WTF is happening to the server community.

[Jugg 33]

Hey rocket. Here's a mechanic.

Player deaths multiply zombies spawn numbers in x hundred meters/kilometres for X hours. 1 or 2 people die? No worries. Death match occurs? Prepare for zombie infestation of a zone.

I don't care how its justified. They can come from the smell of rotting corpse, or the sound of gunshots. Either way it makes sense and doesn't FORCE players in or out of a decision.

[Mutonizer 78]

Much of this "meta-game support stuff" is really complex, and I was only planning it for the later stage of Alpha. But I will have a look at see what I can put in for the next update.

Yep...that's gonna be the meat you talked about previously I suppose and it's gonna be a whole lot harder than adding temperature and drink/food or alter spawns. But in order for people who want to survive, to look beyond surviving, and therefore group up because it's more beneficial, it's needed at some point.

However, don't burn down under the load. Do your stuff, in the order you want, how you want it, even if 90% of the people here end up leaving and hating you, what do you care? It's not like you owe us anything anyway. As you said previously, this isn't a game, it's an experiment.

[Hesher (DayZ) 2]

Rocket, respect for not being an asshole, you're the first dev I know that is sane and passionate about his work, ok enough buttlicking, I actually have a suggestion of sorts, it maybe bit off topic, but since you are following this thread I'll just write it here.

The idea is simple, the forum is overrun with threads and suggestions and I understand it could be quite a hussle going through all of it, trying to pick out usefull stuff among all the whining and shit. I think you can actually delegate some of this work(filtering out good ideas/suggestions) to a group of forum members or whoever you might see fit doing it, so they can present and refine a grain of sanity sometimes found on this forums, let them present a list of ideas/suggestions to look through, to spare some time and frustration and speed up the whole process.

For example you can tell us at glance what could be realistically implemented immediately and things that are far away, so instead of just throwing ideas around that are far off, you could tell us what is more important at this very moment and let people brainstorm something specific you're are currently working on or about to implement and give us kind of priority list of features in some order so we can be of some help. Something along the "Dr. House" kind of teamwork.

The general idea is to make the whole process more effective and organized.

[sherlock (DayZ) 31]

The feeling of exhaustion after reading almost the entire thread is undeniable and you won't feel better if you make it through this post ;). Even after Rocket’s pledge for non-circular arguments there are still too many being made. So here is my attempt at a factual analysis of the situation, I will deliberately try to leave out any personal sentiment.

The player-killing is an important facet of the game. No one seems to deny that a lot of the tension and excitement comes from the threat that this aspect poses.

In order to attempt to solve any problem with the game, either by making changes to it or by changing the way the players interact with it, we need to find the reasons for it.

The decreasing life expectancy seems to support the claim that there is a lot more pvp happening. What are the possible reasons?

1) More people play the game. The more people that interact within the same space the likelier it is that they will run across each other and interact (either by cooperation, flight or fight)

2) Incentives or lack thereof to behave in a realistic way (these are gameplay related).

3) Limitations of software. (will be related with 4) )

4) How people play the game. How do they approach a situation? What is there risk reward assessment? How do they interact with people in the game?

Discussion of those 4 possible reasons.

1) It is relatively save to say that this point can be dismissed since servers were quite full even in the early days of DayZ and the supported player count on Servers is for the vast majority 40 and hasn’t changed.

2) This point and point 3) are closely linked together. It is up to a game designer how closely he attempts to recreate reality (gameplay wise not visually) but he/she does always know that it is impossible to recreate it accurately. For the moment DayZ still features a sort of morality system that incentives morally “right” behaviour.

The supporters claim that it adds to the realism since no human being woud just turn into a ruthless killer gunning down everything that moves. The incentive “not wanting to be a bandit”, that this system creates, mimics in a limited way, the way how the human psyche would oppose any kind of murder that wasn’t aimed at self-preservation. Any killing that was not provoked by hostile actions of the other party cannot be classed as an act of self-preservation since all other factors that might support that claim are out of the equations. By other factors I mean water, food and shelter, since there is enough in Chernarus for everyone.

The people opposing the morality system rightfully argue that identification by appearance seems unrealistic and that the ramifications of becoming a bandit (for whatever reason) seem too harsh. While the aspect of unrealistically reflected “karma” is easier to grasp, it is no more valid than the claim by the supporters.

