Virfortis

We've already mastered the art of walk-around-fire-gun. We've been tied to the post of rail shooting and gallery style chatrooms for well nigh on a decade or more. Gamers have hated it, the mainstream wasn't a fan of it, but it was all we had. We were stuck chained to the gate where we had a small room and told to shoot each other while our literal owners rolled in our interactive forum. It explains why indie titles have become such a big hit: Gamers want something new. Then, suddenly, rocket comes out with a new field, where you can roam freely. He says the tools are out in the field, and it's only a matter of finding them for you to use. He promises freedom, allowing us to actually enjoy a game to the fullest. Gamers picked up on it because they want something new the most, but then the mainstream caught it, and what happened? They showed up, dragged everyone to the gate, and started shooting each other, just like before. If there is any lesson that DayZ has taught, any experiment or fact that could be stated, it's that rocket finally, after all these years, answered the two questions the industry has wondered for years: Why is CoD so popular? Because it's what players really want. Why aren't good games made anymore? Because players abuse the good ones. The evidence is right here. Gamers, REAL gamers, realize the games inherit flaws and issues. Yet, because they've been strapped to the same grindstone for years, they have a hard time expressing it in terms the rest of the audience will understand. Then the mainstream comes in with their "carebear" hyperbole, using it to muzzle the creative voice of DayZ. All that's left is the number of kills a player has, because freedom means using kills as a measure of fantasized manliness. In what other games are kills considered the end-all carrying card of popularity? And yet, you say you want something different. It's hypocritical, at best. Rocket has said it best: The player will determine what DayZ is. Then players love to use that as an excuse and say DayZ is different. By your logic alone, you admit that you want a random deathmatch. That's what DayZ will be until the community backs off with the "carebear" shield and starts owning up for screwing this game over.

So instead of survival, I should just shoot people for fun. Because DayZ is a new experience, based solely around shooting people. ........nope...still same old ArmA2.

This thread shows two underlying problems. DayZ has about 2 hours of actual gameplay, before all that's left is PvP fragging The forums are over-flooded with assholes Is there any wonder why gaming is on a decline if THIS is how we act?

As for the topic: I'm going to have to agree and disagree here. Yes the issues are bad, yes everyone and their cousin is out deathmatching, but no there's not much to stop that in-game through arbitrary systems. I have always been a fan of making guns extremely rare, and the survivor washing up with only 2 magazines to his name, but I don't see that happening anytime soon because Rocket wants a mechanic to deal with it. He won't change the "balance" of the game via loot table alteration because he wants it that way. He WANTS everyone decked out in Rambo style armaments, spraying bullets at each other, because that's how his fantasy works. Sure, that's fine because he's making it, but then he needs to stop touting this as a zombie apocalypse survival mod, that's all. I'm not saying the game sucks, just that it's mislabeled.

So, with this, I'm thinking of consolidating all that I have written into one large blog-post about harassment and the virtual community. Any idea on a good place to post it? It wouldn't be a continual blog unless people ask me, but it would be a backup in case this happens again. Edit: from over 300 posts down to 180... x_x I'm not mad just...blegh...never doing that again.

The spike, though not dangerous, is likely from a clogged server, meaning it needs a reset. I'm no expert, that's just a guess. Try playing on servers that reset every few hours.

This is not the peak of DayZ, but this IS the peak of the hype for it. I, for one, welcome the decline in popularity. I know that sounds stupid, but it means that those who actually like DayZ will soon become more and more prevalent.

Well nuts. All that campaigning I did to better the community is now gone. I have to start this crap ALL over again, which means dealing with every whine and moan from the word go.

Every time I search a tent, I just get cheap guns and stuff I don't use. =( I'm like Charlie Brown on Halloween man...

Can we get a "everyone needs to let players adapt and not camp the coast" thread next to our "PvP ALL OTHERS will be deleted!" thread?

Of course, Rocket doesn't NEED a big fanbase because he's doing this all as part of a mod. for free in his spare time. So he can cater to the minority that wants his dream, not the casual crowd that wants another Fallen Earth.

I expected a "what's with all the nerds playing video games?" reply that is SO common on forums. Instead I see nerds equated with DC abusers...you may very well incur the internet wrath for this.

I signed up, tried to jump in but servers were full and life was against me. Maybe Thursday night.

We should probably cut the number of alive players down too, in order to factor people who have left.

Here's the problem. There are only two ways to achieve a goal: Consent or force. Let me try putting it this way and seeing if it sticks: Obviously, we have a problem. That problem is players treating DayZ like another free-for-all deathmatch mod just to have fun killing "noobs" and fragging the coastline. I think we can all agree on this: DayZ is not about making the multiplayer version of STALKER. If anything, it's trying to capture the singleplayer aspect of it, that is clans forming together and survivors toughening it up or dying. The problem is that it's relying on player consent to make the NPCs, the Duty/Freedom, the STALKER/Scientists, etc. When players have been so indoctrinated by other games to simply "shoot the bad guy" that it curtails the social aspect that DayZ is trying to mimic. ArmA2 has never been about socializing, nor have other games in the "realistic" (and I always chuckle when they use that word) world of Battlefield and CoD. So, what's to be done? If consent doesn't work, there is obviously force correct? Sure, we could implement arbitrary mechanics that slap players for killing and endorses surviving, but then it kills the freedom that is DayZ, gives it objectives, and places the player on a rail of achievements and objectives. In other words, it ceases to be a sandbox. Either way, it doesn't look good, but there IS a third option: peer pressure. What works for bullies and social stigmas works for survivors and stalkers. If those with the power do not tolerate those that abuse it, the general consensus of the collective shifts. So, what am I saying? If you're a clan, and you don't like mass PKing, get the power and stop it. If you're a survivor and don't like it, sign up for this "police" clan. You have the power, YOU can make it happen, you just need to go get it. I am already seeing this happening now, just look at the different areas for survivors/bandits. Patrol the beach, take in survivors and shoot bandits. If you move in a large enough force, soon nobody will bother you. Word gets around, I mean look at HA...nobody goes north in SLC1 and expects to survive. Sorry for the wall of text, hopefully I threw something there that stuck, hoping to refine this statement over time.

Plain and simple: One does not simply handle the backstabbers.

And the crowd goes wild! :D

That's actually the exact definition of a "carebear." Definition: an insult, the term applies less to players who merely prefer PVE to PVP and more to individuals who question the basic legitimacy of PVP or who greatly overreact to their avatars' deaths. As used in DayZ: Someone who likes anything that isn't total bandit griefing (not PvP, many PvP players hate griefing and are labelled carebears for it.)

DayZ mod has spoken. I hope the community considers maturing up a bit as a result. ALL kinds of crime would increase in an apocalypse, not just specific ones. It's one of the reasons DayZ is so open as a sandbox, there are no rules because there would be no rules. That is irrefutable, but this forum is not in the middle of an apocalypse, and really DayZ isn't going to be a mod where all kinds of crime are possible, just the killing and looting stuff you see in movies. DayZ is not a "crime" simulator, plain and simple, get over it and grow up.

Everyone is divided into clans in the real world, nobody is a lone wolf. We just call our clans something different, like countries, factions, insurgencies, guerrillas, etc. If you want to survive in DayZ, or even in the real world, you need to pick a clan/country to support so they, in turn, will support you. Unlike DayZ though, it's kinda hard to just swap clans IRL...I really have considered moving to Sweden or around that area. =/