My own thoughts and reservations regarding the impending morality system

[Jedimushroom 1]

I think it's important to remember that no matter how realistic a game is made, there are always some things that cannot be simulated. The most primal of these non-simulatable factors are compassion and a fear of death.

The fear of death is actually modelled quite well in the mod, since dying resets your character to a weak and unsafe state and loses hours of progress, but is still not nearly as much of an incentive as it would be in real life (obviously). Any more serious consequences for player death would almost certainly be excessively irritating and not conducive to gameplay, so this will probably have to be left as-is.

The second factor is compassion, the lack of which is the essential reason behind the creation of the morality system. In a real-life survivalist scenario, most people would retain (up to a point) the morals and belief systems that served them in civilised life. This means that your average person would be very unlikely to simply kill a stranger for the items they possess unless they had no other option.

In essence, modern society puts a great deal of 'weight' or value on a person's life, and this is not simulated in a game where your actions are anonymous and at a distance, and their consequences are small and acceptable. Essentially, players in this game act like psychopaths who believe that their actions have no consequence because that is, quite simply, true.

If the developers of this mod want to bring the human interactions within it more into line with reality, then they must find a way to simulate human compassion in a situation where it is unnecessary, and this is what the morality system is trying to accomplish. The trick is to find a way to encourage cooperation without limiting player freedom or removing the intriguing element of mistrust present in the game.

My advice at this point would be to attempt to reduce the danger of trusting other players, rather than attempt to punish uncooperative behaviour. This might give cooperative groups more confidence to interact and reduce the amount of unnecessary murder.

[Deviant (DayZ) 43]

I think it's important to remember that no matter how realistic a game is made' date=' there are always some things that cannot be simulated. The most primal of these non-simulatable factors are compassion and a fear of death.

The fear of death is actually modelled quite well in the mod, since dying resets your character to a weak and unsafe state and loses hours of progress, but is still not nearly as much of an incentive as it would be in real life (obviously). Any more serious consequences for player death would almost certainly be excessively irritating and not conducive to gameplay, so this will probably have to be left as-is.

The second factor is compassion, the lack of which is the essential reason behind the creation of the morality system. In a real-life survivalist scenario, most people would retain (up to a point) the morals and belief systems that served them in civilised life. This means that your average person would be very unlikely to simply kill a stranger for the items they possess unless they had no other option.

In essence, modern society puts a great deal of 'weight' or value on a person's life, and this is not simulated in a game where your actions are anonymous and at a distance, and their consequences are small and acceptable. Essentially, players in this game act like psychopaths who believe that their actions have no consequence because that is, quite simply, true.

If the developers of this mod want to bring the human interactions within it more into line with reality, then they must find a way to simulate human compassion in a situation where it is unnecessary, and this is what the morality system is trying to accomplish. The trick is to find a way to encourage cooperation without limiting player freedom or removing the intriguing element of mistrust present in the game.

My advice at this point would be to attempt to reduce the danger of trusting other players, rather than attempt to punish uncooperative behaviour. This might give cooperative groups more confidence to interact and reduce the amount of unnecessary murder.

[/quote']

An interesting post. I think if a group/clan system was added in-game, you would see people be a bit more cautious. Killing everyone you see will ultimately end in people hating you, and not trusting you. Having people not trust you means you will be a target more often.

[oktyabr 53]

My advice at this point would be to attempt to reduce the danger of trusting other players' date=' rather than attempt to punish uncooperative behaviour. This might give cooperative groups more confidence to interact and reduce the amount of unnecessary murder.

[/quote']

Excellent post, but I'm curious to know what suggested ideas you have for accomplishing this?

[Jedimushroom 1]

Excellent post' date=' but I'm curious to know what suggested ideas you have for accomplishing this?

[/quote']

Well there are two main issues here, the first is that some people play alone and simply murder all they see. The second is that it is hard for cooperative groups to form for fear that the person you have found is one of these lone murderers.

The morality system attempts to solve the second issue by trying to inform the player about the past actions of the person they are seeing, so they can make an informed decision about whether to trust them or not. This system seems to have some flaws in that many otherwise trustworthy people are bandits and vice-versa but it is certainly a step in the right direction.

The problem is that it does not solve the first issue at all. I have spoken to quite a few lone murderers and they universally shoot from a position from which they cannot be seen, thus eliminating the advantage of the morality system and severely reducing the chance of anyone exacting revenge on them for their crime.

One way to both increase the difficulty of this activity and make trusting players less risky is simply to reduce the effectiveness of firearms. The player in ArmA 2 is a highly trained soldier with significant experience in live combat, the survivors in DayZ are not. To this end, it would make sense to me to reduce the accuracy of firearms across the board.

Not only would this help with both the above issues, it would not cause significant problems with zombie balance, as zombies are rarely far enough away for accuracy to be a significant factor.

In addition to the survivor specialisation mechanics and other cooperative boons described earlier in the thread, I believe this would help to alleviate the one man army mentality that is plaguing the mod.

[oktyabr 53]

One way to both increase the difficulty of this activity and make trusting players less risky is simply to reduce the effectiveness of firearms. The player in ArmA 2 is a highly trained soldier with significant experience in live combat' date=' the survivors in DayZ are not. To this end, it would make sense to me to reduce the accuracy of firearms across the board.

