DayZ Update 1.12

[Homeschooliazon 87]

4 hours ago, Private Evans said:

 there is no real disussion about what the community and the playerbase really do want.  

The gunshot sounds and stagger-when-shot as well as the loot systems in recent patches were changed after community out- *cry* on the forums 🙂

[VVarhead 185]

On 5/27/2021 at 11:17 AM, Raphael_RJ2 said:

I remember my first time playing this game before I got good & understood the game mechanics being Thirsty/hungry was a death sentence lmao

Being that said, In real life I Fast for days with no food, So What if you patched it to where if you are Hungry / Thirsty you don't die when your health reaches zero, you walk like a Zed because your overall staniman is down, Pass out ect ect but after a few game days you then die?

 

Lol the old (0.62 and before) version had this. Also the "stamina" system was better like @Derleth mentioned.

The game overall is a downgraded version with silly features and non-existing direction. No immersion and atmosphere left, even visually the weather is way downgraded.

0.62 is far superior than the current DayZ.

[green_mtn_grandbob 594]

They did take the "flavor" out of dayz standalone. 

[Private Evans 1303]

On 6/5/2021 at 8:30 PM, VVarhead said:

 

Lol the old (0.62 and before) version had this. Also the "stamina" system was better like @Derleth mentioned.

The game overall is a downgraded version with silly features and non-existing direction. No immersion and atmosphere left, even visually the weather is way downgraded.

0.62 is far superior than the current DayZ.

0.62 was a hundred times better regarding gameplay and mechanics, it looked better and was a lot more immersive because of all these sweet little  so called flavour things...night time looked awesome, weather looked awesome...medical gameplay was awesome....and there were so many things to come. If they had spent the two years for finishing the game on the existing tech we would have get the games of our dreams...fuck some more FPS ....fuck some better animations and fuck consoles.....we nearly were there...

[Parazight 1599]

I definitely don't miss the glory days of 18 frames per second.

[Derleth 1357]

11 hours ago, Private Evans said:

0.62 was a hundred times better regarding gameplay and mechanics, it looked better and was a lot more immersive because of all these sweet little  so called flavour things...night time looked awesome, weather looked awesome...medical gameplay was awesome....and there were so many things to come. If they had spent the two years for finishing the game on the existing tech we would have get the games of our dreams...fuck some more FPS ....fuck some better animations and fuck consoles.....we nearly were there...

I mostly agree, but having played a lot of both versions recently, practically side by side, I will say that 1.12 is a far superior game in several ways. 0.62 is "stiff" for lack of better words while 1.12 has movement and animations that I find myself missing a lot when on 0.62. There was no climbing or jumping and the vaulting was laughably implemented. There are myriad little things that were unfinished, unpolished or simply missing in 0.62 that amount to a better experience overall. Inventory system, loading magazines, stacking and splitting stacks, crafting actions, making fires in fireplaces, cooking... 1.12 is far more polished, as it very well should be. Also in 0.62 many weapons lacked several animations and the ones that had animations were often mismatched or poorly configured. By comparison the weapon animations (handling, shooting, reloading, unjamming etc) are far, far superior in 1.12.

BUT I still come away from playing both versions feeling that something absolutely vital has been lost in 1.12 - and that is player presence and immersion. The system in place for stamina was actually better for travel as I have touched on before, although it lacked smooth integration with melee, ADS, climbing etc that the current stamina system has. The skies...  oh those volumetric clouds... It can't be exaggerated how much they actually meant for the games total visual style. Watching the clouds racing over the sky as a storm approaches, it is breathtaking and so superior to the current pixel mush skies that I get truly sad.

Most importantly, 0.62 had less arcadey gunplay. Better recoil, bullets coming from the weapon barrel and not the camera, more sway after sprinting and just slower overall. Looking at the recent sGunplay mod it is obvious this is a design decision and not a technical limitation in the new engine, which makes me sad. There is no reason for DayZ to go down that arcadey route, imo the devs should take a really good look at what has been done with that mod and adjust the vanilla game accordingly. The changes are subtle, but very good. Weapon inertia, sway and recoil are dynamic and affected by attachments, how well you can handle it depends on your weight carried and a soft skill for strength.

With sGunplay all I really miss from 0.62 is the clouds - and apparently those are impossible to mod in since devs not only removed the implementation but entirely ripped support for it from the engine. Then there's some small things like the bow, pointy stick (still no stabbing animation...), weapon painting and so on but they'll come eventually. The cloud thing pisses me off though.

