Stop Adding Things and Fix The Game

[zak757 146]

Here is a suggestion I have.

DayZ is in Alpha right now. The point of any Alpha is to get the core of the game working, move to the beta and fix all minor issues and make some changes such as balancing, THEN the full version is ready and you begin adding things.

We are getting trivial things like temperature, infections and antibiotics, dogs soon. We are also getting terrible server desync, zombies clipping through walls, weapons and ammo disappearing, spawning in oceans and forests, inability to join servers, loot not spawning, terrible zombie pathfinding, unplaceable tents, and hacking.

Stop adding things that have little effect on the overall experience of the game, and fix the damn thing first. When ARMA III comes out, I hope to play a fully functioning and working Beta or even Full version that everyone can enjoy. Not having to download 4 different things to bypass "retrying to authenticate" and avoid picking up clothing so I spawn where I last was. I have lost high value rifles and items and died 3 out of 7 times to glitches.

Alpha is for getting the game working. The game does not work. Make the game work, and then begin adding things. Preferably things like incentive to interact with players beyond killing them for no reason at all. Teamwork, robbery, even proper banditry are all gone in favor of a 225km^2 deathmatch.

[Dinnj 4]

http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=3502

[rocket 16567]

Actually, Alpha is for adding features. Beta is for ensuring those features work. There is no point getting the features to work only to break them by adding another feature. The focus at the moment is to add features, ensure enough stability for testing, then add more features.

Once the core features are all added, there will be a feature freeze and then coding begins to address remaining issues.

[unsobill 0]

rocket, you doing everything right man.

there is the reason you are successful in what you do, ignore small people talking and don't let it affect your work.

we love you dude

[bjarnidk 9]

rocket' date=' you doing everything right man.

there is the reason you are successful in what you do, ignore small people talking and don't let it affect your work.

we love you dude

[/quote']

I respect rockets work just as much as the next guy but comments like this make me cringe real fucking hard.

This sort of fanboyism is just too much. The OP is not ''small people''. He was just addressing his concerns in hope of either enlightening rocket with his opinion or getting more views on his issues.

[rocksicles 0]

seriously, yall need to get a fucking job.

[eblis 0]

People need to stop joining alpha testing and expect a bug free/optimised project, that is what final release is for. If you don't want to be part of the project and help Rocket develop it by testing out new features and fix bugs then please do not play and wait for the final release.

A lot of us love the game so far and are very happy with the way the project is going. We do not want to see it changed because people do not understand the term alpha and expect to be playing the full game that they believe they "paid" for.

[sqpantz 0]

I myself was wondering why the numerous functionality problems are seemingly ignored while trivial things like bicycles are being added. Thankfully Rocket is communicating with the community through posts like these. Thanks to OP for voicing his opinion and thanks to Rocket for enlightening me on how shit works. :cool:

[Disgraced 1123]

rocket' date=' you doing everything right man.

there is the reason you are successful in what you do, ignore small people talking and don't let it affect your work.

we love you dude

[/quote']

I respect rockets work just as much as the next guy but comments like this make me cringe real fucking hard.

This sort of fanboyism is just too much. The OP is not ''small people''. He was just addressing his concerns in hope of either enlightening rocket with his opinion or getting more views on his issues.

You are, however, incorrect. Rocket is, of course, exactly right.

This is a person who wants a stable game experience and is not going to get it.. People constantly saying "alpha, alpha!" might be annoying, but they are right. This is not a release game. It is an ongoing experiment. Don't ask for your stuff back. Don't ask to be moved back to your old location. Don't ask for anything. Play as you can. Check the forums when you run into bugs. If theyre already being discussed, leave it alone. If not, post a thread. That's it.

People keep acting like this should be or be striving toward a release model and it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

[Nekosan 20]

He wasn't implying Rocket was wrong, he was implying that blatant fanboi "balls in mouth" syndrome doesn't help at all, saying "rocket you're 100% right man, ignore everyone" is the exact opposite mentality to the one that lead to there being a "suggestions" forum in the first place.

If you don't like people's opinions on features (even if they're blatantly wrong) then stay the hell out of the suggestions forum, I'm sure you can make threads praising Rocket in the general section or something.

[unsobill 0]

ah just shut the fuck up and drink some cool-aid,

if any of you get offended by love for rocket then grab your fuking emotional baggage and get the fuck out with your pillows filled with delicious tears.

[pogoman979 4]

Actually' date=' Alpha is for adding features. Beta is for ensuring those features work. There is no point getting the features to work only to break them by adding another feature. The focus at the moment is to add features, ensure enough stability for testing, then add more features.

Once the core features are all added, there will be a feature freeze and then coding begins to address remaining issues.

[/quote']

But what if the features you add are only implemented because other core features are broken? Something might seem like a good addition simply because it is compensating for another feature that is broken and has left a glaring hole in the gameplay. i.e. zombies/infected aren't a threat due to stopping to attack and walking indoors, which makes the game too easy which causes deathmatching and so everyone suggests multitudes of trivial features to fix the surface/most apparent issues, and ignores what's actually causing them.