The system as it is now seems flawed since once someone becomes a bandit (even by “self-defence”) they face hostility in most cases because there are no negative side effects to shooting a bandit from a strategically superior position (ambush). If anything shooting an unsuspecting bandit yields only rewards in the form of loot. This and the fact that they are automatically perceived as untrustworthy severely limits their possibilities of interacting with survivors in a non-hostile way and forces them more into the “bandit-direction”, which in turn might contribute to the increase in pvp.

Furthermore the current system can be exploited. Just because someone has a survivor skin doesn’t mean he’s more trustworthy.

Possible solutions

2) a) Any killing that didn’t result from self-defence (self-defence mechanic is already implemented but could be (if technically possible) be improved) will result in a fixed amount of negative humanity (starting value for humanity: 100, killing a survivor: -130, killing a bandit:-110). Humanity will regenerate slowly (+1/min) (skin switch/class switch at 0). No other options to regain humanity (for the fear of exploitations).

2) b) Removing the skins. This will remove the hostilities towards bandits by survivors and might cause some to start cooperating with survivors again to reach higher goals (for example fixing a chopper and fleeing this zombie infested hell-hole ;) ). Anyone concerned that this might make the situation worse has to realise that there are other ways to judge whether someone is out to get you or not. For instance survivors opt for weapons that are well suited to defend against zombies (that’s why the winny was/is so popular). Bandits who want to get you might chose a different weapon (a cz is a very poor choice against zombies ;) ).

With the change of removing the skin, it might be interesting to make the weapons suit a more distinctive role (terribly loud sniper and long range rifles for hunting humans that do less damage against zombies and short ranged more silent weapons that do well against zombies (pistols, smgs, shotguns), but less damage against humans).

3)&4) Software is never going to be able to recreate the reality. I remember when I had to handle a loaded gun for the first time in the military, I had a huge respect for that thing – I was scared.

So how much reality do we want in a game? The exciting and not the frightening part of course (in the end it should entertain us). On this front I think Arma 2 and DayZ do a good job of striking a balance. DayZ evokes strong emotions (also seen in this thread ;) ) and proves to do a better job in this regard than most games since people care to formulate arguments to support their views (in comparison to other forums I don’t see a lot of whining). So, there doesn’t seem to be anything wrong with how the bare bone mechanics of Arma go about the realism aspect (be aware that I exclude the “morality”-system here).

Arma however has a few bugs (constantly being fixed by an amazingly cooperative and dedicated team at bohemia). The biggest problem I see is the chat system. The fact that it didn’t work (with beta-patch it does) might have contributed to the pvp-problematic. Direct communication over VOIP is what you would use if you meet someone in game to get into contact. If it doesn’t work you’ll have to resort to chatting in the side channel. This has a number of disadvantages:

-You’re hesitant to use it, since everyone can read it and might deduce where you are putting you in more danger

-While you write you lose control of your character.

-You could miss important chat messages because you’re focused on something else or they get either buried in random chatter or server messages.

This situation did create a (arguable) negative side effect: the community reacted to those short comings by using proprietary software (ts, ventrillo, skype, steamchat). Now how is this a negative thing?

If you read through this forums you’ll see a lot of advice for surviving that suggest joining a clan and playing with friends on ts and trusting no one outside of those groups. This removes player interaction within the game since everyone not on ts, is not trustworthy. Why? Being able to talk to someone is a higher level of communication than chatting (anyone trying to pull off sarcasm over chat will know that ;) ) and evokes a higher sense of security around the person you’re talking with. You’ll also be a lot more hesitant to betray that person.

PR:A2 is another example of this. A lot of people resort to using ts exclusively leaving other players on the sideline. The game however is a lot more engaging if you play it the way it is intended (with ingame voip) since the enemy can hear you if he’s standing next to you. And the usage of TS could be considered as borderline cheating since it gives the player groups within the same TS channel an unfair advantage over those that communicate in the game.

The fix for this will be the next patch for arma 2, put it will need a lot of commitment from us (the players) to get it right and not just stay with ts but force ourselves to use direct Voip to give everyone the same chance to interact if they choose to do so. This will also address the trust problem over chat, since you’re unlikely to switch out cooking recipes over Voip with someone you’re planning to stab in the back ;).