Edited June 10, 2021 by Derleth

[Private Evans 1303]

Of course 0.62 was unpolished in many regards but just imagine how much time  has gone by since then...enough time to polish and improve things while still having all the awesomenes of all the cut out features. Not to forget...all the stuff they had planned or already working ingame from helicopters to boats and bikes...stuff that worked in Arma 2 and perfectly works in Arma 3...client side of course but who gives a fuck about that.

The one and only thing that really has improved is the new animation system but honestly...I would trade that any time for a DayZ finished by the old dev team ( Brian Hicks) based on 0.62....

[Private Evans 1303]

Well Parazight, if you prefer having 60 FPS but at the same time having a cartoonish look  including horrible lighting, horrible draw distance, horrible clouds and weather and an even more horrible night time , it is a question of personal preferences and taste...I really hoped to get best of both worlds with Enfusion but if I had to choose my choice would be different. 

Looking on the Arma 3 community....it seems that a good game is not all about FPS ...not speaking about fast paced shooters of course...

[William Sternritter 449]

16 minutes ago, Private Evans said:

Of course 0.62 was unpolished in many regards but just imagine how much time  has gone by since then...enough time to polish and improve things while still having all the awesomenes of all the cut out features. Not to forget...all the stuff they had planned or already working ingame from helicopters to boats and bikes...stuff that worked in Arma 2 and perfectly works in Arma 3...client side of course but who gives a fuck about that.

The one and only thing that really has improved is the new animation system but honestly...I would trade that any time for a DayZ finished by the old dev team ( Brian Hicks) based on 0.62....

Now this just comes back to the original .63 release, when they said that re-adding existing stuff is going to be fairly easy. One ex-dev said the same to me in a private conversation. However instead of seeing that, the game itself is moving more and more towards shooty arcade. Thus I still think that the current state, despite all technical hurdles, is really a result of decisions, rather than engine overhaul. 

 

On a separate note, I played the official 1pp vanilla again yesterday and would like to reiterate that accelerated time is bull. To everyone sayin that they want to experience "full cycle", I can confidently reply that there was no full cycle, but rather an hour of twilight and 10 minutes of relative darkness. IRL I would compare it to summer night in Sweden. While I did enjoy the Swedish nights, here the short cycle adds nothing to the game and it can be outright running daylight 24/7. 

[Derleth 1357]

57 minutes ago, Private Evans said:

Of course 0.62 was unpolished in many regards but just imagine how much time  has gone by since then...enough time to polish and improve things while still having all the awesomenes of all the cut out features. Not to forget...all the stuff they had planned or already working ingame from helicopters to boats and bikes...stuff that worked in Arma 2 and perfectly works in Arma 3...client side of course but who gives a fuck about that.

The one and only thing that really has improved is the new animation system but honestly...I would trade that any time for a DayZ finished by the old dev team ( Brian Hicks) based on 0.62....

Absolutely - that would essentially be 1.12 with 0.62 gunplay and volumetric clouds 😄. (and half functional ragdoll, never forget...)

Biggest issue 0.62 had imo was the godawful netcode, lag, rubberbanding and desync was a million times worse than in the new engine. Could probably have been polished too, but when explaining the 0.63 shift devs have said they had painted themselves into a corner with 0.62. Iirc they were actually adding stuff to the Legacy branch while working on 0.63 in parallell. How accurate that is I don't know, but when confronted with "why didn't you just finish what you had with 0.62" that's what they say, that it simply wasn't possible. Legacy kept going because it was already on EA and playable. Really weird situation.

Edited June 10, 2021 by Derleth

[Derleth 1357]

10 minutes ago, Private Evans said:

Well Parazight, if you prefer having 60 FPS but at the same time having a cartoonish look  including horrible lighting, horrible draw distance, horrible clouds and weather and an even more horrible night time , it is a question of personal preferences and taste...I really hoped to get best of both worlds with Enfusion but if I had to choose my choice would be different. 

Looking on the Arma 3 community....it seems that a good game is not all about FPS ...not speaking about fast paced shooters of course...

