|
On April 01 2014 19:53 Body_Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2014 06:28 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 06:02 Excludos wrote:On April 01 2014 05:34 Conti wrote:On March 18 2014 06:29 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2014 21:47 Omnishroud wrote:On March 17 2014 21:29 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2014 09:59 mrgoochio wrote:
Haven't been paying much attention to DayZ lately. Are there more than 5 zombies on the map, do they respawn, and do items respawn without server reboots yet? No, no, and no. If the latest devblog is to be believed, they are very close to putting all of that into the game. Rofl fucking really? No wonder nobody i know plays it atm. Its been months since they released the alpha, i know its an alpha but that really comes off as bad. "nobody plays it"..? There are literally thousands of servers with 20+ people on it and equally many with less. alpha is exactly that, alpha. Its not even beta. Its suppose to be full of bugs, glitches, and with missing content. You can't blame the game for missing things when its in alpha. The creator even said specifically that you should NOT play the alpha expecting anything good. And you sign a "I know this is alpha and the game is shit" user agreement every time you log in. If they spend the next 5 years in alpha, it would STILL not come off as bad. A lot of games have even longer development cycles than that. Does anyone even remember the Minecraft alpha? You had a creative mode with 20-something blocks..and thats it. No adventure mode, no health or eating. I don't think you even had multiplayer.. Some years later its the best selling indie game of all time. Funny how you bring up Minecraft, a game where the development early on was not on creating new blocks for you, but building the infrastructure of the game for the future (multiplayer, mod support, engine, etc.). Watching the dev blogs of dayz is rather depressing, as they keep advertising new features like new weapons or some new gimmick you can use (which in itself is pretty cool), while speaking no words about terrible FPS, idiotic zombies or countless clipping errors, etc. It would be nice if the devs would focus on getting the very basics of the game to work before they'd start working on more helmets for everyone to wear. It's fine if people enjoy the game in this state. I, for one, do not, and will not pay any money until the game is out of alpha. And at this point, I genuinely doubt the game will ever leave alpha status. You mean the devblog where they talked about the back infrastructure, the glitchy zombies, how to add more depth to the game, decrease lag, add dynamic spawning, hunting, and fix melee hitboxes? You know, the latest one? Sometimes I swear people are ignorant on purpose. Yes, that one: - Invisible players and zombies: No complaints here.
- Fireplaces and Emissive Improvements: New feature instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New towns in Chernarus: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New Weapon Content: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Mouse acceleration and player control: Minor bugfix.
- Physics and Arrows: New feature (throwing, ragdolls) instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Animals, collisions and zombie pathfinding: Basic stuff, for which they now have an entirely new team?
- Persistent Loot and objects: No complaints here.
The vast majority of the points they talk about are completely new features, like every week, and the basic issues seem to be treated as an afterthought, if that. Because clearly the entire development team, including the art guys and the map guys, have to sift through code to find the bugs. Alpher
Adding new content (maps, weapons, whatever) is not something you ought to do in an alpha, it's as simple as that. You should focus all your efforts on getting the game to work so you can add new content later on without any hassle.
|
But they're not gonna fire their art team or let them do nothing forever.. Adding weapons and modifying the map is fine, I agree though that the programmers that are trying to implement physics and this kind of stuff may be better spent on fixing the still awful flaws of the engine and adding the damn respawning loot.