4) The players choice to try and kill another player is dependant on his risk-reward-assessment. In most cases a player will chose to open fire on another player when he feels that he’s in a superior position (strategically or just on a weapon level). It could be that the risk-reward-relationship is flawed in this situation (either by gamedesign or by player choice). So there are three set screws that we can alter:

-increase the negative effect if it goes wrong

-decrease the rewards of killing someone

-increase the benefits of cooperation

In conclusion the 8 things that can improve the situation:

Things the DayZ-developers can look at:

-revising the humanity system

-removing the skins (and giving guns more distinctive roles)

-introduce machanics that promote cooperation and teamplay

-altering the risk-reward-relation

Things that the players can do:

-Use direct VOIP (either now by playing with the beta patch or later with the official patch)

-Don’t be lazy and choose the more convenient proprietary solutions to talk to just the people you know

-Be aware that you’re distorting the game mechanics and create an unfair advantage for yourself by talking over ts exclusively. This will create a suction effect with more people not willing to communicate over VOIP since they might be heard by a group on ts that they cannot hear.

-Be aware of your in-game stance. If you’re looking at a player directly, your gun will be pointing at his head and it’s a hard thing to expect him/her to trust you. Lower your rifle (double-tab CTRL) or use ALT to free-look and face him without pointing your gun in his/her face.

-Play this mod as it is intended: as an experiment. Play it how you want within the parameters of the mod. The fun thing is we don’t know what happens in the experiment because if we did, it would defeat the point of experimentation. Keep an open mind. I too have some reservations about some changes, but it’s going to be fun to see how wrong or right I was in hindsight. And if it goes terribly wrong it can always be undone.

Sorry for the long post ;)

[underscore 12]

I'm really liking the idea that someone else mentioned that there could be a delay before respawning which is longer if your humanity is low.

Yeah, me too. The more I think on this one, the more I like it. We really ought to try this out. Like you say, it may be a game-y mechanic but so are respawns. Lock people out for, say, 2 hours for every murder they commit and I think we'll see some real interesting behaviours develop. And, yes, I do mean murders, not killing. In other words, bandit kills still don't count against you.

Consider that we can no longer auto-identify bandits by their skins, and you'll realize that taking a life now becomes a serious decision. After all, you'll never be certain whether shooting someone you don't know will cost you respawn time or not. We'd see a lot more stalking, observation, communication and just general sizing up between players.

Also, imagine what happens when you run with a pack. Suddenly there is even less incentive to open fire at everybody you come across. Are you sure you want kill that dude, when you know that afterwards your "buddies" might very well shoot you in the back gambling that you just commited a murder and that now killing you in turn won't incur a respawn penalty? Pure awesome.

Of course, clan buddies can still agree "we're all bandits here, we don't shoot one another", but you know how the saying goes about honour among thieves. Are you going to tell me that some griefer clan dudes aren't going to give into the temptation to pop one another when they KNOW that shooting cousin Billy Bob who's racked up 100+ murders will provide endless streams of sweet, sweet rage-filled tears. More grief and lulz can be had through one such act of betrayal than a thousand newbie kills. My God, just think of all the delicious paranoia and possibilities.

A final note, if this was to be implemented perhaps it would be best if people were given a humanity reset upon death? Otherwise this systen would probably get too onerous. Either way, we could also use more mechanics whereby we gain back humanity by helping others out. And, I'm thinking maybe these mechanics should scale in such a way that a few murders can be undone by good deeds, but the further one sinks into homicide and depravity, the exponentially smaller the possibility of recovering one's humanity?

Actually, I will continue this brainstorm in future posts, but this should be enough to get some creative juices flowing and generate further discussion.

Any thoughts?

[zedqube@gmail.com 3]

I posted an idea for co-op gameplay, check it out.

https://dev-heaven.net/issues/32053

[mehillus 0]

WE GET SWORDS?!?!?!?

--EDIT--

*fail quote on CoD: Skyrim edition remark earlier*

---

--snip--

I've thought about clan tags' date=' different hats, chest emblems and the like, but those would be difficult to work with given the survival setting of the mod. Is there a way to make identifying players selectively? Perhaps players that spend time in proximity would be able to tell one player from their friend?

So, an example would be that I team up with someone, and after some time I can "remember" them. They would show up when aimed at like the softcore tagging we have now (which, I guess would make it redundant, but I kinda wish it wasn't always-on to begin with) but it would only stay for either A) Their lifetime, or B) A couple hours (ish) and would require re-interacting to establish. It would just be a scroll-wheel option really, like the saving tent/vehicle thing.

I'm still working on the idea.

[/quote']

ARMA2 has a Squad Url system, If you ever see a Player named Bladerunner

Join a server, Press P and scroll over him.

