IF this was an actual game...

[darkshadow120@gmail.com 0]

Free to play, but you can buy stuff. This allows for many people to play the game, but still earning you money through micro transactions.

[astamarr 0]

- Game purchase only, but with a price that increase with time until it get in release version.

You can also find some " buy your shit" , but you probably know that in an hardcore game as DayZ, you shouldn't change any part of the gameplay with irl money. Maybe some metagame parts like the possibility to have more than one char.

Studio developed, but don't forget that we are all behind you and ready to help with any skills we have =D

Kickstarter should be perfect for you, you already have a lots of followers. Even if i already spent 25$ to play dayZ i'll drop some more :angel:

[michael.lerch@hotmail.com 13]

Free to play' date=' but you can buy stuff. This allows for many people to play the game, but still earning you money through micro transactions.

[/quote']

It depends on what we're buying. If you're suggesting the idea of buying weapons and stuff - NO. That is pay to win no matter what they try to do and I would never ever ever support the game if they went that direction. If it is cosmetic stuff.. then definitely, I'll do that. Hats. Lots and lots and lots and lots of hats.

[Gulchi 0]

An expansion for Arma 2/Arma 3.

[Gibbonici 9]

I'd be happy to buy the box and pay a monthly fee as long as the servers were run by the company and updates came regularly.

I also be happy with a buy the box and pay for my shit, as long as said shit was cosmetic and/or service based (paying for extra characters and such like).

[Maedis 18]

- Game purchase only.

- Studio developed (as long as they don't standardize it to make it like Call of Duty or whatever bullshit formulaic model they might use)

- Studio servers

- Kickstarter

[BasHy (DayZ) 0]

Game purchase only

Studio developed

Kickstarter

Also a cosmetic stuff could be bought with money. If someone wants to buy a cooler hat that would be fine by me.

[SpiritoftheWolverine 0]

Definitely Just pay for it, I'd be happy to give you guys the money to help you keep developing it. And I think paying for a game keeps people who don't actually care about the game from playing it.

And please don't hand the game over to anyone, keep the game in your hands, Rocket. You've done an amazing job and I love where your taking the game, keep it that way.

Both Community and Studio servers, let there be a good variety in server styles.

And please no kickstarters, paying for an advantage is not the hardcore dayz apocalypse way. All players should be on equal grounds, leaving only playstyle and skill to come into play.

Thank You

[WhipDiddyWhip 0]

sounds a bit ominous if good mods start to cost,

dangerous ground as it could be the end of free modding if a mod this big starts the charging money trend

[AnthraXx 95]

free. thats the reason I bought ARMA 2 OA cause of a free mod...

[Daddy'o 4]

Game purchase only. If you need more cash injections, make shitloads more content and sell them as DLC.

Community and Studio servers would be optimal.

Studio developed but input from community taken seriously.

Best case scenario tbh.

[demine0 43]

I wouldn't be opposed to paying a smaller monthly subscription fee to play this game. Honestly, I would start the game at something between $3-$5 a month. $3 at 1000 active subscribers, you would still be getting in 3 grand a month. I'm pretty sure that would be enough to run the Hive(Please correct me if i'm wrong. I don't know your running expenses). And lets face it. This game is going to get big. It's going to get real big. Your going to have more than 1000 subscribers.

I could also see some type of F2P option too, but something that limits the players. Like F2P characters need to drink and eat way more often then subscription players, would be a good compromise I think. Allows people to demo the game and do everything... It's just way more of a challenge :P.

[poisonman 28]

If this was made as a stand alone game, 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?

This really depends on how you go about it, I'm willing to put money down on this game either way, but you really have something here with this game / idea / concept. I think it could really become Huge if it was developed as its own game from the ground up, and it really would be awesome as sandboxy MMO, so you can have more people and more zombie then our small 50 person servers we have now. I would easily pay a box fee and even a monthly fee if you were going to go that route, although the Guild Wars approach (no monthly fee) is nice too.