Draw distance has been set stupidly low by default, the engine can handle MUCH better. If the server is configured to allow increased max view distance and object draw distance the client can be set higher too - and the game looks incredibly much better. The only reason I can think of for the low default setting is console adaptation, and they just cba having separate settings between console and PC default configurations. Default is something like 2500/1250, I have it set to 3500/3500 without noticing any impact whatsoever on fps:

[Tonyeh 454]

1 hour ago, Derleth said:

The only reason I can think of for the low default setting is console adaptation,

 

I think this is the reason for a lot of the dumbing down of DayZ.

 

And gaming in general.

[ZBA 66]

Just release Dayz 2 and ignore this old dog shit PS4 and Xbox One consoles

[DefectiveWater 536]

56 minutes ago, ZBA said:

Just release Dayz 2 and ignore this old dog shit PS4 and Xbox One consoles

Yeah... this is exactly how game development works /s
Make a second game while not even having any sort of engine to run it, sure, what could go wrong?

As much as I would like DayZ 2 too, it's just not possible. You could argue that Current DayZ is DayZ 2 because of the engine switch they made few years ago.

Edited June 10, 2021 by DefectiveWater

[Parazight 1599]

3 hours ago, Private Evans said:

Well Parazight, if you prefer having 60 FPS but at the same time having a cartoonish look  including horrible lighting, horrible draw distance, horrible clouds and weather and an even more horrible night time , it is a question of personal preferences and taste...I really hoped to get best of both worlds with Enfusion but if I had to choose my choice would be different. 

The things that you don't like are entirely subjective.  When the title hit 1.0, the performance jumped incredibly.  If DayZ was officially released as it was, with 18 frames per second, the game would not succeed and BI would be famous for releasing new games with antiquated technology.  What a death sentence that would be.

[green_mtn_grandbob 594]

At first they said we would have parity with .62, Then they they said that .62 stuff was just flavor, and we would  not get parity.

[Private Evans 1303]

21 hours ago, Parazight said:

The things that you don't like are entirely subjective.  When the title hit 1.0, the performance jumped incredibly.  If DayZ was officially released as it was, with 18 frames per second, the game would not succeed and BI would be famous for releasing new games with antiquated technology.  What a death sentence that would be.

0.62 ran for sure better than 18 frames in most places except for some of the anyway oversized cities. Not to forget that we are speaking about a version that was not polished and final, I am pretty sure that they could have been improved it over time like they did with Arma 3.

Arma 3 Altis was nearly unplayable on day one for a lot of people including me ( I remember that I had to downgrade view distance and quality to even get it loaded) and now it runs on my system with far above 100 frames. But even today after a lot of polishing, maps like Tanoa or Livonia with a lot going on,like npcs and explosions and gunfights and vehicles, do not provide more than 30 -45 frames for most players even on high end PC's...The Contact SP Campaign did not even touch 60 frames, but bringing framerates going down to 15-10 at some heavy scripted parts, but was epic as fuck and great fun...and should I tell you what..Arma 3 in gerneral is nevertheless absolutely successful. People give a fuck since OPF because Arma with all its shortcomings is offering something absolutely unique...so you are clearly talking nonsense there! People also loved the mod with all its wonkieness because it was ...special. If a game has soul, if it is immersive, if the gameplay is good and if it is unique and special...people will always give a fuck about fps and wonkieness....Play a heavy modded fallout or Skyrim same thing...and there are endless more examples.

Honestly..and I mean this by no way personal or offensive...its also people like you that helped making this game here such an disappointment..at least for all of us that were here from the very beginning.

Graphics, gunplay, vehicles, medical gameplay, nutrition, hypothermia, stamina...there is nearly one thing that really works well...but praise the lord we've at least can play it with 60 fps .....

 

Edited June 11, 2021 by Private Evans

[Parazight 1599]

3 hours ago, Private Evans said:

so you are clearly talking nonsense there!

 

3 hours ago, Private Evans said:

Honestly..and I mean this by no way personal or offensive...its also people like you that helped making this game here such an disappointment

Is this a real statement?   You call out me as the source of disappointment for this game?  No way.  I've made no decisions regarding this game.  Don't blame me and then say "don't be offended"  Absolute bullshit.

Again, you're just providing opinion about what you like in the game.  You're basing success on feelings and how much you like the game.  Ellipses, feeling-good, and assuming your opinion is the popular one doesn't pay the bills.  Arma 3 wasn't that great.  It didn't make a lot of money for Bohemia Interactive.  It wasn't 'absolutely successful' by any stretch of the imagination.  Notice how the company adopted the Early Access Model to fund DayZ!   Having a game that doesn't run well and expecting it to be successful is super ridiculous.  Claiming that Arma3 runs great now is completely irrelevent.

