SGT. Kalme

I didn't go through all the pages but it seems that only reasonable post within 5 pages is ignored. They cause different damage. A broadhead hit can cause you to bleed to death in seconds. It isn't that much kinetic energy that kills. Especially for big games. Bluntheads are for killing small game by shock from impact. Getting a breadhead shot into your chest from crossbow would kill you quickly. About as fast as a 5.56 bullet if both are shot into vital area. From close range it wouldn't make much difference. Damage calculated in dayz is so basic and wrong that I wouldn't be surprised if it was impossible to implement realistic danage from different weapon shots. As for your question why it is like it is in dayz? No idea. The ballistics seems to be messed up for all the weaponry.

People claim they are fine with others but go on hours of arguing how one or another would not be possible. Play how you want. It won't make any difference. It is all good. What makes the game what it is, is that people have never seen how individuals really act and think. They live in a highly controlled box where everyone is strictly limited to what the most see appropriate. And when they see real human nature, theycan't accept it. It is widely known that while many people claim to be waiting for apolyptical event, you don't really want it. Because it will be nothing you could imagine. It is not because it would actually be bad - nature would recover in the long run, corrupted systems would collapse. Real reason why you don't want it is because you and other 50% of mankind would die within week, other 25% in few months. Just because you will never expect what is out there. My advice is, if you want to play real survival game with real survival aspects - go to camping into the woods for two weeks with knife only. You'll get the survival and no bandits to shoot you. If you want survival to include more than one person, expect more than one way of behavior.

And no one is forced. They are what they are, by their choice. They don't need excuses and definitely my point isn't one.

Refer to the example and my post. People have long gone from natural path to only self-preserve. We want to destroy, rule, overcome the nature. But that is completely another story. You will see that some people just think they are better than everyone else, that they do everything better than others. Overall are superior species somewhat. But it is their choice. Nothing you can do about it.

Yes and no. I see it that way - there would be all kinds of extremists when anarchy would hit a nation. You think what people do in a game where they can do all they want is weird and out of normal. It is, in regulated society. But people would do all kinds of stupid things when opportunity hits. So, my opinion is that it ia fine in DayZ. There were to apart discussions about how the instincts lead action in stressful situation and how behavior is connected to a personality, not dependant on environment in which they exist. It doesn't make difference if you behave differently than you would in person in material world. It does determine part of personality, however. I don't think there is anything wrong with DayZ and its playerbase as it is now. You do meet all kinds of people in reality so I don't think any behavior in DayZ is somehow surprising.

Well, congratulations on that. That is some achievement right there. On more serious note, you don't read or just refuse to understand my posts in order to go on with your what-ever-that-is-story. You assume my argument is one thing and put up another that is completely off the topic. Whenever did I post such argument, it must have been a typing mistake. But it was not. Because I didn't post such statement. I am fully aware that my posts are little too hard to follow, though, so it is as much as my mistake as it is yours to misunderstand them. You call people idiots that choose to play the game as they want. So, in comparison to my point, you are putting people that choose to act differently on an inferior position. And you call me out being on a high horse. I get tired of it. You try to make people look worse than you to prove your point and that is not a way I am looking into to go on with discussion. Your arguments are actually quite irrelevant because all you do is to bring examples how you choose to do something. That doesn't make any point of mine less true but actually proves them. You want to take psychology away from human behavior? Good luck with that. It is simply logic. You don't even need to study psychology to understand basic rules of behavior. The way you compose your posts shows something completely different than me being on a high horse. That really depends from who they would be defending from. It is still essentially the same principles on most primitive level. Our ways to kill whole nations for some shiny rocks is not a primitive level that I am talking about. This is just an example.

They already have a perfect excuse to act as they want (in dayz that is) - freedom of choice. They do because they can. And it is not wrong or bad actually. You can see all forms of human nature in that game which is awesome I think. Animals defend themselves by the same principle humans do. After all we are animals as well. But don't confuse the actions that are only justified by selfdefence as one. As for DayZ - many people get caught up with it. More or less everyone does. That means to some extent, intense situation affects their thinking functionality. Only because nowadays so many people have lost the need to selfdefence because they live in a safe environment where they are not threatened by predators. Ability to make rational decisions fades because people rarely go through any of those situations. That means the first most basic and reasonable action when thrown into danger may be kill or be killed. Most of the time it comes down to it. People spend much time, get emotionally attached to their virtual character and to what is achieved so far so the fear of losing it affects their emotional readiness to risk it. They become eager to defend their time and pixels in a primitive way. They might even not be threatened but they don't estimate the danger, they just act like they were programmed to by nature. People think it is only a game and they are right. It is only a game but people actually act quite similar way in reality. So, my point is. It is impossible to fix what people ask to by just making changes to game. Because it is not caused by game itself.

