Zombie Survival My A***

[ltdan 14]

Adapt to survive, you know the scenario of how you get slotted!!

Find other ways, eg. I rarely use supermarkets now when I can find ponds and animals

+1, Survival of the fittest

[duddbudda 33]

If that sniper had to actually approach his target and engage him in cqb, it would be far superior

not for those who can be arsed to scout

because the interesting answer to snipers is work out how to deal with them,

if they snipe you when you're looking for them then you're doing it wrong,

if you don't want to worry about snipers then don't, but you can't complain when they kill you

Off Topic observation:

you can tell the people who've never played strategy games (or tried to code a thing, or do a calculus, or solve many problematic problems [gaming site gets gaming analogy]) because they look at impossible situations and don't even try for solutions - you just know they've never had twenty turns to break the Drengin's hold on an ascension crystal, never reverted to mass marines in the face of a dozen BCs (inb4 marines OP), never even heard of Panzer General

Edited July 17, 2012 by Sandy

[Devmagic 36]

ok taking all serious responses on board and ignoring the pathetic ones e.g.

If you don't like it then GTFO...

first i would like to make note that perhaps you should read an entire thread before flaming the poster with "stop complaining" or "don't be a sore loser bro" cos if you did then you will see that i clearly state that i still am enjoying the hell out of this game. This has taught me a lot about the intellect and humanity of a lot of people in the DayZ world and has truly opened my eyes to the sort of attitude and behavior of my fellow humans from around the globe, it frightens me slightly that everyone is quick to adopt the attitude to say that we would just all sell each other out or stab each other in the backs means that you either are or hang out with assholes and should perhaps seek new friends (if you actually have any beyond the internet). second, next time you pass a dictionary open it up and read the definition of constructive criticism, you will see that just because someone has something negative to say about something doesn't mean that they hate it or are complaining about it it just means that they are opinionated enough to speak out about something they believe is wrong or right even if it means upsetting a few die hard fans. as i've stated i study games for a living and my point is based on first and third party research, something i believe needs to be addressed regardless of anyone else's thoughts. if i'm correct i believe there was a stage in development when all pvp peeps were complaining that the game didn't cater to them enough and this is me merely saying that now i believe the balance has shifted too heavily. what reward is there for someone who tries a different approach, my view is that there is none. i believe this game has just turned into a free roam resident evil: operation apocalypse, kill each other with the odd zombie annoying you from time to time. if you don't like what i say then that's fine, everyone has a right to an opinion but perhaps next time you should construct your view a little more intellectually rather than take the Christianity approach and just try and convince everyone else that they are wrong for not believing what you believe with insults and off-the-point fact blurting.

[Virfortis 111]

OP can you direct me to the advertisements you are talking about which were misleading?

Or the "tin" which listed the features of the game you are referring to?

You can't, because those things don't exist. You're not talking about advertisements you read or a "feature list" that said this game was all about zombie survival. You're talking about your own personal preconceived notions that you cooked up when you read the name and saw the game had zombies in it. Your brain said "Oh, this must be XYZ," but your brain was wrong. That's your brain's fault, eh?

The first day I learned about DayZ I watched a few videos, read articles and every interview with rocket and you know what every single one said? Even the fluff pieces on gaming sites? It said "Be aware that PvP will play a central role in this game and you will find yourself dying to players as often as zombies."

That line was repeated in almost every piece of DayZ-related media I ever encountered and repeated by rocket himself.

So if you came into the mod expecting it to be focused solely on zombie survival with "maybe a little bit of PvP sometimes" then you have only yourself and your own preconceptions to blame. Nobody bait-and-switched you. Nobody lied to but your own expectations. That's not the game's fault and it's certainly not rocket's.

False. Dead false. Go lookup stories related to DayZ. Specifically the ones pitched on PC Gamer. Those stories are about finding people, working together, and yes shooting people, but not raiding elektro while camping the forums and telling anyone that disagrees with the collective to "GTFO." It's very clear that DayZ has degraded, and all this supposed "tear sponging" trolls love to do is actually draining the intelligence well dry. The people out to make something with DayZ that's more than a giant de_dustbowl are slowly, but surely leaving. When they're gone, what's left? The same community, the same people. DayZ has once again failed to attract the people, but the community and lack of moderation is to blame. The community abused freedom, and nobody has the power to step in except rocket, but he won't because he's too busy doing the same thing. I have no problem accepting that DayZ is just designed so griefers can scratch their ego itch more easily than before, by havng no kick function for abusive gameplay, but trying to glorify DayZ for catering to the douchebag is taking it a bit far.

