IF this was an actual game...

[dooks 1]

Rocket make a paypal account and let us all pay you whatever we feel the mod is worth. I for one would be in for $50.

[Izziee 128]

Shit is gettin serious.

If this was made as a stand alone game' date=' or as part of some particular existing game, what kind of consumer model would you want to play it on?

How would you rather pay for it?

- Game purchase with Monthly fee? (WoW stylez)

- Game purchase only? (Guild Wars stylez)

- Free to play, buy your shit?

- Something else?

Also:

- Community developed or studio developed?

- Community or studio servers? or both?

- Kickstarter? or not?

Please try and stick to short sentences, its much easier for me to get broad feedback.

[/quote']

It completely depends!

I DO NOT EVER want to play a "F2P" game with RMT's. Microtransactions are the absolute SCUM of games, and pay to win is utterly retarded. I think their nothing but a scam and the community that go with it come fully equipped with shit for brains.

I would however happily play a monthly fee so long as there is NO store where you can buy weapons or special items and that the game would constantly have stuff added to them. I do not agree with Blizzards greedyness either, however, CCP's general style of free expansions every summer/winter is great (Eve online, and for a 9 year old game still going strong, something is right here)

In fact, I think you should take a look at how CCP do things, since this game is similar in many social regards. I.E Full of the nice 4 letter C word (Id say it but I don't wish to get banned!) Which, isn't a bad thing. Both games have an "as is" deal with it feel which I quite like and keeps the suspense.

Also, with a monthly fee you could aim for your own dedicated servers holding a larger player base with a larger world (Sorry, it's too small atm for subscriptions)

It would be nice to see an experience based system involved as well. Now, don't shoot me down for this, I absolutely love the perma death and it adds suspence, but something that could be added is a save system. How I envision it to work is something like this.

Player spawns with nothing.

At 100 XP (Low number but just for my own math, obviously the system would be far greater) player gets saved.

At 1000 XP player gets saved

At 10,000 XP player gets saved

HOWEVER. It would need some guidelines, Needing perhaps a tent or whatever.

The reason for this, since it would be subscription based, people enjoy "working for something" and then you can add roles. It would also encourage team work and clans/tribes etc.

Perhaps adding certain professions into the game, such as basic cooking, or woodworking. It would suck to say get these to max then die. Things like this would allow the character to learn and be wanted by a community allowing them to set up camp sites or even take over areas and build a stronghold. Having gunsmiths means you can implement broken weapons and weapon parts, which in turn allows for greater objects to find, leather workers could create rucksacks and armour (Mad max style!) possibly bandages etc.

However, to keep the whole risk vs reward scenario in it, the more you learn the more experience needed to save your character, so having a high end character would need an absolute gigantic amount of experience before their character saves, so after gathering all your materials to "level up" your profession and getting it near max to that level, and dying and losing it all would be more painful than just losing some gear and going to X location and finding it again. It would encourage team work to go out on raids a lot more, since the danger is there.

There doesn't need to be an end level either. For example, you've just reached 1 million experience and had your character saved, now you can work to create some of the rarest items in the game, but it would require A LOT of work, and, the down side is, these items can only be created at a very high level and you've hit the last save point. Reason for this is so that even end game characters have A LOT to lose.

I hope that makes sense, it's kinda coming from the top of my head.

I'd also like to see a decent engine involved, something like frostbite, where you can shape the terrain.

Obviously being a subscription you'd have to keep creating new land, but the larger the world, the more people can shape it their own. A secluded tribe waaay out surviving? or a simple nomad exploring.

You can add perks to a character, maybe not as indepth as a whole class based system but something like having choice as say, a bandit, which gives you a slightly higher damage increase while working with your clan, or a nomad which gives you a higher chance at getting meat from an animal, or leather from skinning. A survivor can get a bonus against bandits and a medic for healing with bandages (very rough ideas just thrown out). It would be good to add a punishment system where you lose experience or some kind of debuff / karma system for killing a good/bad guy. I.E if a survivor kills another survivor then they get a punishment, and likewise if a bandit kills another bandit, but not against the opposite, thus having the danger aspect still involved that anyone can if they wanted, kill anyone, but also adding some teamwork.

