No DayZ Beta Before End Of Year

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If you are one of the 875,000 people that paid $30 for the DayZ Alpha, you might be interested in today's announcement. The good news is that, with no beta until the end of the year, you'll have the game all to yourselves. Coincidentally, that's also the bad news.

The DayZ Alpha is available for early adopters from Steam for 23.99 Euros. Please be aware that our Early Access offer is a representation of our core pillars, and the framework we have created around them. It’s a work in progress and therefore contains a variety of bugs. We strongly advise you not to buy and play the game at this stage unless you clearly understand what Early Access means and are interested in participating in the ongoing development cycle. Please keep in mind that we do not expect to reach Beta status sooner than the end of 2014.
Click to expand...
 
Even in Alpha DayZ is fun.

Yes the bugs can be a bit annoying, but that hasn't stopped my buddies and I from having a bunch of fun.

Best thing to do if you come across bugs and glitches, just report it to the feedback page on http://feedback.dayzgame.com/
 
They are in a tight spot right now. I would say that they shouldn't have even released the alpha, but they obviously don't have the manpower needed to release the game while its still relevent.
 
Unpaid testers paying a nice chunk of change to test... kinda brilliant. QA is not cheap!
 
haste. said:
Unpaid testers paying a nice chunk of change to test... kinda brilliant. QA is not cheap!
Click to expand...

Probably more for getting capital needed for making a game. The studio isn't exactly a AAA company backed by a big publisher.
 
wow not even 7 days into the year they just flat out say "fuck you for a WHOLE YEAR TO COME"

glad I didn't give them any of my money.
 
collegeboy69us said:
wow not even 7 days into the year they just flat out say "fuck you for a WHOLE YEAR TO COME"

glad I didn't give them any of my money.
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate? Aside from the fact that Rocket stated it would be 6 months to a year and a half to go from Alpha to Beta before the Alpha even dropped, updates have come at a quick and steady rate. So what if they don't change the title from "Alpha" to "Beta". At this point, the words Alpha, Beta, and Release mean nothing as far as gaming is concerned anyhow.

If you haven't been following the Alpha closely enough to know that, it's likely you're not the kind of person they were looking for to begin with, as they've stated. It's only for the die-hards.
 
Go read their blog post. It was very professional.

It was also stated that they would re-evaluate the production schedule at the end of this month. I mean, no kidding. They have likely taken in more than 5 times what they could have dreamed of. They have the money to bring on a few people with serious talent to hammer the engine into submission for them. That... and an art department.

Bring it on. The reason everyone bought it is because even this rough the game's concept is positively addictive and has endless promise.
 
lloose said:
Probably more for getting capital needed for making a game. The studio isn't exactly a AAA company backed by a big publisher.
Click to expand...

You're reaffirming my point. They can't pay 50+ testers $10-12/hour 60 hours a week for a year or two. Why not get an army of unpaid testers to pay for an alpha build? It's a brilliant business move.
 
haste. said:
You're reaffirming my point. They can't pay 50+ testers $10-12/hour 60 hours a week for a year or two. Why not get an army of unpaid testers to pay for an alpha build? It's a brilliant business move.
Click to expand...

It worked for EA / DICE for Battlefield 4 AM I RIGHT?
 
What I don't understand given how long Rocket takes, is that there are 30-40 mods out now that if you have ARMA 2 or ARMA 3 ARE FREE. And maybe around 5 are awesome.
 
And it'll probably still be chock full of cheaters out to ruin the experience for everyone in ways not typically seen by the normal FPS cheater.
 
It has it's issues (obviously...it's an alpha), but my friends and I have still had a blast playing it the past few days. I don't think we'll be playing as much as we have been in the coming weeks, but we're all looking forward to what they add to the game. The game has some serious potential as a standalone, but it also has some pretty major flaws too (ie server hopping, ghosting, etc).
 
Isnt this the game that had some huge backlash where they released some crazy bug ridden pre-alpha-alpha, charged a bunch of money for it and acted like it was a full game and told everyone else to kiss their ass?
 
And liked about map size stating 120m radius, then when it was discovered to only be like 30m they say "well it COULD go up to 120m lololol"
 
It's like counter-strike except the time between rounds is 20mins~2 days as opposed to 2 minutes.

Oh and there's zombies.

Please never criticize someone for keeping up with the Kardashians if you play this game.
 
McFry said:
Whoops nevermind that was The War Z.
Click to expand...

I was just logging in to correct you, but you got it. That was actually a really big worry when The War Z decided to name themselves what they did. It's so similar to DayZ that people confuse them, and DayZ gets flak over The War Z's failed launch. BTW, The War Z is now called "Infestation: Survivor Stories" if you want something to avoid. ;)
 
flegg said:
It's like counter-strike except the time between rounds is 20mins~2 days as opposed to 2 minutes.

Oh and there's zombies.

Please never criticize someone for keeping up with the Kardashians if you play this game.
Click to expand...

If you think this is supposed to compete with Counter-Strike, you're barking up the wrong tree. Just because it has guns doesn't mean it's about shooting other people. It's supposed to be about surviving, not being the next greatest FPS :p
 
They've done more hurt than good with the alpha. If the mod is still more playable and has actual zombies why wouldn't ANY release of the stand alone?

Leaving out such core components of even the alpha is... just plain stupid. Then expecting people to pay $30 for it, that's a sure sign of desperation.

The dayz standalone hype is over. Now the SA will slowly choke itself to death.

It's like the world's most boring running simulator currently.
 
