh now...as I visualize the Lead Devs high-fiving each other as they walk past in their offices...and dreaming about how many job offers their going to get post-launch...

Not a single sincere hint that they realize how hollow and exasperating the changes and "updates" sound to the Survivors that have been around for these past many years...

I had a good grasp on the impending content flush when I started seeing all those "Stress Tests"...actually...as it became clear they really had NO idea how to proceed with the critically important features we ALL are expecting to see in BETA (or at the very least 1.0!).

So...to clarify...because I am in my fifties...and prefer clear and concise explanations... The "game" won't really be the "game" we even remotely expected back a few years ago...until Modders get a chance to work their magic (which clearly is beyond Eugen and the gang) and servers start showing up with an experience worthy of the DayZ moniker...Right?

And having the console versions "developed" (not "ported") along the same-ish timelines isn't an overt insult to the dedicated followers of the PC Standalone..right?

And I'm not supposed to be legitimately offended when I play back the interviews these guys pushed out at the games expos? (in other words...pissing on me and telling me its just raining)?

It's about god damn time someone ELSE spoke about the projections and timelines for this project WITHOUT the schizophrenic and contradictory SR getting in the way...is it not?

And lets call a spade a spade and admit that Bohemia simply could care less about DayZ as a game title, and is only concerned that they get their shiny new Engine...right?

And...and...and....so on...

Whew! Pissed off for way too long, and finally starting to run out of empathy.

It's not where I want to be, and I don't feel this is the end of the disappointing news...but been in it for too long...and I see too much potential for it not to be worth suffering a few more years of this...right?

( But at least I get to laugh out loud every Wednesday evening until then...eh?)

Thanks for sharing your time in-game, all you fellow Survivors...and thanks for giving me a platform to vent, occasionally, in this bizarre journey through the Early-Access. 

I just hope we can look back on this as a humorous anecdote in a year or so...instead of looking back at what a colossal screw-up it became...

….Right? ;-P

This is just an on-topic "vent"...so chill out with your replies, folks...I'm still here...and I'm still playing...

Just letting off steam to the crowd that lives my dream...yuk, yuk.

Edited October 26, 2018 by philbur

[exwoll 255]

On 10/25/2018 at 1:36 PM, RaptorM60 said:

would expect from a corporation. There are no investors at Bohemia. We're a company owned by the 2 people that founded the company 20 years ago. They made the money to run, and grow the business of Bohemia by developing games (and taking risks while doing that). We're very much a development driven company, not a company of quarterly business goals.

Oh, common, don´t tell me a company managing several titles with a multimillon budget operates through love and the desire to make the world a better place, while also planting a bunch of flowers in the streets to make kids in the hood happy! :D LOL Most people here are 20+ for christ sake, we know how stuff work. 

Quote

 can only repeat that I stand behind our decision to go for this specific 1.0 feature/content scope as the best option we've got now - even if it's not popular. I know the feeling you've got, it was one of my worst days here when I learned that this should be our 1.0, but it is a way to deliver a stable game, and a stable platform to build on further. That is essential now for DayZ in order to have a great future :)

The best option is to label the build what it is, a BETA.  And keep working on that. Labeling it 1.0 isn´t "essential", it wont magically make the game more "stable", it´s just a number, and a psychologically important number form the consumer point of view. 

The decision was/is purely commercial and has nothing to do with development itself. It is bad for the game image, as well as for the poor souls coming back after 5 years to find that the "released" "complete" game has 80% of the weapons missing, 2/3 of the survival mechanics gone and half of the announced features broken. There is even no fishing in the game, like wtf is so hard of creating an rng event with a fish as a prize?

This isn´t an "unpopular" option, its one which basically everyone is opposed to, which is quite different. Go open the game´s sub. Downvoted to hell SR, almost 1k negative comments (and totally well structured), most posts are about the same , even not counting the ones you are deleting or shadowbaning. Downplaying the community opinion on this is quite offensive I must say.

