This game will fail long term if the PK problem isnt addressed

[Klu 20]

There is no PK problem.

I've noticed quite a few servers with announcements saying things like "PvE server: Kill others and you'll be banned."

I think that answers one issue. There are PvE servers, it's just up to the admins to make it that way and, most importantly, to enforce their own rules. I'm sure there will be some reliable, trustworthy PvE servers gaining popularity. You can still get killed by other players on these servers, of course.

PvP is the ultimate, high-end, competition ran, blood pumping, test-your-limits type of gameplay that sets the great games from the rest. Play any game against a computer, then start playing it against another human and your skill grows exponentially. Playing against another living, breathing intelligent person raises your game. It has to or you're dead.

The thing is, Gadget, you sound like the kind of person who likes to be fed his entertainment. Most of the video game customer base is like that. You want a nice package given to you to enjoy and that makes everything seem "fair."

I'd like to see an argument that Chess should no longer include a PvP aspect. This is just getting ridiculous.

Edit:

I wanted to add a comment to a quote from Xeno:

Games are defined by being able to play and enjoy it how you want.

Actually, it makes more sense to me that games are defined exactly how their developers make them. There is no rule saying a game should be everything for everyone. There happens to now be a base of players who prefer more of a PvE aspect. Does this mean it SHOULD be this way? Of course not.

You can't please everybody. If they start to compromise some of the key reasons for this game's greatness then the game will no longer have... greatness. It'll be just another compromised pile of crap.

Edited July 24, 2012 by Klu

[dallas 5195]

I'm not a big fan of 100% KOS, but DayZ without PvP is like L4D without zombies.

[sixbarns 217]

Can't we all just unite against the hackers and if someone sees a hack he shouts in global and we all alt f4 :P

That would be the easiest grief ever.

There should be PvP and PvE servers which cannot interact. PvE servers will simply be for people who like to work together and stock pile gear. Maybe increase the zombie ratio for more challenge?

I don't think the're holding back on the number of zombies just because they feel like it. And going through all the trouble of setting up PVE system would be a waste as the PVE guys would only come back a few weeks later and whine that there is nothing for them to do.

[jay.pis 32]

Sarcasm aside; the OP makes a few good points. If DayZ wants to be truly successful as a whole the Dev team should look into catering to all aspects of the player base. I myself enjoy the PvP aspect as it provides a nice bit of challenge but by no means should I be forced to play in a PvP server at all times.

Success differs from developer to developer, company to company, etc.

What if their business model and their success is to just target the players that do enjoy what they have created?

[XenoSententia 11]

lmao, oh man, I'm not even going to touch this with a ten foot pole.

Ah, the good 'ol none argument. Nice one.

[ahyokata 15]

Man, everytime I log into play Counterstrike people try to kill me...WTF! I will definately not be playing that game anymore until there is some sort of safe zone. I'm soo sick of it, and just wanted to post my grievances. Going back to playing "Hello Kitty Island Adventure"

[Ramusx 11]

Just another butt hurt carebear. Go play L4d with the other whiners.

[XenoSententia 11]

Success differs from developer to developer, company to company, etc.

What if their business model and their success is to just target the players that do enjoy what they have created?

Well then that's their choice and they lose out on business from the people they didn't cater too. A smart company generally tries to gather as much realistic business as possible and depending on how hard implementing PvE servers would or would not be, I see no reason as to why it could not be a feature in the future.

[j_riddell@live.com 32]

I've noticed quite a few servers with announcements saying things like "PvE server: Kill others and you'll be banned."

As this is not covered in Rocket's only two reasons you should ever ban someone, I'm fairly confident that this is a reportable offense that can have the server blacklisted.

A smart company generally tries to gather as much realistic business as possible and depending on how hard implementing PvE servers would or would not be, I see no reason as to why it could not be a feature in the future.

This is incorrect. A smart company caters to the majority, end of story. The minority group of players (in this case people who just want PvE) is insignificant, and only ever becomes significant if they somehow become the majority. Which in this case, is not even remotely close to happening.