Basically one root problem sometimes causes so many issues that it is better to fix it before adding stuff that might become redundant upon the resolution of that issue.

[dale0404 16]

If more people could get their heads around the fact that we are the guinea pigs then the forums would be less cluttered with shite.

[rocket 16567]

But what if the features you add are only implemented because other core features are broken?

This is an Alpha of a mod, not an Alpha of a game. As such, anything that requires the change to the engine is out of the scope of the project unless, as you identified, a "feature" can be identified to get around the issue.

I could simply stop development until the engine is changed, but that would be rather arrogant of me - ArmA2 is a military shooter, it was designed as such with specific requirements in mind. It was not designed for suvival / zombie shooting. Changes to accommodate DayZ are made as they are for other mods such as ACE and ACRE but like them it is also limited in its scope.

[malice42 4]

But what if the features you add are only implemented because other core features are broken?

This is an Alpha of a mod' date=' not an Alpha of a game. As such, anything that requires the change to the engine is out of the scope of the project unless, as you identified, a "feature" can be identified to get around the issue.

I could simply stop development until the engine is changed, but that would be rather arrogant of me - ArmA2 is a military shooter, it was designed as such with specific requirements in mind. It was not designed for suvival / zombie shooting. Changes to accommodate DayZ are made as they are for other mods such as ACE and ACRE but like them it is also limited in its scope.

[/quote']

Will you be working full time on the mod, as the "PCGamer" article reported, Rocket? If so, the scope of what you could possibly do within a limited amount of time would certainly be greater than if you still had obligations to Arma 3.

[Skeffington 1]

I hope beta isn't for ARMAIII. Ever since being spoiled with steam, paying $60 is too much.

[underscore 12]

Actually' date=' Alpha is for adding features. Beta is for ensuring those features work. There is no point getting the features to work only to break them by adding another feature. The focus at the moment is to add features, ensure enough stability for testing, then add more features.

Once the core features are all added, there will be a feature freeze and then coding begins to address remaining issues.

[/quote']

Nice philosophy. It's like building a house knowing that the foundation and other essentials are fucked up and yet adding more and more floors and rooms willy-nilly. "Just as long as the whole thing doesn't completely collapse, we're good. We'll go back and fix it all later." Then you get into beta and the entire place is such a convoluited mess that you spend countless hours just trying to figure out where to begin the repairs on any given problem. Nevermind the inevitable moment when you realize that a certain issue on the 5th floor can't be fixed without tearing out all the floors beneath it and then rebuilding the foundations. Of course, time and cost prohibit any such restructuring by this point, so you're screwed.

Is this really how they teach software design? Explains a great deal about the state of this industry and its products. No wonder consumers are continually inundated with bug-riddled POS bloatware that won't work properly years after release.

[Domo209 0]

Its alpha, its not going to be finished until ARMA 3 comes out, or it becomes a standalone.

thats a far thing from now

also for a alpha, its surprisingly resilent, ive seen games with less features with smaller maps break MUCH worse in alpha stages that this game

sure are the desynchs bad?

always

are the zombies bugging out through walls bad?

yeah

but do you really expect a end product in a mod that hasnt even been around that long?

[Azrail (DayZ) 211]

it really makes me wonder how bad commercial games are these days, when a beta version of a sim, together with an alpha test of a mod, makes more fun and has less gamebreaking problems.

hats off to that.

[thebigJ_A 0]

Actually' date=' Alpha is for adding features. Beta is for ensuring those features work. There is no point getting the features to work only to break them by adding another feature. The focus at the moment is to add features, ensure enough stability for testing, then add more features.

Once the core features are all added, there will be a feature freeze and then coding begins to address remaining issues.

[/quote']

Nice philosophy. It's like building a house knowing that the foundation and other essentials are fucked up and yet adding more and more floors and rooms willy-nilly. "Just as long as the whole thing doesn't completely collapse, we're good. We'll go back and fix it all later." Then you get into beta and the entire place is such a convoluited mess that you spend countless hours just trying to figure out where to begin the repairs on any given problem. Nevermind the inevitable moment when you realize that a certain issue on the 5th floor can't be fixed without tearing out all the floors beneath it and then rebuilding the foundations. Of course, time and cost prohibit any such restructuring by this point, so you're screwed.

Is this really how they teach software design? Explains a great deal about the state of this industry and its products. No wonder consumers are continually inundated with bug-riddled POS bloatware that won't work properly years after release.

It's not a 'philosophy', it's a fact. He's telling the OP what an alpha is. This is how games are made. Because, you know, games aren't buildings.

If you have a problem with the fundamental structure of game design, go found a company, come up with some new way to do it, ignoring all the lessons of the last three decades, and let us know how it works out for you.

Man, I hate it when people argue from ignorance.

[legwiz 0]

Actually' date=' Alpha is for adding features. Beta is for ensuring those features work. There is no point getting the features to work only to break them by adding another feature. The focus at the moment is to add features, ensure enough stability for testing, then add more features.