At the end of the day, only 16.5% of deaths are PvP related. So regardless of the clamor and clap on the forums, the game is clearly more than just PvP or a "deathmatch." Most people are dying to zombies or environmental hazards most of the time. Even if you allow 10% for bugs and glitches (which is probably high) then you still 75% of the player deaths to zombies. (These stats do not include respawns before you get your little reply fingers typing).

This is true, but very misleading. Comparing PvP deaths to PvE deaths is one thing, but how many times do non-clanned players come into contact without shooting each other? That is a statistic which cannot be as easily measured. So yes, most deaths are zombie related, of course they are. However, this fails to take actual interaction into play. IF there was a way to measure that, the statistic for "PvP coop vs. PvP kills" would be much higher. It's not about Zombies vs. PvP, it's about what the odds of seeing someone and not shooting is, which is extremely low if these complaint posts have any merit (and while slim, they carry that much merit).

So it is about zombie survival. And so far people aren't proving too good at it, are they? 35 minute average life expectancy? You fancy yourselves survivors so get out there and get that fucking number up already. PvP isn't what is keeping it down.

Another poorly quoted statistic. These numbers take people respawning to get closer to cities into account. Any good, solid player will last a couple hours provided they make absolutely no contact with another person, and that's also not factoring the VERY common occurence of the zombie-proof sniper hills.

Ultima Online and EVE are the only other two online games in history that have taken PvP seriously in a persistent world, and DayZ is the only one that has gone the step further of introducing permanent death. It is literally unique, and in just a few short months this unique approach has captured the attention of more players than SWTOR has managed to keep with hundreds of millions in advertising dollars. That's something amazing. And it's not all about the zombies. If it were, we would all be playing Dead Island or Left 4 Dead. Instead, we're playing DayZ. Why? Is it the glitches and bugs keeping us interested? The odd zombies with their ability to attack through walls?

No. It's the intensity. The emotion. The stress and the heart-pounding moments that result from interactions with other players in the game. All of which are uncertain and some of which are horribly violent.

So the fantasy of killing people is unique? Not exactly, it's simply so rare that the moment players make contact they're desperate for kills. I have yet to experience any moments, be it intense or otherwise, when related to other players. I get annoyed at stupid people going "OMG who's shooting?" so I stopped playing with people. There's no real drama or action when one simply gets a gameover screen, just shock mingled with "WTF." But heart pounding? No, never, just bloodlust being starved. Also, DayZ does anything but take PvP seriously, in fact it does quite the opposite by making it all reward with no risk in most scenarios. Get a sniper, camp up the woodline a bit, watch snipers setup, pick off, rinse and repeat. That's about as dramatic and serious as Battlefield 2.

If DayZ didn't have unrestricted PvP it would just be another zombie knock-off. It would have absolutely nothing special or new to offer that hasn't been done before and it would fall flat on its face in the dirt before it ever got off the ground.

This is indefinitely false. Games such as Chernarus Apocalypse and Killing Floor are perfect examples. A game doesn't need the fake fantasy of mass murder to appeal to the hardcore. The "hardcore" used to be all about saving princesses and stopping robot overlords, no PvP involved. If DayZ had no PvP, IN IT'S CURRENT FORM, yes it would be extremely boring. However, to cite PvP as some "golden ticket" to the gateway of fun gaming? That only further enforces the "single player/co-op is dead" mentality, something which Skyrim and Dark Souls would like to have a word about. STALKER was good too, but it had bad PvP, does that make it an inheritly bad game by your standards? Is it just another survival knock-off? Hey it had zombies too you know.

A mass, open-world co-op zombie survival game with extremely rare loot drops and the goal of, somewhere out there, being helicopter parts to escape off the island and fly to safety, meaning players would have to scour the entire map to look for the things they need, all the while having to make extremely difficult choices between shooting zombies or conserving ammunition. With food being extremely rare, and summoning a zombie horde an almost death sentence? Did I mention random loot locations? HELL YES I can see that working. Maybe tone the number of players down to about 4, make it extremely difficult. It may not be as guts and glory as easy-mode PvP, but it would be a much higher quality game. I'm sorry but DayZ feels cheap and weak without PvP for a reason, it relies on it as a crutch.