Unless what you are trying to subtly imply, is that there is pressure to release 1.0 this year, otherwise the company will cut the project dry and abandon it in a worse state than planned. That indeed would be "essential"

Quote

1.0 on PC has no repercussions on console releases at all. We're just going for a PC 1.0, consoles are not part of that.Our console inventory and user experience is not quite there yet. Console versions won't likely go for a 1.0 release anytime soon.

So, you are throwing out the window all that stuff about the pc and consoles builds being the same, which would "not draw any sources from PC" , which is the  "main focus"?.

Edited October 31, 2018 by exwoll

[philbur 476]

10 minutes ago, exwoll said:

Unless what you are trying to subtly imply, is that there is pressure to release 1.0 this year, otherwise the company will cut the project dry and abandon it in a worse state than planned. That indeed would be "essential"

I'm afraid you might be closer to the truth than you might wish, my man...

But maybe that be the ultimate saving grace for DayZ?

Just cut it loose to the passionate modders out there and I will gladly part with a few more of my hard-earned dollars so that the game can be everything it needs to be to earn the right to be called a Standalone.

[Asmondian 372]

I think nobody here (players) questions the possibility of waiting the necessary time to reach the level performance, content, bugfixing and stability necessary for a real 1.0 build. And I mean real in objective terms.

The message that you guys (Devs/BI) are giving with this idea of labeling any product as 1.0 no matter what, is that there are really no more incentives to continue with the Dayz project once it reaches 1.0. At least not with the same level of commitment than before. If you guys deny that the reasons behind this decision, the Xbox release and many others that have been taken during 2018 are not exclusively commercial, then this is even more worrisome. Mainly because it shows that the development team have significantly reduced their criteria on what a quality game/product really means and the value of fulfilling your word. Two elements that are decisive for any developer. And from the company itself (BI), it shows that the game is just a lost cause in your head, with the only expectation that the community can offer some kind distraction (mods) while you guys rethink the objectives for Dayz project in 2019 (If there are any at that point). Perhaps dreaming that the successful "Dayz Arma 2 Mod resuscitation model" will be repeated once again.

The fact that you can not even consider limiting yourself to a BETA in 2018 it is a clear sign that something somber, dishonest and that you can not share with the community is happening behind the scenes. Even more considering that:

1. This 1.0 build will definetly not be a feature complete build as you guys presented it. There are missing core features from the Dayz experience and almost an unanimous consensus regarding this among Dayz players (If indeed our opinion is ever heard)
2. This eventual 1.0 build Is going to be even inferior to the most optimistic BETA expectation (According to the information, objectives and roadmaps/checklist that you have provided us for years and only a few months ago). And im not talking only about content at this point.
3. Is decidedly false in the terms of a real 1.0 software, even if you guys try to redefine that concept. After years and years of hard work and frustrations, it is just sad to see how a trick is used to meet a deadline.
4. It is very naive to think that, in only two months, you guys will be able to correct the whole set of bugs and performance issues of the current build (for a long time now) to reach a "1.0 status". As I said, unless you guys have significantly reduced your criteria on what a quality game really means, you are going to break your head for almost two months to correct a build that, from its concept, is already a failure to anyone who has supported this project (and probably also for you guys and for the people who have worked in it)

Of course, the game will continue and probably its development too. The real scam would be to imagine a different scenario. But the lack of honesty that, in my opinion, is present in this decision will probably represent a break in trust between the community, the developers and BI as a company. Maybe you are not going to notice any consequences of this on a practical level because you will surely keep selling copies, developing other games and simply avoid reading the negative feedback. But you should at least feel it at some point from an ethical and profesional point of view. I think that anyone who founded a company does it on certain ethical foundations and a clear vision, and those are things that can not be left aside.

Just a game, we know. I really hope I did not make anyone feel uncomfortable with my feedback.