The zombie respawn is a giant joke at the moment, they'll just chain respawn on your face in most spots and prevent you from doing anything, even just sitting hidden by a bush and observing your surroundings... But as bad as it is, the game is still a giant blast sometimes, yesterday I played the best DayZ game ever despite the retarded zombies and all the bugs... Punching geared people to death to steal their stuff and win a 1V3 is worth the bugs and stupid laggs 
|
On April 01 2014 20:25 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2014 19:53 Body_Shield wrote:On April 01 2014 06:28 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 06:02 Excludos wrote:On April 01 2014 05:34 Conti wrote:On March 18 2014 06:29 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2014 21:47 Omnishroud wrote:On March 17 2014 21:29 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2014 09:59 mrgoochio wrote:
Haven't been paying much attention to DayZ lately. Are there more than 5 zombies on the map, do they respawn, and do items respawn without server reboots yet? No, no, and no. If the latest devblog is to be believed, they are very close to putting all of that into the game. Rofl fucking really? No wonder nobody i know plays it atm. Its been months since they released the alpha, i know its an alpha but that really comes off as bad. "nobody plays it"..? There are literally thousands of servers with 20+ people on it and equally many with less. alpha is exactly that, alpha. Its not even beta. Its suppose to be full of bugs, glitches, and with missing content. You can't blame the game for missing things when its in alpha. The creator even said specifically that you should NOT play the alpha expecting anything good. And you sign a "I know this is alpha and the game is shit" user agreement every time you log in. If they spend the next 5 years in alpha, it would STILL not come off as bad. A lot of games have even longer development cycles than that. Does anyone even remember the Minecraft alpha? You had a creative mode with 20-something blocks..and thats it. No adventure mode, no health or eating. I don't think you even had multiplayer.. Some years later its the best selling indie game of all time. Funny how you bring up Minecraft, a game where the development early on was not on creating new blocks for you, but building the infrastructure of the game for the future (multiplayer, mod support, engine, etc.). Watching the dev blogs of dayz is rather depressing, as they keep advertising new features like new weapons or some new gimmick you can use (which in itself is pretty cool), while speaking no words about terrible FPS, idiotic zombies or countless clipping errors, etc. It would be nice if the devs would focus on getting the very basics of the game to work before they'd start working on more helmets for everyone to wear. It's fine if people enjoy the game in this state. I, for one, do not, and will not pay any money until the game is out of alpha. And at this point, I genuinely doubt the game will ever leave alpha status. You mean the devblog where they talked about the back infrastructure, the glitchy zombies, how to add more depth to the game, decrease lag, add dynamic spawning, hunting, and fix melee hitboxes? You know, the latest one? Sometimes I swear people are ignorant on purpose. Yes, that one: - Invisible players and zombies: No complaints here.
- Fireplaces and Emissive Improvements: New feature instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New towns in Chernarus: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New Weapon Content: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Mouse acceleration and player control: Minor bugfix.
- Physics and Arrows: New feature (throwing, ragdolls) instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Animals, collisions and zombie pathfinding: Basic stuff, for which they now have an entirely new team?
- Persistent Loot and objects: No complaints here.
The vast majority of the points they talk about are completely new features, like every week, and the basic issues seem to be treated as an afterthought, if that. Because clearly the entire development team, including the art guys and the map guys, have to sift through code to find the bugs. Alpher Adding new content (maps, weapons, whatever) is not something you ought to do in an alpha, it's as simple as that. You should focus all your efforts on getting the game to work so you can add new content later on without any hassle.
No, that's what they planned on doing for the development of this game, add content to more or less the level of the original mod, and make sure it works along the way. Sometimes there are more bugs than expected. If you don't like this, then maybe you should read the alpha disclaimer, and shouldn't buy or have bought the alpha.
On April 01 2014 21:00 Nimix wrote:But they're not gonna fire their art team or let them do nothing forever.. Adding weapons and modifying the map is fine, I agree though that the programmers that are trying to implement physics and this kind of stuff may be better spent on fixing the still awful flaws of the engine and adding the damn respawning loot. The zombie respawn is a giant joke at the moment, they'll just chain respawn on your face in most spots and prevent you from doing anything, even just sitting hidden by a bush and observing your surroundings... But as bad as it is, the game is still a giant blast sometimes, yesterday I played the best DayZ game ever despite the retarded zombies and all the bugs... Punching geared people to death to steal their stuff and win a 1V3 is worth the bugs and stupid laggs
The current zombie spawn mechanic is a placeholder, this was directly stated in the patchnotes when it was added.