With all due respect, which is exactly zero, I have never seen you make a post in these forums that wasn't tearing down the game or whining about its features, and doing so in a completely insubstantial way. I might be able to entertain your presence if the things you said were in any way connected to reality and not just some fevered forum fantasy you have been bandying about for weeks (or has it been months now)?

Because this is a forum about a game still under development, it requires critiquing and feedback, not fanboy-digs against games Rocket himself has admitted to enjoying. Yes, stupid posts are stupid, but just like they have the right to complain, you have the right to ignore. Instead of saying "you're an idiot, GTFO" to everyone, consider finding why this issue is, and learn to question data. Maybe the statistics miss something? Maybe he's being camped? Maybe he's actually having a bad time? Suggest the co-op mod, it can be fun. However, the moment you get a dig in, you bury yourself to their level of shitty intelligence. Even if we disagree, I still respect you enough to know you're above that. You make a solid case from your standpoint, but likewise I have actual game experience, which is clearly different from yours, that shows flaws in the game's system. If things are working as intended? It's a flawed game, but people like it so it's not for me. However, if it's all working as intended, and the game really is about shooting each other for no reason, by all means continue. Just don't expect people to fawn over DayZ like it's anything different.

Ever since the bandit skin was removed and you insisted the game was going to devolve into an all-out deathmatch you haven't shut your yap about it.

Yet, fewer bandits are in the game now as a percentage of the population. Murder rates are down, and PvP deaths as a percentage of total are falling.

Your complaints are vacuous, vapid and unconstructive. Why are you even still here?

Because his experiences have proved him both right, and given him a reason to post his feedback. My experiences are very similar to his: Rarely dying to zombies, rarely dying to players, but every player interaction results in shooting. Murder and PvP rates are down, yes, but so is the overall amount of player interaction. Players now have no idea where ayone is, and most wander aimlessly until they spot a zombie, or suicide and try getting closer to a town. Players are learning to avoid major cities, and as a result interact less, and as a result bring the percentage down, but the actual rate of kills per interaction has increased exponentially since DayZ has gone mainstream.

Pick your ass up and go play a different game already.

Like what? Other games are way too easy and DayZ needs serious work. The game pool is extremely stale at the moment, which is exactly why DayZ has gotten so much instant hype. This, sadly, is also why the game has degraded over time, too many players. DayZ would make a great cult classic, where players respect the game and get involved, but as-is? Very impersonal, very bland, and very predictable. No, there's not much to be done about that, just wait a few years for the hype to wind down. It's a lot like Champions Online, when the hype died down, the RolePlaying quality picked up. DayZ will pick itself back up from the generic gritty open PvP in time, but for now we just have to sit through the wave of mainstream.

Edited July 19, 2012 by Virfortis

[resident_leeonheart@yahoo.com 32]

Only a few days in but is it me or does it seem that those who play the game as its genre depicted seem to be the only ones who cant get anywhere (unless you have a team of 10 or so). Been trying to enjoy the game via patching vehicles, building bases, teamwork etc. and just when it seems everything is going well, BAM! a sniper shot from your routine supermarket sweep ends your life and makes it almost impossible to get back to where you were. I just feel that the game has been taken over by those who have no interest in zombies or even survivng but getting whatever amazing sniper rifle they can get (sometimes even in teams) and just ruining everyone else good time. I understand that bandits make the experience more challenging, but for a game with no real end goal i feel i am just wasting my time and wits playing this with no reward....at all. Anyone feel the same way, or have i just missed the point of this game altogether?

Yeah in its alpha stage, it should be called DayP(vP) or DayS(nipers) :lol: Don't give up hope, the game may change when it reaches beta/final.

[Virfortis 111]

Yeah in its alpha stage, it should be called DayP(vP) or DayS(nipers) :lol: Don't give up hope, the game may change when it reaches beta/final.

Combat Arms and Soldier Front didn't, can't see DayZ changing, same mentality.

[duddbudda 33]

Another poorly quoted statistic. These numbers take people respawning to get closer to cities into account.

that is a lime green lie