But im still very disappointed and discouraging about this like many others.

Edited October 27, 2018 by Asmondian

[Gadget_97 28]

^ One of the best post here.

Philbur has a very interesting point too: when the beta and 1.0 labels will not correspond in any way to the state of dayz, it will very well correspond to the state of the engine. It really seems like the CEO doesn't care about dayz.

Martin, is bohemia about to move ressources from dayz to another project with this 1.0 ?

Edited October 27, 2018 by Gadget_97

[philbur 476]

2 hours ago, Gadget_97 said:

Martin, is bohemia about to move ressources from dayz to another project with this 1.0 ?

Is a frog's ass watertight?

;-P

[green_mtn_grandbob 594]

I don't know any thing about game development.
But i do know if you are building a machine with inch dimensions, and you find out the base of the machine is too weak to hold up and you have to start all over and make a new base.
And then you find out you have to use metric dimensions on all the other parts, so you have to convert all the nuts and bolts to metric.
All that rework takes time, and the timeline is all shot to hell.

[IMT 3190]

You know what surprises me the most, they try to talk for us. Even with the huge backlash, I don't think they are changing their minds. They say it's in their and our best interest, nice how they decide that for us. They also haven't clarified the why part on why they are going to release 1.0 instead of just staying in Early Access. You can have a stable platform in Early Access as well, no need to release the game for that. As I see it, it is either because of the suit-people or Playstation, wish they were just honest about this.

It pains me that they don't listen to the community and rather do their own thing and dig their grave. Unless they change it around or 1.0 isn't a failure, it will permanently change my vision about BI. Of course I'm going to extensively test 1.0. I'm also going to be honest. If it's good then all is good and DayZ will get a post-release positive review. Is it not what I expect, it is going to get a negative review. Never thought I would ever have to think about the latter one, such a shame.

[Ballsinacan01 6]

@RaptorM60 I want say thank you for the reply.

Edited October 27, 2018 by Ballsinacan01
Don't care anymore

[[Gen]Adzic 241]

Ahhh, the idea of a standalone DayZ, independant from Arma, loved it, excited me, I wanted it! but once Dean "DayZ" Hall left BI, nothing but alarm bells rang in my head and have done for all these years, he was DayZ.. not BI, in my head you have taken (bought, borrowed or been given) his idea (his success) and basically turned it into 4 years of disappointment after disappointment on top of more disappointment.. sorry for speaking so frankly.

The only thing I have learned is that BI are far better suited to developing combat simulation games (Arma) than survival simulation games. As far as I'm concerned when Dean left, DayZ left with him. You've tried, I'll give you that, but I can't say you've succeeded. Never thought I'd have to say but DayZ SA 1.0 (actual game release) with less content than the DayZ mod of 6+ years ago.. that's just unforgivable I'm afraid. You done goofed.

I've gave you BI folks a hard time, I'd like to say sorry for that now.. and I don't post too often.. I really didn't want to come across as one of those pesky keyboard DayZ hating warriors I've seen other players and fans like myself painted around here as, for years.. by the good old "oh you can't say anything bad because it's Alpha" horn tooting brigade and honestly I've contributed literally zero to feedback on bugs or development along this whole 5+ year "hell of a ride".. but why should I when I saw no real reason to be fired up about even playing? I haven't even wanted to play an unfinished shell of a game idea, as it's literally never gripped me enough whenever I did give it another try. I'd play an hour at most, either get bored of doing the same shit, the game would crash or I'd die to something so stupid I'd instantly rage quit.

This whole adventure has seen nothing but false promises and provided broken dreams to most all DayZ fans but I'll spare you at least my would be negative steam review, like (right at this very moment as I'm typing this) I wished I'd spared my £20 all them years ago, out of respect for your efforts and since I have admittedly played almost 200 hours of your game over the past 5+ years. I may even give 1.0 a try, but honestly.. a Vanilla DayZ is not now nor probably ever going to be the kind of vanilla DayZ I was sold on by Dean.

