Jahandar

You are absolutely right, and I didn't intend to make an impression that I thought players needed to be handheld through objectives or anything like that. I just think there need to be more sandbox tools to allow players to create more goals for themselves that don't involve just killing. This game is similar to Minecraft in a lot of ways. And like Minecraft has, there just needs to be a focus on continually adding game elements for people to interact with, without just telling people what they should do with them, to flesh out the sandbox element of the game. That's long-term though, This is still alpha, so I'm not in a big hurry (and I'm still having a blast with what we do have), right now the focus should be on fixing bugs, but I don't see a problem with voicing these kinds of concerns because they are something that needs to be addressed eventually.

This. The problem is once survival and loot-acquiring are no longer a challenge and when you don't need to establish more camps or find more vehicles, there is really not much else to do besides kill people, and that's just not realistic for a game that considers itself a simulator of a post-apocalyptic world. There would be bandits yes, but not hoards of people saying "let's go murder folks for the hell of it" not out of self-defense, not to take their stuff, just for fun. A zombie apocalypse might make people turn into bandits to survive, but not serial killers. People don't like to think of this as a game, but you know what? It's still being played by gamers. And gamers seek entertainment, first and foremost. So they are going to seek the most fun options. Right now, for a game that prides itself on freedom and choice, there is only one choice once you reach that point in the game: find and kill people or just sit around with all the gear/food/vehicles you've collected in your camp and wait for something interesting to happen. Which one do you think people consider the most fun? Many see that ahead of time and just go straight to the killing, bringing their BF3/CoD mentality and are treating it as just another shooter. Just to reiterate (because people will no doubt say it anyway), I don't have a problem with getting killed. It's only happened a few times, and it was never a big deal to me. I just want the game to be all it can be, and not just another shooter. I can go play BF3 for that. There is hope though, the game has lots of potential (which is why we're all here), and future updates will hopefully bring more features to flesh out the game, and bring this closer to the post-apocalyptic world simulator that we all want (bandits and survivors alike).

If you can't survive in the wild without "constantly raiding towns" for food and water (even medical supplies) you're doing it wrong. The only reason to go back is for pvp or to gank noobs.

So the mechanics change, but the intent, reasoning, and style remains the same. yeah, I should've clarified with the word "most." Some people just want to watch the world burn. :)

The main distinction is this. In real life, people's goal would be survival and ultimately restoring order. In this game/simulator/experiment (whatever you choose to call it), people are really still just looking for entertainment first and foremost. Everything else secondary. So why not kill noobs? It's fun, right? Who cares if it fits the simulation. I draw a distinction between killing people for their loot or because you don't trust them vs killing them just for fun. It's at that point where the simulation breaks down and loses a bit of authenticity. Banditry is great, the fact that you can't trust people adds to the atmosphere. I'm hoping as new sandbox elements and content is added, the additional gameplay options will dilute amount of just running around killing people CoD-style just for the hell of it.

I've only been killed a few times by players, it wasn't a big deal for me, just part of the game. I think most people just saw the title and first few lines of the OP and assumed this guy was just whining about getting killed from bandits (saying the game was failing didn't help his case), but he did actually have a decent point in that right now ultimately the game just funnels you into killing other players without many other options or reasons to seek an alternative. I've managed to survive and live now and gear up and still have yet to murder anyone, but that could change at any minute. It's all about risk vs reward. It's far more risky to be trusting, and far more rewarding to kill. I think its a necessary part of the game, but it shouldn't be the end-all be-all and only interesting endgame that people seek out just for the sake of it, as it is now. As it's alpha, I'm sure with the addition of more sandbox features, content, and game mechanics, things will even out in the future by providing more benefits and rewards to surviving in other ways, and perhaps even adding consequences and risk to the life of a bandit, whereas right now it's safe, and gives easy rewards. For instance, Rocket might choose to implement mechanics that respond to a players loss of "humanity," such as putting them in the "shock" state after murdering an innocent to simulate how that would weigh on your conscience, or a lower max blood for repeat murderers. After all, our characters are just normal people, not soldiers trained to compartmentalize or serial killers who just don't care. Yes, its alpha, that's why its the best time for people to talk about this stuff and make suggestions and give their opinions (even if you disagree), while all the decisions are still being made.