Once the core features are all added, there will be a feature freeze and then coding begins to address remaining issues.

[/quote']

Nice philosophy. It's like building a house knowing that the foundation and other essentials are fucked up and yet adding more and more floors and rooms willy-nilly. "Just as long as the whole thing doesn't completely collapse, we're good. We'll go back and fix it all later." Then you get into beta and the entire place is such a convoluited mess that you spend countless hours just trying to figure out where to begin the repairs on any given problem. Nevermind the inevitable moment when you realize that a certain issue on the 5th floor can't be fixed without tearing out all the floors beneath it and then rebuilding the foundations. Of course, time and cost prohibit any such restructuring by this point, so you're screwed.

Is this really how they teach software design? Explains a great deal about the state of this industry and its products. No wonder consumers are continually inundated with bug-riddled POS bloatware that won't work properly years after release.

It's not a 'philosophy', it's a fact. He's telling the OP what an alpha is. This is how games are made. Because, you know, games aren't buildings.

If you have a problem with the fundamental structure of game design, go found a company, come up with some new way to do it, ignoring all the lessons of the last three decades, and let us know how it works out for you.

Man, I hate it when people argue from ignorance.

Can somebody explain to me why new content masses the current one? I mean, the code that is fixed, should stay this way. New features are exactly what the names says to me, it's something new, that interacts with the environment in general, but aside.

And calm down, the guy did realize the game is in alpha (how could he not? it's almost a war shout 'round here), he just questioned the focus things are getting on the development.

[thebigJ_A 0]

Actually' date=' Alpha is for adding features. Beta is for ensuring those features work. There is no point getting the features to work only to break them by adding another feature. The focus at the moment is to add features, ensure enough stability for testing, then add more features.

Once the core features are all added, there will be a feature freeze and then coding begins to address remaining issues.

[/quote']

Nice philosophy. It's like building a house knowing that the foundation and other essentials are fucked up and yet adding more and more floors and rooms willy-nilly. "Just as long as the whole thing doesn't completely collapse, we're good. We'll go back and fix it all later." Then you get into beta and the entire place is such a convoluited mess that you spend countless hours just trying to figure out where to begin the repairs on any given problem. Nevermind the inevitable moment when you realize that a certain issue on the 5th floor can't be fixed without tearing out all the floors beneath it and then rebuilding the foundations. Of course, time and cost prohibit any such restructuring by this point, so you're screwed.

Is this really how they teach software design? Explains a great deal about the state of this industry and its products. No wonder consumers are continually inundated with bug-riddled POS bloatware that won't work properly years after release.

It's not a 'philosophy', it's a fact. He's telling the OP what an alpha is. This is how games are made. Because, you know, games aren't buildings.

If you have a problem with the fundamental structure of game design, go found a company, come up with some new way to do it, ignoring all the lessons of the last three decades, and let us know how it works out for you.

Man, I hate it when people argue from ignorance.

Can somebody explain to me why new content masses the current one? I mean, the code that is fixed, should stay this way. New features are exactly what the names says to me, it's something new, that interacts with the environment in general, but aside.

And calm down, the guy did realize the game is in alpha (how could he not? it's almost a war shout 'round here), he just questioned the focus things are getting on the development.

Code is complicated and interconnected. You add something new, it's NOT 'aside', and may break something else that seems unrelated.

I'm not sure who you're telling to calm down, or why. The OP didn't know what an alpha was, rocket set him straight. The guy I replied to was just flat out misunderstanding and misrepresenting how games are made. Neither of those have any connection to your statement, so...

[liquidje 38]

Can somebody explain to me why new content masses the current one? I mean' date=' the code that is fixed, should stay this way. New features are exactly what the names says to me, it's something new, that interacts with the environment in general, but aside.

[/quote']

That's not how it works, a new feature would interact with different systems/engines in the game, and since these engines are centrally for the whole game, they can (in potential) affect the whole game. This can be both pure technical (inducing bugs) or a balancing issue. For example, hacking/exploiting opportunities are opened as features are added.

In comparison, you can better compare it with designing something. If you design something, you also look how small things affect the whole, and if you have a complete design you build it. When you design a house, you also don't just design a small part, build it, and go over it again. Usually, you design from the system as a whole and zoom in and add the details. See alpha as a design phase, and beta as the engineering/construction phase.

Even still, the above is very common practice in Software Engineering, and has been around for tens of years.

And calm down' date=' the guy did realize the game is in alpha (how could he not? it's almost a war shout 'round here), he just questioned the focus things are getting on the development.

[/quote']

No, he was cursing and raging about the way the mod is developped, while this is common practice in the software industry. He compares it (incorrectly) with building a house, and obviously does not know much about software designing (at least, not as much as he knows about constructing a house).

To be honest, if you don't know anything about something (I’m not talking about you), people will be glad to answer questions or explain things if you are civilized. Calling facts a “philosophy”, while you don’t know crap about the subject, you are better off not saying anything.