With that, some skins give me my Clan/Squad badge on the shoulder, and most of my Vics/Helos have the Badge emblazoned on the sides.

Also puts [*squadabbr.here] after your name in lobby/chat

[frankmanic 0]

Jesus it's like weening someone off herion.

Animals. Apes. Troglodytes. You can't let this shit get to you, man. No respect for the home brew modder these days. You're doing a good job. DayZ is tits fabulous. Keep it up! Some of us know the difference between an Alpha and gold release candidate! We salute you! Whatever you need, never hesitate to ask. And get some freaking sleep, man, the slavering hordes will still be banging at the door when you wake up, as bloodthirsty and incoherent as ever. Try stuffing cotton in your ears. That and some good whiskey, key to a decent night's sleep. Okay. I'm off. You keep on being awesome, and don't take any shit from these creatures.

[FragMonkey 1]

...and add in that when you kill someone it has a chance to destroy some of their gear.

Please don't do this. Full loot pvp is what makes this game unique. Removing that would be a bad decision

[Arnoldio 2]

In short, the players have gone to shit. Its only a deathmatch with snowball effect. Youre better off playing COD, as its the same, with less bugs. Or better, people who came from COD can go back.

[FragMonkey 1]

Keep up the good work Rocket

[inacio 4]

Look' date=' I really want to clarify something. And I hope this doesn't get lost in a whole bunch of endless posts.

[/quote']

Honestly, rocket, your atitude is fantastic.

I really like that you come clean, talk your mind the way you want. Don't ever change.

Everything that grows big will attract a lot of dumb people, and it's gonna make it look like they're the majority - they're not.

[Daimyo21 (DayZ) 6]

Look' date=' I really want to clarify something. And I hope this doesn't get lost in a whole bunch of endless posts. It's not my intention to be a dick, my intention is to engage in a real dialog, real discussions, with people rather than go through some plastic process and appoint a community manager.

Personally, in game development. I have never, ever, seen this work. The game developers don't really listen to the community manager, because he's not in the development team. The community manager is generally there to feed out updates.

Now, there's been some real good discussion here. I've got angry, you've got angry - that's good. Points were made. Now if I wanted to avoid the "rocket is a dick" or "rocket is an arrogant prick" comments I could just as easily not come into the forums, or lock all the things I don't like, or appoint someone to be a "community manager" and then just ignore everything. But I haven't, and I've also chosen to let you all see the real me, flawed, with my tendency to sarcasm and swearing and all.

I can change that, and turn on my super-professional non-swearing, non-sarcastic, ignore-everything-I-don't like mode. But what I really want to do is to try and develop something where the community is deeply engaged with it. That can only happen where I can be me, and that people let me make mistakes, let me say the wrong thing sometimes. I don't expect anyone to be perfect, I think it's only fair that people don't expect me to be perfect either. But I think it is fair to expect me to be able to grow and learn from situations.

[b']So I am going to focus the attention of the next update on some mechanics to provide more expansion for group play. It's clear to me from the discussion here that this is an area we all agree if improved will help steer things away from being a total deathmatch.

What I ask, is that you don't hang on every single minute detail of everything I say and then bash me over the head with it every second, so that I become so scared to post what I am thinking lest someone on reddit thinks I'm a bad person. I would say about 90% of the ideas I ever have are absolutely terrible. The only way I have found to escape this, is by talking to other people about the ideas and then using their feedback to find the 10% that have some merit. If this is how the forums end up, where I'm scared to be myself (resplendent in all my humor) then I will loose the ability to do that.

I totally agree with you rocket. I played so many games where you get the shaft from the community manager or false hope that are suggestions/discussions are being listened to. In Darkfall (an Indie MMO) this was the case. The devs took their direction over the community and now its dead over there. Keep up the good work, Id focus on fixing tents, making them easier to hide, with some way of defending them when your not on (booby traps, AI mercenary guards, etc etc).

[bovine3dom 0]

How about this for a mechanic: communal cooking.

I'd like to see a chef skin added too.

[Arnoldio 2]

One simple thing rocket. Just one, easy to implement.

Respawn time of 12h-24h. That would bring out the harsh and unforgiving part in DayZ and put fear into each and every one of us.