[/quote']

Hmmm... the only issues I see are technical ones. The lone murderers you speak of are unlikely to be running around. They are probably lying prone somewhere for the greatest concealment and accuracy. A long arm in this engine is VERY steady in the prone position. I'm not sure how you would go about adding sway and the like without disrupting the realism. The other end of that equation is player hit boxes, making them smaller perhaps, again, not a trivial undertaking.

If weapons were the key you would either have to lower the damage done by them or conversely raise the amount of damage a player character can take before being incapacitated. I'm not sure if that's ideal either.

As a game designer I admire once said:

"Removing realism to promote realism DOES NOT WORK and negatively affects the entire game design."

On the other hand the devs could (and apparently are) pruning some of the more lethal military weapons from the game, the M107 TWS, a recent example. The majority of survivors are, as you said, not highly trained soldiers and they shouldn't be equipped as such either in my opinion. We are playing mostly in a civilian country side. Which is more suited to this, a masked bandit with thermal optics on a military grade weapon or a fat beet farmer with an antique double barrel shotgun?

At least you have some concrete suggestions!

[lolrade 1]

Possibly suggested before: Perhaps a grouping system (without group VON) that had some sort of bonus for teamplay is the way to go. Instead of punishing players who have a different play style, nudge people towards working together.

[Samsquanch (DayZ) 8]

There are so many good ideas in here. Honestly, I don't think there will be a sure way to fix the issue though as so many people are just accustomed to CoD's way of gaming. I also am ignoring the fact that there are probably many younger teens playing this. I've met over a dozen so far that actually talk on the mic. These are the kids who run and gun you face down while being chased by a town full of zombies. It's comical, but also a pain when you've been searching for a map or survival gear for hours, and just die in a random blaze of LOLZORS!!!

It's hard to expect players to role-play when this is a military sim. I know that with the new servers opening up over the coming weeks and months, there will be a a more stringent application for various servers, and these will thrive beautifully for those who want to enjoy a more 'realistic' experience, that keeps to the true simulation.

I can't tell you how hard it is when I'm in a tower scouting the town and I see a lone survivor, not knowing if they are actually alone, but I hesitate and check my supplies and rations. I can say that I have yet to pull the trigger... I know many have probably done the same...

I keep telling myself that I can find more supplies, and they deserve to live. I tell myself that they would do the same for me. I even let them know I'm there sometimes, if they have alerted a horde, just to help them on their way at the expense of my own ammunition [which is scarce], and ultimately my own protection. This is true morality in my opinion.

I cant count how many people I've run across in the last 2-3 days that I have tried to talk to (over mic), and then they just shot me and walked off like I was some NPC. Yeah, they didn't even bother to loot me.

Just my opinion based on experience with this from the start, and also from various other mods that reached for the same ideals. [/align]

[oktyabr 53]

Heh, the current state of PVP seems to be a kind of positive feedback loop. The more it happens the more it makes players cautious enough to shoot first which in turn heightens the violence even further and so on.

I did my good deed today! I was actually on a quick screenshot safari and was up high looking for something interesting before it got completely dark. In the distance I could see a new spawn, revolver in one hand and a flare in the other, running down a street with a few zombies in hot pursuit. He'd stop and shoot one or two but more and more kept showing up until I bet he had close to a dozen after him. I had a AK-74 and plenty of ammo and without hesitating to think about what I was doing I just started plinking zombie heads for him. I dropped the few closest to him while he was reloading. I know he heard my shots but he didn't have long to look around for where they were coming from. I bet he got half of the rest and I took the other half. We never said a word to each other and never met close up. It felt good.

[abysmal 2]

Possibly suggested before: Perhaps a grouping system (without group VON) that had some sort of bonus for teamplay is the way to go. Instead of punishing players who have a different play style' date=' nudge people towards working together.

[/quote']

I wholeheartedly agree. Even without the game itself facilitating it in anyway, forming groups has come to define the gameplay, and I think better accommodating this kind of play would rectify a lot of the games issues. I would really really like a group system in which groups or squads could have unique outfits to recognize each other, or identify themselves to others.

[ratszo 2]

Possibly suggested before: Perhaps a grouping system (without group VON) that had some sort of bonus for teamplay is the way to go. Instead of punishing players who have a different play style' date=' nudge people towards working together.

[/quote']

I wholeheartedly agree. Even without the game itself facilitating it in anyway, forming groups has come to define the gameplay, and I think better accommodating this kind of play would rectify a lot of the games issues. I would really really like a group system in which groups or squads could have unique outfits to recognize each other, or identify themselves to others.

Sounds good.

Also, maybe have 'bandit' change to 'escaped convict' for serial killers --bright orange prison jumpsuit or classic stripes.

[oktyabr 53]

Also' date=' maybe have 'bandit' change to 'escaped convict' for serial killers --bright orange prison jumpsuit or classic stripes.

[/quote']

LOL! Brilliant! Get a -5000 humanity and earn yourself a bright orange jumpsuit! Better give it reflective stripes too so it's easier to see in the dark. Honestly, I like this idea :)

[ratszo 2]

Also' date=' maybe have 'bandit' change to 'escaped convict' for serial killers --bright orange prison jumpsuit or classic stripes.

[/quote']

LOL! Brilliant! Get a -5000 humanity and earn yourself a bright orange jumpsuit! Better give it reflective stripes too so it's easier to see in the dark. Honestly, I like this idea :)

Hehe, or a strobing ankle-bracelet --we'd have lynch mobs!

Add a +500 humanity bounty for killing a convict and we'll get some rough justice.

[oktyabr 53]

@Ratszo: Your getting a +1 reputation from me as soon as I have more to give. :)