|
On April 02 2014 00:36 Body_Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2014 20:25 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 19:53 Body_Shield wrote:On April 01 2014 06:28 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 06:02 Excludos wrote:On April 01 2014 05:34 Conti wrote:On March 18 2014 06:29 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2014 21:47 Omnishroud wrote:On March 17 2014 21:29 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2014 09:59 mrgoochio wrote:
Haven't been paying much attention to DayZ lately. Are there more than 5 zombies on the map, do they respawn, and do items respawn without server reboots yet? No, no, and no. If the latest devblog is to be believed, they are very close to putting all of that into the game. Rofl fucking really? No wonder nobody i know plays it atm. Its been months since they released the alpha, i know its an alpha but that really comes off as bad. "nobody plays it"..? There are literally thousands of servers with 20+ people on it and equally many with less. alpha is exactly that, alpha. Its not even beta. Its suppose to be full of bugs, glitches, and with missing content. You can't blame the game for missing things when its in alpha. The creator even said specifically that you should NOT play the alpha expecting anything good. And you sign a "I know this is alpha and the game is shit" user agreement every time you log in. If they spend the next 5 years in alpha, it would STILL not come off as bad. A lot of games have even longer development cycles than that. Does anyone even remember the Minecraft alpha? You had a creative mode with 20-something blocks..and thats it. No adventure mode, no health or eating. I don't think you even had multiplayer.. Some years later its the best selling indie game of all time. Funny how you bring up Minecraft, a game where the development early on was not on creating new blocks for you, but building the infrastructure of the game for the future (multiplayer, mod support, engine, etc.). Watching the dev blogs of dayz is rather depressing, as they keep advertising new features like new weapons or some new gimmick you can use (which in itself is pretty cool), while speaking no words about terrible FPS, idiotic zombies or countless clipping errors, etc. It would be nice if the devs would focus on getting the very basics of the game to work before they'd start working on more helmets for everyone to wear. It's fine if people enjoy the game in this state. I, for one, do not, and will not pay any money until the game is out of alpha. And at this point, I genuinely doubt the game will ever leave alpha status. You mean the devblog where they talked about the back infrastructure, the glitchy zombies, how to add more depth to the game, decrease lag, add dynamic spawning, hunting, and fix melee hitboxes? You know, the latest one? Sometimes I swear people are ignorant on purpose. Yes, that one: - Invisible players and zombies: No complaints here.
- Fireplaces and Emissive Improvements: New feature instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New towns in Chernarus: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New Weapon Content: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Mouse acceleration and player control: Minor bugfix.
- Physics and Arrows: New feature (throwing, ragdolls) instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Animals, collisions and zombie pathfinding: Basic stuff, for which they now have an entirely new team?
- Persistent Loot and objects: No complaints here.
The vast majority of the points they talk about are completely new features, like every week, and the basic issues seem to be treated as an afterthought, if that. Because clearly the entire development team, including the art guys and the map guys, have to sift through code to find the bugs. Alpher Adding new content (maps, weapons, whatever) is not something you ought to do in an alpha, it's as simple as that. You should focus all your efforts on getting the game to work so you can add new content later on without any hassle. No, that's what they planned on doing for the development of this game, add content to more or less the level of the original mod, and make sure it works along the way. Sometimes there are more bugs than expected. If you don't like this, then maybe you should read the alpha disclaimer, and shouldn't buy or have bought the alpha.
I haven't bought the game. I'd love to, but I'm not going to pay for it until it's out of alpha. And at this point, I accepted the possibility that I might therefore never buy the game. Selling perpetual alpha versions is a very popular trend in gaming right now, and dayz is one of the worst offenders. I appreciate the honesty in the developer's disclaimers, but if you demand money for a product, you will have to live with the fact that people will evaluate whether the product is worth the money or not. If you're having fun playing a bugged out game that may not have most of its core engine problems fixed, ever, that's perfectly fine. But pretending that the game is being developed properly and the way a game ought to be developed is an.. unrealistic viewpoint, to say the least.