[EpsilonPhoenix 0]

What I ask' date=' is that you don't hang on every single minute detail of everything I say and then bash me over the head with it every second, so that I become so scared to post what I am thinking lest someone on reddit thinks I'm a bad person. I would say about 90% of the ideas I ever have are absolutely terrible. The only way I have found to escape this, is by talking to other people about the ideas and then using their feedback to find the 10% that have some merit. If this is how the forums end up, where I'm scared to be myself (resplendent in all my humor) then I will loose the ability to do that.

[/quote']

I'm shocked people are actually out there bad mouthing you. With the obscenities and nonsense that half of these players fill Global chat with, I don't they they have a leg to stand on by claiming you're being offensive.

[Spedunkle 5]

I got to about page 8, and decided to just post my opinion.

The game is what it is, it's some pixels on the screen. The players are what make the game a GAME. If you didn't have players, you would not have a game, unless you wanted to play Super Stealth Zombie Evader II.

I always run with about 3 people, sometimes 7 or 8. We ALL survive for days on end, our average death is every 13 hours. We even hit up Cherno whenever we want to. It's about teamwork and being smart.

So, you don't need to balance shit, let's have LESS QQ and more PEW PEW.

[Kingllama 18]

People get so bitchy about saying carebear. This game is a rough game deal with it. If i get negative rep cause of it so be it.

[sirfluffkillington 1]

Okay - why don't we adopt a rule in this thread to avoid the circular arguments.

- Post descriptions of mechanics to solve the problem' date=' and I will consider them and we can discuss.

- Post the same complaints we have heard again and again and I've responded too a million times, and I will post sarcastic rude remarks.

[/quote']

I reckon you can sort this by inflicting yet more hardship on those who think they can take this thing on.

Cold.

Temperature drops? If it stays too low for too long you get hypothermia: intial shakes (or none since you stop shivering), then weakness - after a while can't run, can't lift a gun or at least shoot it accurately. Too long like that you go into shock (could just do fall over unconscious) and, shortly after, die.

Thinking of working with what I've seen Arma do, and because being condemned to death will only cause 'oh how boring five minutes then dead' it'd probably be best to make it reversible right until just before the end. Achieved by proximity to warmth (other player sets up fire next to affected player) and/or a direct item (blanket of some sort'd do to keep it simple®. Regaining temp occurs slowly over time, and you're forced prone or sitting for the duration. All else fails, drag the idiot into a house.

Further if you DO recover, congratulations you're infected (current infection mechanic) anyway because that shit compromises your immune system and you're gonna need antibiotics too.

I've gone through this and you get weak as a kitten, very likely to get sick after, but in the interests of something playable it'd be more effective streamlined.

---

Wounding.

Get shot you're in trouble. If you can't do specific to body parts then shaky aim. If you can - legs = welcome to prone, arms = welcome to the shakes when aiming (toned up post-sprint aiming maybe), torso = I hope you like walking 'cos you aren't running anytime soon.

Alter the system so a person can minister to themself to prevent imminent death, but retains the problems (always prone, shakes, never-run) until another player does a 'full heal' using item: medical toolbox (or whatever) like a bloodbag works only on someone else. Will stop all the problems and render the injured fit again.

The reason I've added that item is because you can bandage yourself solo, stick yourself with an auto injector and chug painkillers, but cutting buckshot out of your own back while stemming the blood etc. etc. is, I imagine, a little tricky. You can patch yourself up to live long enough to get help.

If you want to be a total bastard you could add a chance of infection to that altruistic mechanic, meaning lucky patched up gunshot victim now needs, wait for it...antibiotics! After all these are 'survivors', how are they supposed to know that you need to sterilise the scalpel first?

---

I'm trying to think in the framework of: what's already in game, what I've seen/achieved with the base game etc. so this is all I can really manage.

Deathmatch run and gun is easy, and I imagine quite a few folks will choose to keep playing it that way. However, when they then take a bullet and can't walk/aim, or when they freeze to death in the rain they'll quit or adapt. Once communication is local only it'll be even more interesting.

Thing is, are you going to shoot a guy when you meet unexpectedly, knowing full well one shot could shit you right up for a long long time? Even more if word gets out you killed him? Good luck. Equally are you gonna herp derp into cold conditions, when chances are the environment will do you in if you aren't smart?

It takes patience, wits and awareness to survive as a hostile loner for any length of time - those guys will still be there, but the guys being complained about will be eradicated for the most part with the suicidal nature of trying to play 'another generic arena shooter'.

Groups of players are always going to form and kill others. However, lone guys going full derp can be discouraged without coddling the entire playerbase.