I'd love to see it as a standalone game with a different engine and myself, wouldn't mind a subscription, as long as its NOT pay to win. Subscriptions meaning the fact that it can be a bigger world with more people and dedicated servers. You could even have a starter area where it's free to play but subscription required beyond those boarders, but that's edging towards pay to win and I'm still not so fond on that.

---

No monthly fee you'll lose ALOT of players if you make such choice including myself. I don't think monthly fee is required to keep the servers running it's not a MMO.

O'rly?

He'll lose A LOT of players currently not paying anything? A lot of these players who cry and demand things and threaten to quit if they don't happen regardless of not paying anything?

You know what, who cares? He makes no money from you. Put a monthly subscription in and have some proper advertisement and you'll get a TON of people signing up and actually giving him money. These people would care more about the game they play and realise what it is they've bought and paying (if their intelligent enough to do research) so you won't have as many whiners demanding to change the key aspects of it. Yes, you'll get whines and what not, but none of this "let me play on a server where I can't get shot!" crap.

There would also be a higher group of responsible people, since there's a fee. Not so many idiotic kids anyway. Yes, mummy and daddy will pay for some of their accounts, but it would at least cut down on them. I don't wish to say the CoD Kiddies who got this for a small fee once and don't have to worry about it, but yeah.

[jafit 0]

I'd prefer it were an MMO, single unsharded world, or us/eu servers, very big map. That way you can actually have persistent character inventory without having to worry about the metagaming that is possible with having so many servers

Monthly subscription.

Independently developed because I think that a big studio will be too tempted to turn it into hello kitty zombie adventure, scaling back the hardcore PvP in favor of pleasing anti PvP whiners

[disastersoldier 8]

Yeah kickstarters for sure. And buy once only game. Because if you can buy equipment etc. it's unfair between poor and rich people.....

[nashable 45]

It comes down to this.

Rocket - If you want to control how the game is ran operationally you're going to need your own servers and that upkeep is probably going to need subs at some level.

If you want the community to host and mod in the way ArmA has been then release it as a standalone game. You could get away with this if there were only a few 'Official' servers ran by BIS and then the community hosted more but it would need some incentive for server hosts as we're seeing some tension in just this alpha. Also the BF3 backlash after their botched launch of 'licensed' servers.

[karasu (DayZ) 0]

Game purchase only. (I'd never pay for a subscription service' date=' and F2P with purchased items is purely imbal.)

Studio developed. (Professional. There's no need to involve a community in the development process.)

Kickstarter. (Extra cash on the side never hurt.)

(Super excited to hear that it's gettin' serious, you deserve it entirely. :D)

[/quote']

This ^

[unknown..2..u 0]

I would buy it as an expansion of Arma3 when finished or as a stand alone if there was around 50% more content within the game world (more shit to do apart from kill each-other).

one time purchase.

Studio developed.

No kick-starts.

DLC of new map and weapons, maybe even era (WW2/cold war 1960's or 70's).

One sniff of micro transactions and i wont play it because i can't afford it, unless it's free and we don't get too much of a disadvantage and could get the same shit if we grind for it.

[OPnepo 0]

My two cents

I would prefer a one time purchase of the game. It would be neat if it was DLC for Arma 3. I like the current development process but any process that lets you finish your idea of the game is acceptable. As far as funding goes anything that allows you the most flexibility with game development so probably kickstarter.

[Maderas 12]

Blunt honesty? I wouldn't even consider paying a subscription fee for Day Z unless it was significantly, significantly expanded (I'm talking in the neighborhood of about 1000% more content and map size than what we've got now with Chernarus) and even then it's unlikely.

I paid $30 for ARMA 2 specifically to play this mod, so I wouldn't mind buying a box. But a subscription fee on top of that? Nope. If big budget MMOs like Guild Wars 2 and PlanetSide 2 are adopting free to play models there's no reason something like Day Z should require a sub. There are plenty of people willing to host servers themselves, I don't see why I should pay for 'official' ones.

[Crooze 0]

Please no F2P, I don't have an issue with subscription or just a purchase.

I would support a Kickstarter.

And I dunno if you should trust the community that much, but I don't really care either way.

[detonate 0]

Game purchase only

Kickstarter

Community servers

[Robert-_-Frost 13]

Eh I would quit playing if the game became a subscription type game and on the question on how to fund the servers it's an easy solution just put advertisments in when logging in to a server garanteed to turn it into a continually money making machine without any cost to me. :)

[HanoverFist 64]

How would you rather pay for it?