But if you go the MMO route you would have to make sure the game stays the way it is, no levels, no quests, open world, basically the same game you have now, just bigger and more in depth in a MMO space. You could go in more depth with and beef up the "crafting" system you have now with the setting up fortifications, repairing vehicles, etc. etc.

If you see what I'm saying / getting at, I don't want the game or your vision to change, but this concept would really take the MMO scene / gaming scene by storm.

Also:

I think even if you were going to start developing this as its own game from the ground up, and even if you were going to take my suggestion to push it as a MMO to make it the same game as it now but larger scale, It should be studio developed, but it should be able to take ideas / suggestions / and even help from the community kinda like it does now already in the Alpha, and be kinda like a Hybrid Development situation.

For the servers if your going to push this as a bigger MMO title it should obviously be Studio Servers as most games, it works out the best & you can have more control to prevent cheating, and faster on bug fixes and patches, I just feel the overall response time of things is better when you have all the control like that with having / owning the servers as the developer / studio.

And why not do a Kickstarter, I'm sure lots of people from the community you have now actually playing the game not to mention, the gaming community in a whole would probably have no problem throwing money your way to make this dream a reality. I know people are already trying to throw money at you for the Mod, so yea, that shouldn't be a issue.

[Seaon09 5]

Game purchased!

[Ub3rS0ldat 0]

Game purchase only.

Kickstarter. - I want your creative freedom to remain intact.

[Sin Vince 3]

I believe the game should remain free, although I don't object to the "one-time purchase" concept.

This does prove to be problematic, as initial sales will only generate so much profit to go towards development, but like many people have already suggested, the amount of DLC that could be added is almost limitless. Aside from expansions, non-attributive items could be marketed as well. (Look at League of Legends selling skins like frigging hotcakes. Who wouldn't want to run around an island killing zombies in a Ninja Suit?)

The possibilities are almost endless at this point, especially looking at the rate of which the Arma 2 sales have skyrocketed since the release/publication of DayZ. The only trick is would be to keep the appeal that it already has. I strongly feel as though making the game pay-to-play would be a negative factor in that aspect, although I could see people paying a monthly fee for, say, their own server? (Provided through DayZ servers?)

[bondono 1]

If this game required a monthly fee I would flatout not play it. Don't do that. You will fail.

Freemium I may try, but I would largely hate it. What makes this game great is that there are no artificial barriers. I don't play WoW. Any jobless halfwit virgin can devote hundreds and hundreds of hours to leveling and gathering loot. There's no skill involved. No intelligence.

I'm okay at FPSes. Not great, but okay. And you know what? It doesn't matter that I'm not a dead shot with a sniper rifle. This game is more about the player's ability to stay cool and move cautiously. It's about being smart, not a good shot. I love that. Don't jeopardize this by allowing players to buy weapons or modifications. Don't give them an unfair advantage because they've got more money than they know what to do with.

That said, you'd make a mint with freemium, so I can understand if you'd rather go that route. If you do, I sincerely hope you only allow cosmetic purchases.

If you made this into a solid retail game, if it was polished, if I could easily drop into servers, and if you added more content, I would absolutely pay retail price for it. You might not sell bajillions of copies like CoD or Battlefield, but you'll sell tens of thousands.

If you devote your attentions toward creating a fantastic gaming experience there are plenty of us who will buy your game, and you can make quite a profit by not blowing millions on making DayZ a cutting edge game that won't even appeal to mainstream audiences.

[robin-hood 0]

One off purchase (ala Guild Wars)

Should it be required for monetary purposes I would be happy with the presence of micro-transaction store but PURELY for cosmetic purposes, nothing that actually effects the game. So you can buy things like 'Crocodile Dundee' hats or different character models (like Killing Floor) but nothing that really effects gameplay.

Should you turn it into a stand alone game I'd suggest trying to get full access to BI's engine or something, but just building it from the ground up for Day-Z. Otherwise I'd be VERY worried you'd change the style of play, atmosphere & what not so much so that the game didn't feel the same any more.