|
On April 02 2014 01:13 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2014 00:36 Body_Shield wrote:On April 01 2014 20:25 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 19:53 Body_Shield wrote:On April 01 2014 06:28 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 06:02 Excludos wrote:On April 01 2014 05:34 Conti wrote:On March 18 2014 06:29 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2014 21:47 Omnishroud wrote:On March 17 2014 21:29 Excludos wrote:
[quote]
No, no, and no. If the latest devblog is to be believed, they are very close to putting all of that into the game. Rofl fucking really? No wonder nobody i know plays it atm. Its been months since they released the alpha, i know its an alpha but that really comes off as bad. "nobody plays it"..? There are literally thousands of servers with 20+ people on it and equally many with less. alpha is exactly that, alpha. Its not even beta. Its suppose to be full of bugs, glitches, and with missing content. You can't blame the game for missing things when its in alpha. The creator even said specifically that you should NOT play the alpha expecting anything good. And you sign a "I know this is alpha and the game is shit" user agreement every time you log in. If they spend the next 5 years in alpha, it would STILL not come off as bad. A lot of games have even longer development cycles than that. Does anyone even remember the Minecraft alpha? You had a creative mode with 20-something blocks..and thats it. No adventure mode, no health or eating. I don't think you even had multiplayer.. Some years later its the best selling indie game of all time. Funny how you bring up Minecraft, a game where the development early on was not on creating new blocks for you, but building the infrastructure of the game for the future (multiplayer, mod support, engine, etc.). Watching the dev blogs of dayz is rather depressing, as they keep advertising new features like new weapons or some new gimmick you can use (which in itself is pretty cool), while speaking no words about terrible FPS, idiotic zombies or countless clipping errors, etc. It would be nice if the devs would focus on getting the very basics of the game to work before they'd start working on more helmets for everyone to wear. It's fine if people enjoy the game in this state. I, for one, do not, and will not pay any money until the game is out of alpha. And at this point, I genuinely doubt the game will ever leave alpha status. You mean the devblog where they talked about the back infrastructure, the glitchy zombies, how to add more depth to the game, decrease lag, add dynamic spawning, hunting, and fix melee hitboxes? You know, the latest one? Sometimes I swear people are ignorant on purpose. Yes, that one: - Invisible players and zombies: No complaints here.
- Fireplaces and Emissive Improvements: New feature instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New towns in Chernarus: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New Weapon Content: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Mouse acceleration and player control: Minor bugfix.
- Physics and Arrows: New feature (throwing, ragdolls) instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Animals, collisions and zombie pathfinding: Basic stuff, for which they now have an entirely new team?
- Persistent Loot and objects: No complaints here.
The vast majority of the points they talk about are completely new features, like every week, and the basic issues seem to be treated as an afterthought, if that. Because clearly the entire development team, including the art guys and the map guys, have to sift through code to find the bugs. Alpher Adding new content (maps, weapons, whatever) is not something you ought to do in an alpha, it's as simple as that. You should focus all your efforts on getting the game to work so you can add new content later on without any hassle. No, that's what they planned on doing for the development of this game, add content to more or less the level of the original mod, and make sure it works along the way. Sometimes there are more bugs than expected. If you don't like this, then maybe you should read the alpha disclaimer, and shouldn't buy or have bought the alpha. I haven't bought the game. I'd love to, but I'm not going to pay for it until it's out of alpha. And at this point, I accepted the possibility that I might therefore never buy the game. Selling perpetual alpha versions is a very popular trend in gaming right now, and dayz is one of the worst offenders. I appreciate the honesty in the developer's disclaimers, but if you demand money for a product, you will have to live with the fact that people will evaluate whether the product is worth the money or not. If you're having fun playing a bugged out game that may not have most of its core engine problems fixed, ever, that's perfectly fine. But pretending that the game is being developed properly and the way a game ought to be developed is an.. unrealistic viewpoint, to say the least.
This nitpicking is starting to be unbearable. You don't even play the game and you complain about it. The model they went for in alpha is add new features then balance and major bug fix in beta. They acknowledge the lag is bad, even Dean has complained about it. The issues won't be able to be address in their current environment of experimental and stable. Stable is too far complex of a system where experimental is just a handful of hive clusters. The devs would need some staging environment that is as complex as stable to really work out some of the bugs you talk about. But even that is a huge resource dump to get that up and running. I feel like they would waste time if they fixed all the bugs now only to find more bugs will be introduced once they get further in the development. And, honestly, who are you to be the judge of a product being developed properly? Anyway Dean hopes to get out of alpha by the end of the year.