Edited July 24, 2012 by DEADS0NG

[imagelesskjc 35]

Actually be definition a sandbox game allows you to do whatever you want. So in a true sandbox he should be able to play on a PvE server . . that's a terrible argument.

lmao, oh man, I'm not even going to touch this with a ten foot pole.

I guess someone has to bite the bullet...

A sandbox game is developed with the player in mind in an attempt to create an experience that has features that the player can utilize to make his/her own decisions. Having PvE is not a required component of a sandbox, it is a feature designed for a specific user experience. In this case, the intended experience is focused on player interaction.

[Black Dow 21]

Off the bat it's HARD to just find some random chap while playing the game and expect them to be friendly. You have to change your mind set when playing games such as these and you HAVE to adapt to them, that's the whole point.

In my mind, that quote represents one of the biggest issues with this game. There is basically zero incentive to make friends with anyone you don't know. You're better off just shooting another player than you are worrying that they'll shoot you if you approach peacefully. I don't mind the PvP element, but there needs to be some sort of incentive to work with strangers, or perhaps a disincentive to killing people for no reason (a reason being self-defense, to loot their corpse, perhaps cannibalism if it's added at some point, etc.).

It would make the game more realistic, more interesting, and more fun.

[XenoSententia 11]

I guess someone has to bite the bullet...

A sandbox game is developed with the player in mind in an attempt to create an experience that has features that the player can utilize to make his/her own decisions. Having PvE is not a required component of a sandbox, it is a feature designed for a specific user experience. In this case, the intended experience is focused on player interaction.

Sandbox games simply allow someone to play how they want without creative limits. Allowing someone to implement a PvE game mode would be an example of this. They have to tools required for it.

I don't see why everyone gets so defensive on these topics and attacks the OP. I am a big supported of people playing how the want. Playing for fun design philosophy and all that jazz.

If OP wants to play on a PvE server he should be allowed to.

[jay.pis 32]

Well then that's their choice and they lose out on business from the people they didn't cater too. A smart company generally tries to gather as much realistic business as possible and depending on how hard implementing PvE servers would or would not be, I see no reason as to why it could not be a feature in the future.

That's still irrelevant, that's like saying Best Buy or Fry's should start selling food (grocery) products to cater to everyone else.

[Klu 20]

Well then that's their choice and they lose out on business from the people they didn't cater too. A smart company generally tries to gather as much realistic business as possible and depending on how hard implementing PvE servers would or would not be, I see no reason as to why it could not be a feature in the future.

Xeno, you are making a poor argument. A smart company doesn't just try to snatch up every piece of business as possible. It isn't that narrow. There's a lot more to it than that. You might have answered your own question by saying "every realistic piece of business." You aren't being realistic.

Besides, Bohemia is SWIMMING in new cash right now. DayZ has EXPLODED sales of Arma II. All this coming from their current game in Alpha. Do you think they want to alienate everyone?

Edited July 24, 2012 by Klu

[kingmeanie 6]

You whiney care bears kill me. This game is ALLLLLL about pvp with some zombies thrown in. Deal with it or get out.

[XenoSententia 11]

That's still irrelevant, that's like saying Best Buy or Fry's should start selling food (grocery) products to cater to everyone else.

Fry's now has a ladies perfume section as well as a small desserts section. And how is that irrelevant?

If they want to expand their business opportunities they carry more products. It's all up to the company. It's the same exact thing. Except here it's even easier because they already have the game made, just would require different server implementations.

[jay.pis 32]

In my mind, that quote represents one of the biggest issues with this game. There is basically zero incentive to make friends with anyone you don't know. You're better off just shooting another player than you are worrying that they'll shoot you if you approach peacefully. I don't mind the PvP element, but there needs to be some sort of incentive to work with strangers, or perhaps a disincentive to killing people for no reason (a reason being self-defense, to loot their corpse, perhaps cannibalism if it's added at some point, etc.).

It would make the game more realistic, more interesting, and more fun.

I found random players to group with outside the game no problem now I'm enjoying the game a lot more.and made some online friends at the same time.