Keeping up with the Kardashians is supposed to be about surviving, not being the next greatest TV show.
 
flegg said:
Keeping up with the Kardashians is supposed to be about surviving, not being the next greatest TV show.
Click to expand...

It at least has rich snobby people, the core element. Where are the zombies in DayZ? I saw 2 in 4 hours of game play on twitch.

It's a KoS running simulator at best.
 
Don't worry winter is coming. Unfortunately in this iteration there's no midgets to entertain you in the meantime.
 
It is early access. What do people expect, a complete game? Do people not understand the concept? Of course it may take a year or longer.

Of course the developers may not have enough money otherwise to complete the game. If they did, why bother releasing an incomplete game for less money early?

The point is you give them money to help fund them finish up the game. And you get to play an early build. It does vary (some games might be in beta, others alpha), but that is what you are doing.
 
Makes sense. When I become a professional bum I'll be sure to ask for money BEFORE I was the window.
 
Flogger23m said:
It is early access. What do people expect, a complete game? Do people not understand the concept? Of course it may take a year or longer.

Of course the developers may not have enough money otherwise to complete the game. If they did, why bother releasing an incomplete game for less money early?

The point is you give them money to help fund them finish up the game. And you get to play an early build. It does vary (some games might be in beta, others alpha), but that is what you are doing.
Click to expand...

Poor sales probably indicate they are asking a bit much for a product that has been delayed for years.

But of course since they encourage you not to buy it, and say they don't have the server infrastructure to handle more players, I suppose the high price serves two purposes.

it reels in the hard core dayz supporters (and suckers riding the hype bandwagon), and funds their paychecks for the next year.

It wasn't like they created the engine from scratch. Heck they barely tweaked the UI. I suppose it's partly Rockets fault for hyping it so much in the last 18-20 months only to let people down continuously... He even said that almost word for word.
 
Seeing that people replying in this thread are supposedly game developers themselves, how about this?
  1. How long does it take to go from alpha to beta to gold/release version?
  2. What is the average time it takes to develop a game from scratch?
  3. How feature-complete is a game in alpha compared to beta and gold/release version?
  4. For a small game development company of less than 50 employees-- full time and part time, how long does it take to release a game on average?
  5. For a large company like EA, Ubisoft, or DiCE, how long does it take to release a feature-complete game?
  6. What's the [possible] average net income between a small studio compared to a large gaming development company?
  7. If you were to develop a game with a full time staff of 10 developers, how long do you expect to release a fully a playable game with all features mentioned with online, multiplayer gameplay for a large game like an action/adventure or simulation game?
I'm curious now given that people are expecting a complete game within a year or less. That and are holding too high of an expectation for the game.
 
octoberasian said:
Seeing that people replying in this thread are supposedly game developers themselves, how about this?
  1. How long does it take to go from alpha to beta to gold/release version?
  2. What is the average time it takes to develop a game from scratch?
  3. How feature-complete is a game in alpha compared to beta and gold/release version?
  4. For a small game development company of less than 50 employees-- full time and part time, how long does it take to release a game on average?
  5. For a large company like EA, Ubisoft, or DiCE, how long does it take to release a feature-complete game?
  6. What's the [possible] average net income between a small studio compared to a large gaming development company?
  7. If you were to develop a game with a full time staff of 10 developers, how long do you expect to release a fully a playable game with all features mentioned with online, multiplayer gameplay for a large game like an action/adventure or simulation game?
I'm curious now given that people are expecting a complete game within a year or less. That and are holding too high of an expectation for the game.
Click to expand...

The bottom line is when the game you're making is a piece of shit, you need a strict NDA.
 
DayZ fans got what they wanted

only issue during the alpha is if updates are few and far between

if it's often, then DayZ fans will probably be happy to continue playing an alpha
 
lloose said:
They are in a tight spot right now. I would say that they shouldn't have even released the alpha, but they obviously don't have the manpower needed to release the game while its still relevent.
Click to expand...

Still relevant? Will EA, Ubisoft and Rockstar be releasing their multiplayer survival horror games sometime in the next year to devastate the DayZ community?
 
Why are people so upset about this? It's a niche game, sure, but they just raised aprox. $25million in additional capital to help develop the game and pay their people. This was previously an ARMA 2 mod which they worked on for a couple years for free. I think they should get paid and I'm glad to see them doing well.

If you don't want to alpha test, then don't buy it. It clearly states in big bold blue box that it's early release and you're basically paying to test a game. In case people forgot, this is how Counter-Strike, DoTA and many other games got their start. Build an awesome mod for an existing game and then branch out/hope to get bought out by a big developer.
 
This game is a jogging simulator, NOTHING HAPPENS. I don't get the hype, and it may die before it hits beta.

However, they clearly tell you not to buy their game if you do not understand what ALPHA is. I do not see a problem here.
 
XvMMvX said:
This game is a jogging simulator, NOTHING HAPPENS. I don't get the hype, and it may die before it hits beta.

However, they clearly tell you not to buy their game if you do not understand what ALPHA is. I do not see a problem here.
Click to expand...

It's already been around for a couple of years, and if you don't get it, then it's not for you. Many do get it.
 
Why all the hate for early access? I think that is one of the best things to happen to gaming in a long time. Although this particular game isn't of interest to me I have several other titles I have Kickstarted at levels that offer early access and I have my eye on a couple of other Steam titles with early access availability

No one forces anyone to buy a game for early access and unlike preorders (which I also occasionally support) I can get an immediate benefit from my advance purchase ... I think the idea of early access is good and I will continue to support it for select titles :)
 
I guess it's good they are taking time to make the game right, but goddamn they're taking a LONG time on this game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top