Sure I have played those games. And playing them like they are expected. But I still don't act any different than I would in person. You see, it is not about the games or what they are like. It is about the behavior of playerbase. While therre are nice people in any game that I have played, there are whiners, ragers and so on so forth. While this goes far off-topic now but I try to bring it back. There is nothing wrong with game concept. It is the human behavior that causes so much whine around it. I am not saying there is something wrong with it. When you live in a complete anarchy, it is expected that everything depends purely of individuals actions. And their actions vary from one extreme to another. It may be just a game for you. It is just a game for me, too. I just don't see why should I be any different when playing a game. Just like you don't see why would you behave the same as you would in person. I don't understand why would you want to prove there is something wrong with me and not with others. I don't say there is something wrong with others. But I do not believe there is something wrong with me. But as I choose to act one way or another, it is tied to who I am in person. Try to argue with that but that won't change a thing. And I can differ game from real life very well. It feels completely different when you are being shot at in reality than it is in game. That does indeed mean I can make the perfect difference. Plus I rarely play any games so that couldn't be problem either that I spend too much time in them. You see why making assumptions can be mistake?

Books differ which is expected. Ability to defend yourself in first phases of life is in no way related to it being primary instinct. Can be argued though so let's just call it a day here. I think we can say survival is keyword for any living organism. Defence plays huge if not major part of it. Now that is why I even brought up that point. It is very counter productive. But still, it is true. Not to kill everyone, there are more than one choice. But in difficult times, one weighs up another. We have nations that want to destroy and rule everything even in not so difficult times. So you are stating that when you are on the internet or in a video game, it is a different person than you or your actions are decided by someone else? Nope. You may try to justify the way you act when there is illusion of privacy covering your person that prevents others to know who you really are but only that fact says a lot about person. Question my mentality all you want but you obviously don't have much understanding of psychology. That said, I see no point in discussing it any further with you. For your actions to help homeless, I salute. But it was just a series of examples not directed to you personally. Just in attempt to explain how different actions in different enviroments are still your actions that you personally choose to make. And that connects those actions to your person, no difference if your person is known or not in reality. It is human nature that we try to defend ourself and our actions, words and whatelse. I can't and don't want to crucify you for that. But your manner of speech tells me a story that is not written post you composed. It gives me an understanding of you. And you are extremely eager to make assumptions. Assuming is often the biggest mistake. I am not free of that myself but try to hold back making those as I can.

In the mod days, we shot eachother all the time. Just for the fun of it. When it got boring, we messed with eachother, called names and shit. Then shot our legs broken, sometimes half of our 14 men team killed eachother. Other times were when we were attacking one other team (regular team in the server we played) and some of our guys went crazy, yelling yolo and running around spraying their ammunition at random targets. Then we usually shot them. For the luls. In SA, I have been quite easy and calm on those things though.

I can't say you did anything wrong. But the new guy played it well. Nice story you got there.

I see lot of anger in your post against the playerbase. Since you quoted me I assume that my post, or the part you cut from it, caused that, anyway. I don't see a problem because I didn't address it as a problem. I simply stated what could change the game to what people so much praise for. Do I think that this game should be all about the value of life and looking for ineractions, preserving life of your own and others? No. I don't know where you read that from my post because the opposite is actually stated there. I asume you just skipped to the part that caused that emotion in you because my post is long and boring wall of text. I think that people should be able to play the game in the manner they choose. Whatever it may be, it is individual choice and game developers shouldn't be working on how to limit the freedom of choice but how to make selection of choices much bigger. If people have only two choices to choose between - that is either to sit in a tree or go kill everyone - then the choice becomes one eventually. Because boredom leads to it. For the very first statement that you bring up as a problem - everything you do, whereever you do it, is affected by what kind of person you are. Be it saying rude word to homeless, acting douche in forum or playing game as one - it is related to morale in your person. I don't choose to be rude or kill people and teabag them in a videogame because I can. I act the same way I do in life because that is what I am in person and I don't see why would I change that and try to be something else. I don't judge you for acting differently in a videogame because it doesn't bring any harm to anyone. But it does reflect you as a person, don't ever think otherwise. Cheers. I expect you to not give any warranties for what you can't actually guarantee. That is exactly what I am talking about. Don't take it strictly personal, you are not alone in this.

