bluemage

What i wanted to say is that you cannot eliminate the KoS mentality. You can just reduce it by making KoS unattractive. If PvP is active, there will be KoS. KoS is the "bad" part of PvP.

It's nearly impossible to avoid KoS, if Pvp is active. Maybe you can reduce the KoS mentality. Finally someone said it :)

Do you think that "The walking Dead" is unrealistic in realtion to the fears of the protagonists?

Without pvp the game would be boring. Otherwise you don't have to be careful. Imagine: No PvP -> You can kill all Zombies with shooting on them. Someone hears the shot? No problem because there is no pvp. So you guys are right. Maybe i am a bit mad after being killed but i do not complain. Even an unarmed could be a spy or he could find a weapon.

I didn't say that a video game justifies killing and i didn't say that slavery doesn't exist today. What i wanted to say is that there is not a state-aided slavery. I am talking about modern states. A state represents the ethics of the folk. As you can see ... poverty has to do something with brutality. In a zombie apocalypse (which is unrealitic) there will be people who are starving. Starving means people will get desperate. Desparate people will do things, which they wouldn't do in a well-fed situation(more crime). My comment about killing people in a zombie apocalypse was referred to a post about grouping. Let's say 500k people survived the apocalypse. Do you think all of them will be "friendly"? No. Do you think all of them will be "bandits"? No. Now i say that i am a bandit. Now you know that there will be one person who is not friendly. Would you still try to meet every person you see? To meet a lot of bandits in such a scenario is really realistic. A lot of bandits means ~5-10%. So if you want to survive, you cannot group up very easy. You have to be really careful. The other thing is ... being a bandit in that scenario isn't equal with being a horrible person. Let's have a look on the evolution of the human race. There are theories about that our ancestors killed the Neanderthals. These theories are not unrealistic. Our ancestors did not stay in Africa. They moved because they wanted to find places to stay. "Places to stay" means places where you have enough food and water. That's why there could be a fight between these two races where the Neanderthals lost. Are our ancestors horrible people? (Two races - no communication possible). Killing people in state of emergency or is it self-defense? See season 2 of "The walking Dead" ... i don't want to spoil. What would you do in such a situation? prejudice - You talked about being 14 years old. It's just like saying your are a car thief -> You have to be a pole. That's prejudice. If you would say "Your ethical views are horrible". That would be juding based on something i said. Congo - Would you go to Congo? You have to carry about 50000 € in that scenario. Carry means in your hands - Everybody has to see it. If yes ... why? If no ... why? In a zombie apocalypse you can replace the money with a backpack. I took Congo because you said Congo. Replace it was a fictional state where the brutality is absurd. Grouping in a apocalypse - Of course there will be groups of people. Grouping will be like becoming friends. You don't go out and ask people whether they want to be your friend.

My mate and i were in cherno and we heard an explosion. After some minutes, it exploded again and we saw it. (+ smoke). Are explosives already implemented?

Yes, it's true ... killing in real life is a lot harder but pulling out a pistol or small guns can be really fast. If you turn 45° to the right, your right hand will be hidden for a person. (see US Secret Service)

horrible? - Morality is something that can change during the time (see Ancient Rome and slaves). 14 year old - Well ... prejudice isn't a horrible thing? "Every bandit = 14 years old" ?!?!?!

let's say a zombie apocalypse is realistic. you need a disease like the plague in the 14th century + the comeback as a zombie. That means the person you meet could be sick. The disease is highly contagious and uncontrollable. ---> Avoiding people is normal. A lot of people would try to barricade their homes. What do they need? ---> Water + food ---> Do they have enough food at home? No ---> raiding the stores and storages is a part of surviving the early stage. After the ressources are gone, they have to search new ressources to survive. It could be like a HI virus but it has to be deadly and highly contagious. Even if we say your scenario is true. The stores and storages are full with canned food. Let's say after 5 years it will be empty(depends on the count of the people who survived). What would you do? 3 hungry people but YOU found a canned baked beans. if its your family ... you would try to share but why should you share with a stranger?

Rare food --> people are hungry --> hungry people are aggressive There are enough examples in the history that proves my hypothesis true. So ... why should the people change their attitude in a real apocalypse? This attitude is called survival instincts. Just believe me ... in a real apocalypse i will be a "bandit" and i will shoot people to survive.

KoS is a essential part of the game. In a real apocalypse you wouldn't trust anybody because you could lose your life. In DayZ it's just the gear. So i don't understand why people want to have a "unrealistic DayZ".

I had a duel with someone who shot my friend down. My first reaction was running into the wood. After some minutes i found him and searched a good position to shoot. I crawled under a tree but he instantly saw me under a fir(distance to enemy ~ 600m). i thought that i was safe cause i had a lot of leaf in my face. After a while i realized that if the distance is long enough, the trees dont have leafs near the ground. Is that normal or is it a bug?