I'll now be hoping modders can somehow conjure up a version of DayZ I can once again enjoy.

[Private Evans 1303]

Let's see what really is missing from their special beta status review from last year...https://dayz.com/blog/status-report-28th-november

two or three cars, the helicopter, throwing items ,  jumping/vaulting/climbing ...to be fair everything else they promised in that report will be in !

0.62 weapons and items they stated, that they will try to add as much as possible to get on par with 0.62 ( did not really happen)

polishing and bugfixing...they are obviously some months behind their plans but trying to push beta and 1.0  out within the next 8 weeks, even with missing promised features and a lot of missing content from 0.62. This will give them for sure not enough time for bittely needed tweaking and polishing before Q1 2019 ...which is normally done within beta phase before full release !

keeping in mind that the devs allready pushed a lot of stuff post 1.0 I would suggest

 

release beta (0.63 stable) before christmas

add the promised missing features and if possible some content from 0.62 ( some iconic weapons and itmes)

do the needed polishing fixing and tweaking

release Version 1.0

release some nice regular content patches

 

everything else will probably kill DayZ for good ( at least the PC version)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2018 by Private Evans

[pilgrim* 3514]

 

SAY -  Why not just call it   DayZ 3.2  ?

(take a hint from Microsoft - they never had any trouble with version numbers, strange names, malfunctions, fit for purpose,  or random updates)

problem solved ?

Edited October 29, 2018 by pilgrim*
nah - if you don't get it I'm not going to explain it. read a book.

[Tang0ed 24]

what about crash sites ? Are they in yet

[blackberrygoo 1416]

On 10/27/2018 at 7:46 AM, IMT said:

You know what surprises me the most, they try to talk for us. Even with the huge backlash, I don't think they are changing their minds. They say it's in their and our best interest, nice how they decide that for us. They also haven't clarified the why part on why they are going to release 1.0 instead of just staying in Early Access. You can have a stable platform in Early Access as well, no need to release the game for that. As I see it, it is either because of the suit-people or Playstation, wish they were just honest about this.

It pains me that they don't listen to the community and rather do their own thing and dig their grave. Unless they change it around or 1.0 isn't a failure, it will permanently change my vision about BI. Of course I'm going to extensively test 1.0. I'm also going to be honest. If it's good then all is good and DayZ will get a post-release positive review. Is it not what I expect, it is going to get a negative review. Never thought I would ever have to think about the latter one, such a shame.

These devs have changed for the worse IMO . Business is dictating every one of their decisions lately ; where as before we the community would at least get some say when they would come to ask us about specific issues .

i used to agree with the devs on everything , but when eugen started to slip to the background and Brian signed off the game, the whole dev team and project seemed to slip into this cold , callous feeling process in which no info is given and when it is it’s not enough to put logic to their reasonings .

Lets just hope they stop this deadline nonsense , they are trash at meeting deadlines so they need to just keep working on it in early access ... but to be honest I know they can be working faster / harder than this , something truly fishy is holding their progress back like crazy . 

[scriptfactory 620]

Read the message when you join the game, guys! It's just an alpha.

This is hilarious.

Are we getting modding?

[Fing 111]

So can I get this most definitely clear.  It is most definitely going to Beta by Christmas?  And at 1.0 we have a stable base platform of the game?  If so you have 8 weeks to fix the base game.  Good luck and lets hope you make it.  If that isn't the intention and that it is made stable after 1.0  then "Houston we have a problem".   I get the need for a stable platform to build on.   But if you are opening it up to the rest of the world to play there has to be more in it as you WILL get bad press regardless of it only being Beta and more so when the content of .62 is touted around.   Any one new to the game that comes to this forum will soon know how much is missing and how hard done by will they feel and may be go and give more bad press.   Oh well the decision has been made and I think the wrong one.   May be you will survive as people overlook the game as better things are out there to distract them and when the game is ready for a big song and dance you might get that influx of players as suddenly they seeing a cool looking survival game.  