As a long term fan (Played since the original OFP, all the expansions, Arma I and II) My main suggestions for improvements that could be made:

Better Animations/Actions:

Animations are clunky and VERY slow in the Arma games, to the point it damages game play. For instance if you're getting shot at you don't spend 30 seconds to lie down, watch videos of Magpul Dynamics or other trainers. They hit the deck at lightning speed. I know you're a 'survivor' and not a high speed operator but then I think it applies even more so. When people shoot at you, you eat dirt. The same applies for basic things like hopping fences, swapping weapons, using equipment, etc.

General Movement:

It is very clunky, your character bumbles around and stotters and derps through the environment. This is especially problematic in buildings where simple tasks like climbing stairs or walking through doorways become a challenge. Careful & Precise movement is pretty important in any FPS, especially a mod like this where a wrong move can have you back at the coast wondering what the f*** just hit you. There are already mods for Arma which, when compiled together, fix most of these issues and they make the overall gameplay experience less glitchy and VASTLY more enjoyable.

Better Inventory System:

Let's face it, the inventory system sucks. It's absurdly slow and clunky, if you're in a building hiding from zombies or bandits or being shot at or whatever you're not going to sit down, slowly open your back back and have a look around. One by one carefully move things around and then donder off. You need to be able to grab things out of your back pack & move them around in your inventory much quicker and much more efficiently.

Better Interface

The interface is frankly atrocious. It's so badly designed I simply do not understand why anyone would think it's a good idea. When it comes to ease of use it's simply terrible, and that's coming from someone who's used to it after years of play. How you have to bring up this menu and scroll around to do things is absurd, in the clutch point of a battle having to stand around like an idiot trying to scroll through some list to find the function that says "Drag Player" or "Bandage Wounds" or "Open Door" or what the hell ever is ridiculous. A simple pop up when you look at a downed player saying something like "Press * to drag, press * to bandage wounds" would be so much smarter, easier and more useable.

These changes don't have to effect the pace of the gameplay in a negative sense, they don't have to turn it into a 'fast paced COD style shooter', no one wants that. But it needs to be done, either by BIS or by someone else. They've used this horrendous out dated system for years for absolutely no good reason, it completely kills the flow of the game and I've had the simple horrendous clunkiness of the system completely ruin what could have been awesome and enjoyable gaming moments and turn them into fits of rage induced by the absolutely atrocious user interface.

I really hope you take my opinion on board, I've been a gamer all my life and enjoyed this series for years. I really believe these are necessary changes if Day-Z or even the Arma franchise want to continue with any real success.

P.S - I will never pay to play a subscription game.

[Decoy (DayZ) 0]

One off purchase (ala Guild Wars)

Should it be required for monetary purposes I would be happy with the presence of micro-transaction store but PURELY for cosmetic purposes' date=' nothing that actually effects the game. So you can buy things like 'Crocodile Dundee' hats or different character models (like Killing Floor) but nothing that really effects gameplay.

Should you turn it into a stand alone game I'd suggest trying to get full access to BI's engine or something, but just building it from the ground up for Day-Z. Otherwise I'd be VERY worried you'd change the style of play, atmosphere & what not so much so that the game didn't feel the same any more.

As a long term fan (Played since the original OFP, all the expansions, Arma I and II) My main suggestions for improvements that could be made:

[b']Better Animations/Actions:

Animations are clunky and VERY slow in the Arma games, to the point it damages game play. For instance if you're getting shot at you don't spend 30 seconds to lie down, watch videos of Magpul Dynamics or other trainers. They hit the deck at lightning speed. I know you're a 'survivor' and not a high speed operator but then I think it applies even more so. When people shoot at you, you eat dirt. The same applies for basic things like hopping fences, swapping weapons, using equipment, etc.