[DrHellNo 11]

I guess someone has to bite the bullet...

A sandbox game is developed with the player in mind in an attempt to create an experience that has features that the player can utilize to make his/her own decisions. Having PvE is not a required component of a sandbox, it is a feature designed for a specific user experience. In this case, the intended experience is focused on player interaction.

Exactly, I also want to add that the devs have said the game isn't meant for private (or self-contained) experiences, and that is exactly what a PvE DayZ would be. You and your buddies running around, killing glitchy zombies, farming loot and vehicles, all for what? Nothing, because without player interaction from players other than your own group you are missing out entirely on what the devs want to accomplish with this project.

[XenoSententia 11]

Xeno, you are making a poor argument. A smart company doesn't just try to snatch up every piece of business as possible. It isn't that narrow. There's a lot more to it than that.

Besides, Bohemia is SWIMMING in new cash right now. DayZ has EXPLODED sales of Arma II. All this coming from their current game in Alpha. Do you think they want to alienate everyone?

Providing PvP and PvE is not "every piece of business possible". In fact that's a pretty small and realistic goal. I don't think the game is doing poorly or that it will do poorly.

I just don't see a reason why there can't be something for everyone or why a majority of people blindly hate against people like the OP who simply want to play the game their way. Half of the forum posters are just as "ignorant" as they claim the OP is.

Edited July 24, 2012 by XenoSententia

[jay.pis 32]

If OP wants to play on a PvE server he should be allowed to.

The big fat question is...WHY?

Did he give a big fat check to the developers or something?

[jay.pis 32]

Fry's now has a ladies perfume section as well as a small desserts section. And how is that irrelevant?.

Oh wow, ladies perfume and a starbucks...great, now EVERYONE will flock to Fry's and they'll make TONS more! :thumbsup:

Obviously they have that so that girlfriends and wives have a place to hang out at and refreshments for kids so they don't bother the guys. :D

Edited July 24, 2012 by jay.pis

[Klu 20]

I just don't see a reason why there can't be something for everyone

Then start seeing it. There can't be something for everyone. That statement is immature and uneducated. There can NOT be SOMETHING for EVERYONE. That is just a universal truth to LIFE. Apply it to your opinion of gaming.

If you want PvE there are a LOT of games out there that are better suited. DayZ doesn't have to be turned into something it's not to satisfy the few who just don't get it.

[orb917@hotmail.com 117]

trying to get people away from the usual, comfortable, safe and unchanging format that all games have fallen into over the years really is like trying to wean people off of heroin.

instead of complaining about the rampant pvp, players should do something to fight it. here's a relevant quote regarding this topic since it's been discussed to death here:

"The bad guys are doing way fucking better at this game than the good guys. Because the good guys keep coming on the forums to post how the bad guys win."

http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/6487-wtf-is-happening-to-the-server-community/page__st__40#entry67159

one guy has tried to initiate a police force, not sure how it's going but here's the link for those of you who want to actually keep in the spirit of the game and allow the players to shape the world in game instead of relying on EA/Blizzard style balancing:

http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/37328-rocket-said-its-up-to-the-players-to-do-something-about-bandits/#entry354755

[Swineflew 480]

Providing PvP and PvE is not "every piece of business possible". In fact that's a pretty small and realistic goal. I don't think the game is doing poorly or that it will do poorly.

I just don't see a reason why there can't be something for everyone or why a majority of people blindly hate against people like the OP who simply want to play the game their way. Half of the forum posters are just as "ignorant" as they claim the OP is.

So many games have restrictions, or player help, or a safe zone, or ways to have your hand held. This game doesn't have that and people LOVE IT.

I can't understand why people think that a game developer should cater to them. The developers have a vision for the game, and they make the game in accordance to that, a true tragedy is when a game is changed purely for profits so that it caters to the masses and everyone is safe and gets items handed to them.

[robciviccrx 28]

Yea because zombies are really hard to kill and/or dodge and survival is a serious pain its not as if you can just go to a lake/field to get food and drink, or a handy store full of it...