|
On April 02 2014 01:54 Knighthawkbro wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2014 01:13 Conti wrote:On April 02 2014 00:36 Body_Shield wrote:On April 01 2014 20:25 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 19:53 Body_Shield wrote:On April 01 2014 06:28 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 06:02 Excludos wrote:On April 01 2014 05:34 Conti wrote:On March 18 2014 06:29 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2014 21:47 Omnishroud wrote:
[quote]
Rofl fucking really? No wonder nobody i know plays it atm. Its been months since they released the alpha, i know its an alpha but that really comes off as bad. "nobody plays it"..? There are literally thousands of servers with 20+ people on it and equally many with less. alpha is exactly that, alpha. Its not even beta. Its suppose to be full of bugs, glitches, and with missing content. You can't blame the game for missing things when its in alpha. The creator even said specifically that you should NOT play the alpha expecting anything good. And you sign a "I know this is alpha and the game is shit" user agreement every time you log in. If they spend the next 5 years in alpha, it would STILL not come off as bad. A lot of games have even longer development cycles than that. Does anyone even remember the Minecraft alpha? You had a creative mode with 20-something blocks..and thats it. No adventure mode, no health or eating. I don't think you even had multiplayer.. Some years later its the best selling indie game of all time. Funny how you bring up Minecraft, a game where the development early on was not on creating new blocks for you, but building the infrastructure of the game for the future (multiplayer, mod support, engine, etc.). Watching the dev blogs of dayz is rather depressing, as they keep advertising new features like new weapons or some new gimmick you can use (which in itself is pretty cool), while speaking no words about terrible FPS, idiotic zombies or countless clipping errors, etc. It would be nice if the devs would focus on getting the very basics of the game to work before they'd start working on more helmets for everyone to wear. It's fine if people enjoy the game in this state. I, for one, do not, and will not pay any money until the game is out of alpha. And at this point, I genuinely doubt the game will ever leave alpha status. You mean the devblog where they talked about the back infrastructure, the glitchy zombies, how to add more depth to the game, decrease lag, add dynamic spawning, hunting, and fix melee hitboxes? You know, the latest one? Sometimes I swear people are ignorant on purpose. Yes, that one: - Invisible players and zombies: No complaints here.
- Fireplaces and Emissive Improvements: New feature instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New towns in Chernarus: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New Weapon Content: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Mouse acceleration and player control: Minor bugfix.
- Physics and Arrows: New feature (throwing, ragdolls) instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Animals, collisions and zombie pathfinding: Basic stuff, for which they now have an entirely new team?
- Persistent Loot and objects: No complaints here.
The vast majority of the points they talk about are completely new features, like every week, and the basic issues seem to be treated as an afterthought, if that. Because clearly the entire development team, including the art guys and the map guys, have to sift through code to find the bugs. Alpher Adding new content (maps, weapons, whatever) is not something you ought to do in an alpha, it's as simple as that. You should focus all your efforts on getting the game to work so you can add new content later on without any hassle. No, that's what they planned on doing for the development of this game, add content to more or less the level of the original mod, and make sure it works along the way. Sometimes there are more bugs than expected. If you don't like this, then maybe you should read the alpha disclaimer, and shouldn't buy or have bought the alpha. I haven't bought the game. I'd love to, but I'm not going to pay for it until it's out of alpha. And at this point, I accepted the possibility that I might therefore never buy the game. Selling perpetual alpha versions is a very popular trend in gaming right now, and dayz is one of the worst offenders. I appreciate the honesty in the developer's disclaimers, but if you demand money for a product, you will have to live with the fact that people will evaluate whether the product is worth the money or not. If you're having fun playing a bugged out game that may not have most of its core engine problems fixed, ever, that's perfectly fine. But pretending that the game is being developed properly and the way a game ought to be developed is an.. unrealistic viewpoint, to say the least. This nitpicking is starting to be unbearable. You don't even play the game and you complain about it. The model they went for in alpha is add new features then balance and major bug fix in beta. They acknowledge the lag is bad, even Dean has complained about it. The issues won't be able to be address in their current environment of experimental and stable. Stable is too far complex of a system where experimental is just a handful of hive clusters. The devs would need some staging environment that is as complex as stable to really work out some of the bugs you talk about. But even that is a huge resource dump to get that up and running. I feel like they would waste time if they fixed all the bugs now only to find more bugs will be introduced once they get further in the development. And, honestly, who are you to be the judge of a product being developed properly? Anyway Dean hopes to get out of alpha by the end of the year.
It's the other way around. They waste time by building features on top of an extremely buggy foundation, and then attempt to fix those bugs later on.