 

[ICEMAN-FMCS 69]

I honestly feel that too much time is spent organizing, promoting and traveling to functions like gamescom, pax etc.. we all know the game exists, but that time could of been spent productively fixing, polishing, testing, implementing content the game at this point needs badly. We know the game has got cancer, its up to the devs to dedicate their time more intensely which will decide if the game takes a left down the corridor to palliative care or if it gets a optimistic bill of health and takes a right to the exit and recovers in remission and makes a comeback, figuratively speaking that is. The game needs updates every week or less to show its not moving into the heavenly light, but moving into the right direction to hit Beta in 8 weeks. Of course we all hope for the second option.

Edited October 28, 2018 by ICEMAN-FMCS

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

4 hours ago, scriptfactory said:

Read the message when you join the game, guys! It's just an alpha.

This is hilarious.

Are we getting modding?

https://forums.dayz.com/forum/154-general-discussion/

If you're going to be snarky, at least use your reading comprehension skills first, man.

[Tarkules 153]

On 10/25/2018 at 7:34 PM, Private Evans said:

having a specific, locked feature set for 1.0 is essential in order to establish a stable game/platform

NO !

Having a locked feature set is if course something that has to be done at certain points of development and yeah it has to be done to make a platform stable but calling this basic platform  then 1.0  with all the missing stuff is a slap in the face of your fans and something completely different and not the point because we are all pissed here.

we've now reached a point where we have the core set of features that make the core DayZ gameplay, and that's why the line has been drawn

Again  NO !

Don't you get it...most players  are testing the game and then leaving again, because the game has not enough content and features to motivate for more than a few sessions. Don't you read the comments...features and mechanics that are basic and important for us the players are just flavor content for you..this game in its current status is far away from being feature complete !

What we've got is the basic core...nothing more ! We all know that you will add  most of the missing content in the future...but we all also know that this will take at least a year or more looking at your development speed and the massive amount of missing stuff....Don't  you get it that you are currently on the best way to completely loose it ?

1.0 with this feature set, and proper amount of bug fixes and stability, will be the best DayZ we delivered to date + modding support. That alone makes it worth a 1.0 release

and NO !

it is the best running version of this game.....not the best experience!  This is a big difference. I had way more fun with the clunky mod ! What really is shocking me is how far you are away from the original idea of this game . It is still gameplay and diversion that matters not nice graphics and tech !!! Beside that modding is cool but not a core feature of a game !!!!!

Agree 100%.

In 2014, I bought the game when it just got published. I played it a little bit, really liked it, but I decided that I'll get back to it when it's ready.

In 2018, I played 0.62 for roughly 2 hours just to see what's what, but the performance were terrible.

When 0.63 came out, the performance and graphics got really improved. It was a blessing. But where did the content go? It's kinda boring.

Believe it or not, the best experience I had so far was watching YouTubers like TheRunningManz and other great guys, playing earlier versions, up to 0.62.

So I started to test out the stress test builds, and to be honest, I lost my enthusiasm.

See, I do it because I just want the game to be done already. I'm willing to test it and spend the time and report bugs. But whenever BI exposes me to another unfinished feature and or new bugs, I lose some of my faith. I'm just a consumer for that matter. Then I stop playing for a few days, then go back to play it on xbox. Then I check the forums, twitter, I get pissed off but I let it go again, trying to stay frosty and cool about it, and it's been like that for 2 months.

In short - you just "woke me up" in August 2018, just to tell me that the game is not ready yet.

Edited October 29, 2018 by Tarkules
Typos

[scriptfactory 620]

6 hours ago, ☣BioHaze☣ said:

https://forums.dayz.com/forum/154-general-discussion/

If you're going to be snarky, at least use your reading comprehension skills first, man.

Why not both? Thanks, BioHaze!