These are not the game design flaws. These are flaws in design of human. You can't have truly open game with open environment when your actions and decicions are made or affected by anything else than yourself. DayZ offers the freedom of choice. Like in real life, people can have morale and ethics in their approach or not. And you can't change that in game because it is not the fault of the concept of DayZ. It is the society. I vote against anything that suggests that we should limit the game in order to put limits to human behavior. .... Little more details. For some people there is more value to life, for others less. But the gap between the two ends is actually very small. Most people, especially nowadays, can't handle intense situations and danger very well. Hence they panic, they let the primitive instincts lead them to actions. How would one judge if the lack of interaction points out flaws in gameplay or is actually natural behavior of humanbeing in such environment and situation? Preserving life, and especially your life because self-defence is actually the most basic instinct of any living lifeform, is built upon elimination or avoidance of threats. Both by nature are against interaction. There is no reward trying to act in opposite, only three different results in which one of them means being killed, other killing and for last having a positive interaction that connects two different persons into one role - be it having similar goals or friendly nature - but last which doesn't exclude the previous two options. Decision would be made considering the worst threat and consequences and as you can see, the odds are not in interaction favor. What would help? Changing human nature. Teaching people to be more social, to think about others, to value life overall, not only welfare of your own person. The small changes in game can't do that. That should be done during entire life of a person. So it is not a paradox game - well, at least in that meaning - but it is just a possible projection of an apocalyptical event in a virtual environment. Would people speak to each other if it was impossible to cause any harm to others? Sure. Would it make the game better? No, it would just take one aspect of what life really is away and add fake behavior of humanbeings. My opinion only. You are free to agree or disagree. .... I play this game as a survival game and I have not seen any restrictions to it. I survive to survive. Now this is a concept flaw of DayZ. Not only, all the computer games. You can't make the life as valuable and surviving as rewarding as it would be in life. Unless you make people die when they happen to die in game. Which would make this game very unpopular and hence be a bad move. Problem is, people are so boxed in their minds. They only search for a reward for anything they do. if I can't get something from it, why do it? I tell you why. For the feeling of doing something. I find this game much more pleasing than the games where I act to unlock features or get bonuses. Because that restricts me to specific actions, yes, but as well because I am not concentrated for rewards. My own experience is the result and the only reward if seek. It is the fun of it. In reality, I would be much more paranoid about any living creatures and the fun would be less than half of it. Because games are all about fun. Fighting for your very own and real life is not.

Well. I can tell you that on a moonless night, you can see shit and less. It would be stupid to even try without nightvision. Good way to find something to step on. Leaving real life aside, I like nights and even thought every other night being pitch black is kind of odd, the relation to real life day and night cycle is a good thing in my opinion. If you can't find a way to make the game fit for your needs, adapt or quit. People can speak all the crap about their cateyes and shit. Most people even forget how they are able to see. You can see perfectly with no light? I want to see that myself. Even nightvision doesn't work with no light and from real life example. On moonless night, nightvision works like crap. So if you think nightvision will make all the bad darkness go away, lets wait till they make it realistic. Lots of noise, life-like IR illumination. Past 50m your nightvision becomes useless in the woods.

Better than original song. Well done!

I haven't done anything to improve them game. Just played it. And for me, it is a yes based on experience so far.

:thumbsup:

DayZ is built around beans. What are you talking about?

What is the topic exactly? I think people are right now pretty spot-on since the main theme seems to be whining.

I have a dream... That one day we will have a perfect game that covers so many areas from real life in a realistic way that I could play all the games by just having one. I would love to see the hunting made realistic as possible with separate and natural animal AI. Would be awesome.

You bought several copies of the game to gear up more than one character? Okay, your money and stuff, you make your own choices. But complaining about resets? I think these things should happen more often so people would draw their attention from making gearing up as a main goal and started playing the game finally.

The western countries were involved with the plot in ArmA 2 Chernarus. ArmA2 seems to take place in 2009 IIRC from the BI story about it.

I came here to sit in a forest and eat my beans. But I like my forest and beans very realistic. And currently they are not very realistic. Metaphorically speaking.

But I am trained to shoot a rifle. So how is this possible I can't shoot a ducking rifle?

This thread turned out to be really pathetic. People should grow a pair and accept that this game allows people to play like they find it to their liking. And stop complaining about others play-style. Kids. Kids everywhere.