I'm only nitpicking because I was really looking forward to the DayZ standalone game, and believed everything Rocket said about it. How it's going to fix all the problems of the mod because they can build the game from the ground up, yadda yadda. And then the alpha comes out, and it's worse than the mod. They have all the problems they had with the mod and more, and at this point I'm not convinced they're ever going to fix them. If they do? Awesome. I'm gonna buy the game and have fun. But I'm not holding my breath.
|
On April 02 2014 02:43 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2014 01:54 Knighthawkbro wrote:On April 02 2014 01:13 Conti wrote:On April 02 2014 00:36 Body_Shield wrote:On April 01 2014 20:25 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 19:53 Body_Shield wrote:On April 01 2014 06:28 Conti wrote:On April 01 2014 06:02 Excludos wrote:On April 01 2014 05:34 Conti wrote:On March 18 2014 06:29 Excludos wrote:
[quote]
"nobody plays it"..? There are literally thousands of servers with 20+ people on it and equally many with less.
alpha is exactly that, alpha. Its not even beta. Its suppose to be full of bugs, glitches, and with missing content. You can't blame the game for missing things when its in alpha. The creator even said specifically that you should NOT play the alpha expecting anything good. And you sign a "I know this is alpha and the game is shit" user agreement every time you log in.
If they spend the next 5 years in alpha, it would STILL not come off as bad. A lot of games have even longer development cycles than that.
Does anyone even remember the Minecraft alpha? You had a creative mode with 20-something blocks..and thats it. No adventure mode, no health or eating. I don't think you even had multiplayer.. Some years later its the best selling indie game of all time. Funny how you bring up Minecraft, a game where the development early on was not on creating new blocks for you, but building the infrastructure of the game for the future (multiplayer, mod support, engine, etc.). Watching the dev blogs of dayz is rather depressing, as they keep advertising new features like new weapons or some new gimmick you can use (which in itself is pretty cool), while speaking no words about terrible FPS, idiotic zombies or countless clipping errors, etc. It would be nice if the devs would focus on getting the very basics of the game to work before they'd start working on more helmets for everyone to wear. It's fine if people enjoy the game in this state. I, for one, do not, and will not pay any money until the game is out of alpha. And at this point, I genuinely doubt the game will ever leave alpha status. You mean the devblog where they talked about the back infrastructure, the glitchy zombies, how to add more depth to the game, decrease lag, add dynamic spawning, hunting, and fix melee hitboxes? You know, the latest one? Sometimes I swear people are ignorant on purpose. Yes, that one: - Invisible players and zombies: No complaints here.
- Fireplaces and Emissive Improvements: New feature instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New towns in Chernarus: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- New Weapon Content: New content instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Mouse acceleration and player control: Minor bugfix.
- Physics and Arrows: New feature (throwing, ragdolls) instead of fixing the absolute basic issues that plague the game.
- Animals, collisions and zombie pathfinding: Basic stuff, for which they now have an entirely new team?
- Persistent Loot and objects: No complaints here.
The vast majority of the points they talk about are completely new features, like every week, and the basic issues seem to be treated as an afterthought, if that. Because clearly the entire development team, including the art guys and the map guys, have to sift through code to find the bugs. Alpher Adding new content (maps, weapons, whatever) is not something you ought to do in an alpha, it's as simple as that. You should focus all your efforts on getting the game to work so you can add new content later on without any hassle. No, that's what they planned on doing for the development of this game, add content to more or less the level of the original mod, and make sure it works along the way. Sometimes there are more bugs than expected. If you don't like this, then maybe you should read the alpha disclaimer, and shouldn't buy or have bought the alpha. I haven't bought the game. I'd love to, but I'm not going to pay for it until it's out of alpha. And at this point, I accepted the possibility that I might therefore never buy the game. Selling perpetual alpha versions is a very popular trend in gaming right now, and dayz is one of the worst offenders. I appreciate the honesty in the developer's disclaimers, but if you demand money for a product, you will have to live with the fact that people will evaluate whether the product is worth the money or not. If you're having fun playing a bugged out game that may not have most of its core engine problems fixed, ever, that's perfectly fine. But pretending that the game is being developed properly and the way a game ought to be developed is an.. unrealistic viewpoint, to say the least. This nitpicking is starting to be unbearable. You don't even play the game and you complain about it. The model they went for in alpha is add new features then balance and major bug fix in beta. They acknowledge the lag is bad, even Dean has complained about it. The issues won't be able to be address in their current environment of experimental and stable. Stable is too far complex of a system where experimental is just a handful of hive clusters. The devs would need some staging environment that is as complex as stable to really work out some of the bugs you talk about. But even that is a huge resource dump to get that up and running. I feel like they would waste time if they fixed all the bugs now only to find more bugs will be introduced once they get further in the development. And, honestly, who are you to be the judge of a product being developed properly? Anyway Dean hopes to get out of alpha by the end of the year. It's the other way around. They waste time by building features on top of an extremely buggy foundation, and then attempt to fix those bugs later on. I'm only nitpicking because I was really looking forward to the DayZ standalone game, and believed everything Rocket said about it. How it's going to fix all the problems of the mod because they can build the game from the ground up, yadda yadda. And then the alpha comes out, and it's worse than the mod. They have all the problems they had with the mod and more, and at this point I'm not convinced they're ever going to fix them. If they do? Awesome. I'm gonna buy the game and have fun. But I'm not holding my breath.