Finally you also avoid some black/white morality crap inserted into your work to try and encourage teamplay. Sorry for looooong post.

TLDR: Add even more brutality developing systems already in place, particularly temperature and wounding. DM lonewolfing will wane, lone psychos will stay lone psychos.

[son of eevil 0]

I'm sure this may have been posted before but to promote more group play what if you could elect a spawn point to come back to?

When I play with friends sometimes we'll re spawn 10 times before we get to a place remotely close to each other.

So there're clearly a few spawn areas around what if we could elect the one we come into?

Don't confuse this with a spawn "point" where everyone spawns within 2M of each other but for example in or around the area (within a few K's of) a particular town.

Thoughts?

[tiff_lee 0]

The problem is there is no consequences to your actions, why be nice with others and trade when you could just shoot them and take want you want?

The risk of dying is a non-event really as you will respawn within minutes and once again go on the hunt to rob someone of their gear they spent hours collecting.

[Gogglog4992374 3]

I think this is happening because more and more people have become aware of the weak zombies that struggle to scare anymore. Once the zombies are a real threat, people will be more willing to cooperate!

This is only an alpha so cheer up and wait for the more hardcore zombies that will inevitably be released into the wilderness

[bovine3dom 0]

Respawn time of 12h-24h.

I've been thinking about this overnight. Initially I was against it - you're ruining somebody's day. Then I realised that this is supposed to be the anti-game: this game is all about experiences and emotions. It is not a casual' date=' pick-up-and-play game (for me, at least. I understand that some ACE veterans may feel it is a little too arcadey!).

A respawn time of 12 hours would stop someone from playing the game until the next day. This would make people be much more cautious and they would learn from their mistakes - a whole day to think about why you died. It would totally change the pace of the game. Bandits may finally gain some form of conscience - spoiling someone's evening is more ethically questionable than just stealing their stuff.

24 hours is too long - it could stop you from playing for 2 days due to the way people's free time is structured.

[b']The Lesson; Dear Reader: A 12hr respawn time leads to a realistic pace and less frequent but far more intense firefights.

[tiff_lee 0]

Respawn time of 12h-24h.

I've been thinking about this overnight. Initially I was against it - you're ruining somebody's day. Then I realised that this is supposed to be the anti-game: this game is all about experiences and emotions. It is not a casual' date=' pick-up-and-play game (for me, at least. I understand that some ACE veterans may feel it is a little too arcadey!).

A respawn time of 12 hours would stop someone from playing the game until the next day. This would make people be much more cautious and they would learn from their mistakes - a whole day to think about why you died. It would totally change the pace of the game. Bandits may finally gain some form of conscience - spoiling someone's evening is more ethically questionable than just stealing their stuff.

24 hours is too long - it could stop you from playing for 2 days due to the way people's free time is structured.

[b']The Lesson; Dear Reader: A 12hr respawn time leads to a realistic pace and less frequent but far more intense firefights.

Ah I missed that and I was going to suggest something similar!

A respawn time of 12 hours would be enough to deter the gun ho deathmatch style gameplay or at least you would think so, perhaps it's a bit of an assumption but I would of thought people interested in that would soon get bored having to wait 12 hours before they can go again.

On a similar note with killing regardless as trading actually offers no benefits people may well reconsider, is it worth getting into a gunfight and potentially dying over a tin of baked beans?

[Goldstein (DayZ) 46]

It's a Zombiepocolypse right? The current system is more like The Hunger Games w/ a side serve of Z. Zombie mechanics need to be the focus.

- They need to horde, migrate, genuinely make you shit yourself. They need to be unpredictable. Nowhere should be safe.

- They also need to be kept in check by players. There is and will be no end game, but at the moment the game is frozen in time. If players let the zombies run rampant on a server, they shouldn't be able to access half the places they can until they do something about it. Currently they conveniently euthanise themselves.

Providing context for people to socially interract is a big drawcard, I think that context has disappeared now that we know where everything is and the ins and outs of zombie behaviour. I also believe there is a silent majority that do not have friends that play DayZ, but would like to group up with people on the fly (Without living in the co-op isolation bubble of teamspeak/vent) yet they seemingly can't. The line between forming a group is drawn by who you know. Isn't that the anti-thesis of zombie survival lore?

PvP isn't a problem. It's quite integral to the game actually, but the scales have tipped heavily in its favour and the game risks stagnation.

We're in a sandbox, but all we're doing is throwing sand in eachothers eyes. Screams wasted potential to me.