General Movement:

It is very clunky, your character bumbles around and stotters and derps through the environment. This is especially problematic in buildings where simple tasks like climbing stairs or walking through doorways become a challenge. Careful & Precise movement is pretty important in any FPS, especially a mod like this where a wrong move can have you back at the coast wondering what the f*** just hit you. There are already mods for Arma which, when compiled together, fix most of these issues and they make the overall gameplay experience less glitchy and VASTLY more enjoyable.

Better Inventory System:

Let's face it, the inventory system sucks. It's absurdly slow and clunky, if you're in a building hiding from zombies or bandits or being shot at or whatever you're not going to sit down, slowly open your back back and have a look around. One by one carefully move things around and then donder off. You need to be able to grab things out of your back pack & move them around in your inventory much quicker and much more efficiently.

Better Interface

The interface is frankly atrocious. It's so badly designed I simply do not understand why anyone would think it's a good idea. When it comes to ease of use it's simply terrible, and that's coming from someone who's used to it after years of play. How you have to bring up this menu and scroll around to do things is absurd, in the clutch point of a battle having to stand around like an idiot trying to scroll through some list to find the function that says "Drag Player" or "Bandage Wounds" or "Open Door" or what the hell ever is ridiculous. A simple pop up when you look at a downed player saying something like "Press * to drag, press * to bandage wounds" would be so much smarter, easier and more useable.

These changes don't have to effect the pace of the gameplay in a negative sense, they don't have to turn it into a 'fast paced COD style shooter', no one wants that. But it needs to be done, either by BIS or by someone else. They've used this horrendous out dated system for years for absolutely no good reason, it completely kills the flow of the game and I've had the simple horrendous clunkiness of the system completely ruin what could have been awesome and enjoyable gaming moments and turn them into fits of rage induced by the absolutely atrocious user interface.

I really hope you take my opinion on board, I've been a gamer all my life and enjoyed this series for years. I really believe these are necessary changes if Day-Z or even the Arma franchise want to continue with any real success.

P.S - I will never pay to play a subscription game.

Quoting this in case anyone missed it.

This is pretty much everything that is currently wrong with DayZ. Aside from general zombie jankiness.

[poisonman 28]

in case anyone missed it? it is the post directly above yours...... /facepalm

[MILLANDSON 3]

Game purchase only

Studio produced, with community input

Kickstater (with different tiers perhaps giving slightly better starting gear, or some-such?).

[island thursday 0]

For the record' date=' the idea of paying for loot makes my skin crawl and want to punch the wall. But a lot of studios prefer that model because it SOUNDS free to the customer. So the customer plays it, then ends up spending more than a monthly fee. But it destroys any sense of balancing and.. .ugh... I can't even talk about it the idea of it makes me so angry.

[/quote']

Registered just to post this:

I know the kind of model you're talking about and I don't think it's compatible with the game at all. It's supposed to be about scavenging, exploring and surviving. I didn't think this game was supposed to be balanced, but if you can buy what you want it undermines the central mechanics.

A revenue stream seems to be required to run servers though, so you'd have to come up with some kind of VIP or membership incentive scheme that wouldnt split the player base (reserved sorts, premium servers).

To do any of this properly you'd really have to consider the game mechanics and the interactions between paying and non-paying players.

A simple up-front purchase price (or maybe a once-off payment for character persistence; a single session at a time could be the 'demo') might be better for the game, but would it be sustainable?

[[bsm]-ricciardino- 10]

Game purchase only.

Studio Developed.

Kickstarter.

[grio 0]

I would not free to pay. Free to pay for most FPS = Pay to win

Buying the game than buying things that don't give an advantage would be ok. Like skins and so on.

I would pay a monthly fee if a lot more content was added.

(FPS that failed that was a monethly fee was APB. They lacked content to charge a 15 buck a month)

I would buy it as a stand alone game.

[Karl (DayZ) 0]

kickstarter, but do the Killing Floor thing. (buy once, all gameplay/weapons/everything else free updates, but buy new skins to loot maybe?)

Studio developed, 100 percent.

Both studio and community servers.