3 hours ago, Private Evans said:

.at least for all of us that were here from the very beginning.

That's cute.  You think you're part of some sort of special club.  You're not.  I played Arma3 before the DayZ mod was released.  It wasn't that great.  It was clear back then that the shit framerates was going to be a huge problem in the future.  The decisions by the company reflect this.  They did it with DayZ, too.  Instead of just implementing everything and making it run smooth and optimize performance, they decided to implement security measures and not let BattleEye do its job.  For example, moving cars server side when it ran just fine client side in Arma.  Instead of letting BattleEye do its job, they decided to not focus 100% on performance.

 

I did not make this game a disappointment.  Framerates are paramount.  Ask any game company.  Please stop shit-posting.

Edited June 11, 2021 by Parazight

[DefectiveWater 536]

37 minutes ago, Parazight said:

Instead of just implementing everything and making it run smooth and optimize performance, they decided to implement security measures and not let BattleEye do its job.  For example, moving cars server side when it ran just fine client side in Arma.  Instead of letting BattleEye do its job, they decided to not focus 100% on performance.

True, I never understood why there was a need to have server-side vehicles, and plethora other things like: ADS lag that happens when server doesn't run too well... why isn't ADSing client side, if I'm not wrong, every FPS/TPS game does it client side...
You said it well, why didn't they let BattleEye do it's job, why not add ways to "tag" possible cheaters if server sees some suspicious activity/people report suspicious death (although... I assume this would be too abused if players could report).

While I do agree that 0.62 had some good features, and a unique flavor to everything, it also had massive flaws, and current 1.12 is much more playable when it comes to bugs and performance (still... not ideal).

I would take 1.12 any day over 0.62.

But... if let's say 1.17 adds some of that flavor from 0.62 back to vanilla game, it would be probably a nice improvement.

Edited June 11, 2021 by DefectiveWater

[William Sternritter 449]

LOL, Arma 3 runs like crap even on modern hardware.

[Private Evans 1303]

You are not getting the difference...0.62 came out in 2017, two years later BI released 1.0 and now meanwhile 4  years later in 2021. they are still are fixing and ballancing and adding cut out content....All I am saying is that if the Devteam would have worked these 4 years on improving 0.62 instead of  doing an half arsed engine swap, we would have a far better game by now...maybe a bit outdated in some regards and still a bit clunky but for sure not that boring, casual and unballanced game that DayZ is right now...

 

[Private Evans 1303]

Yeah I am not saying anything different...but still people having a blast playing for example the new and current creator dlc....it shows all the Arma 3 shortcomings but on the other hand offers the most immersive and best combat experience I have ever seen in a computer game....people loving it and having a blast playing it in Coop or MP even with having maybe a max of 45 FPS...

 

[DefectiveWater 536]

1 hour ago, Private Evans said:

they are still are fixing and ballancing and adding cut out content....

Oh I do agree with you on that part, funny how something like zeds, which are a part of the core concept of the game, aren't properly balanced yet.
Yes, it's better than 1.11, but there's still a lot of work needed to be done to zeds.

The only reasonable explanation is that BI really jumped the gun, and started cashing in on something that isn't even CLOSE to being a finished product.
Games generally do need like 3-5 years to be made, which seems reasonable IF you ignore everything before the "new" engine change.

TLDR: DayZ upon it's first release, looong looong time ago should have been released with the 1.00 engine.
Now THAT would be acceptable, and now you have a lot of people still to this day mocking DayZ for many core issues that still plague the game.

I mean, I still like the game... but I will ALWAYS warn my friends about the state and the history before they buy it.

I guess this is just ranting for the sake of ranting, at least on my part.

Edited June 11, 2021 by DefectiveWater

[Private Evans 1303]

Hahaha yes same here, I of course know myself, that posting and discussing these things is absolutely pointless. I still would love to see a 0.62 version modded and improved by the community xD

[MrBlonde90 5]

When will we get a next-gen update for console? Frames drop severely as it is with reg console version of DayZ... I am hoping that you will update and optimize your game for next-gen consoles soon. Hope all is well, thx.