- Game purchase with Monthly fee? (WoW stylez) No thanks

- Game purchase only? (Guild Wars stylez) Yes this, Game Purchase only.

- Free to play, buy your shit? No thanks

- Something else? No thanks

Also:

- Community developed or studio developed? Studio

- Community or studio servers? or both? Both

- Kickstarter? or not? No opinion

Edited July 15, 2012 by HanoverFist

[gizm0 96]

- Game purchase only

- Mix of both? no publisher influence

- both

- Kickstarter

[Notchy44 1]

-Game purchase

-Kickstarter.

ILY rocket!

[pred@tor 26]

game purchase only... I think its dumb to pay monthly to play a game... Let alone for this free to play idea sounds absolutely horrible buying digital items for a game? No thanks...

[expendable (DayZ) 6]

Game purchase only. I hate the f2p models. I rather just give you all my money up front then nickel and diming me. If the game went that style, I'm done playing.

[noodlemaker622@gmail.com 5]

Game purchase only.

Studio Developed.

Kickstarter.

[tacticaljim 28]

Rocket had already stated that he wants a minecraft model.

Also, don't count on any subscription being needed since the servers will always be community ran.

Edited July 15, 2012 by TacticalJim

[DarkRaven123 602]

Definitely single pay.

Why? Because I have a feeling if you force subscription you would send the community down the hole. A lot of the people on here have happily bought Arma II simply to play this game.

Studio produced. Within reason - I know that a lot of game publishers like to get heavily involved and can easily corrupt the original idea. (See : Diablo 3)

We want this game to be the best it can be, but we want it to be YOUR vision, not some CEO faggot's (See : Robert Kotick) wet dream of in-game micro transactions and constant pay for DLC.

I'm sure even if you looked for a publisher's backing for a stand alone (Which you would find easily as well), the community as whole would still be happy for you to set up a Kick Starter, so we can feel that this is OUR game as well, as you have said you want it to be.

E:

Also, community servers. With LAN functionality. You will make a large portion of the people on the fence BECAUSE it doesn't have LAN, happy.

Edited July 15, 2012 by DarkRaven123

[robo (DayZ) 7]

Keep it in the community, single purchase, hire devs and keep it small.

If you kickstart then keep your goal low enough to hire devs and staff but not so much that you have no incentives to finish.

Just please keep the community involved and keep the iterative dev cycle. Have a stable live branch and testing branch.

This game will never work in a design by committee studio environment overseen by accountants.

Good Luck!!!

-robo

[Seldrad88 1]

I'd go with one-time game purchase, no subscription.

Professional studio.

Kickstarter? Sure, why not.

[Necrofix 16]

- Community developed or studio developed?

Community, I feel that most mod that make it big allow the community to add stuff to the game. You need to allow people to make content. If that is waht you mean.

- Community or studio servers?

You could have both, Studio server would use the "standard" rule set and would be ranked while the community servers could do what they want

- Kickstarter?

Sure if you allow people that gave you 20$ the game.

[Hendrix27 54]

- Game purchase only (no micro transactions or monthly fee)

- Studio developed (with some community interaction)

- Kickstarter (with enough info on planned features & stuff like that!)

Edited July 15, 2012 by Hendrix27

[zq7 67]

- Game purchase only? (Guild Wars stylez)

Not sure why you are just comparing to MMORGP's when it's a milsim/fps. If you look at most FPS they are almost all game purchase only (CoD has it's elite/premium package, that is the only one I could think of that has a monthly/yearly subscription).

Free2play = pay2win, everyone knows this.

Also:

- Community developed or studio developed?

Don't see why this can't be both, involve the community as much as possible (free workforce ftw?) while having a studio develop it. We all know the horror stories when studios get handed a great concept and they just completely fuck it up by not listening to the community. I think this partly explains why this game is growing by leaps and bounds.

- Community or studio servers? or both?

Both, if possible.

- Kickstarter? or not?

Completely up you, I don't see how this is going affect the game development.

IMO, you guys should take things slowly. You've got a great thing going here and rushing into something new and exciting might not be the best plan. Take your time, evaluate the scenario at every step of the way and make sure you are making the product that you (and the community around you) want to make and not some studio exec or anyone else.