This is where we differ, your secondary sourced observations and my primary sourced observations. I have played almost 200 hours and I can safely say that all my death's could have been avoided if played better. I do not blame the engine for the situations I got myself into. When I encounter these obstacles and bugs, I don't make excuses, I adapt my play. If I feel frustrated at the game for whatever reason, I drop it and play something else. And over time I usually forget what I was mad at when I make a return.
|
Why do items still not respawn again? Its ridiculous how you can't find anything unless you go on a server thats recently been restarted.
|
On April 03 2014 09:35 Coriolis wrote:
Why do items still not respawn again? Its ridiculous how you can't find anything unless you go on a server thats recently been restarted.
They are working on how the items are going to save to the database, and how the items actually respawn (semi-balance and shit depending on area and population). And what do you mean again, they never respawned without a restart in SA
|
On April 03 2014 11:54 Body_Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 09:35 Coriolis wrote:
Why do items still not respawn again? Its ridiculous how you can't find anything unless you go on a server thats recently been restarted. They are working on how the items are going to save to the database, and how the items actually respawn (semi-balance and shit depending on area and population). And what do you mean again, they never respawned without a restart in SA
what? i distinctly remember loot cycling places to get what i wanted... like to get car parts and stuff we would bring a small army of people to a major spawn area for parts and loot cycle the place.
maybe it was changed later...but i distinctly remember spawns working for the most part
|
Car parts? You must be talking about the mod. There are no cars in SA
|
o wow did they add a timer whenever you change server.
|
On April 07 2014 14:47 RiZu wrote:
o wow did they add a timer whenever you change server.
Yeah. Been there for a while now  Really nice not having to worry about ghosting anymore
|
rocket selling snake oil to a fanbase that wants this game so badly..
Looking forward to H1Z1
|
Does anyone from the old TL DayZ mod community plays SA ? We still hang out on TS but I think that I am the only one that actually plays the game in this state.
|
On April 10 2014 18:39 loft wrote:
rocket selling snake oil to a fanbase that wants this game so badly..
Looking forward to H1Z1
Ehhh... if you see the way SoE is handling Planetside 2 now, you'd think twice.
|
What the fuck happened to the zombies? I need like 20 hits to kill them with a firefighter axe. If you don't want to be bleeding or get a fracture you have to shoot them. Is this a bug or intended? It's really fucking stupid.
|
On April 30 2014 20:39 Musicus wrote:
What the fuck happened to the zombies? I need like 20 hits to kill them with a firefighter axe. If you don't want to be bleeding or get a fracture you have to shoot them. Is this a bug or intended? It's really fucking stupid.
They've changed it to headshot kill only. Aim for the head and remember that melee weapons hit at point of impact and not the crosshair position.
|
On May 01 2014 00:06 Jochan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 20:39 Musicus wrote:
What the fuck happened to the zombies? I need like 20 hits to kill them with a firefighter axe. If you don't want to be bleeding or get a fracture you have to shoot them. Is this a bug or intended? It's really fucking stupid. They've changed it to headshot kill only. Aim for the head and remember that melee weapons hit at point of impact and not the crosshair position.
Thanks. Yeah I just played and after a while got a hang of hitting the head, so it was managable. But I think the number of normal hits you need is still too high and they should really get silencers to work, because dealing with 3 zombies at once is a real pain now, so sometimes it's just better to shoot, but then 5 more zombies come running.
|
how much is actually in the game right now? last time i played was couple months ago and it only had like 2 weapons
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
