Does DayZ's player killing simulate real life authenticly?

[FreshmeatDK 22]

In a study of letters from WWI, a lot of soldiers wrote that they enjoyed the killing when they where in the trenches, and IIRC it caused them to feel bad when they returned to a normal life.As good a source as I can get, scoll down to 'joyful slaughter' So Ozelot does have a point, but he extrapolates it far beyond what it can support.

I think WBK has some very good points about some form of tribalism. I think it fits nicely with the human history of starting in small units and then forming larger units. Also, given countries like Somalia, and to some extend Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, people tend to band up with people they have some bond to and not fighting those, while fighting anyone outside their group. In a lot of languages, the word for the tribe is 'human', with everybody else being not 'human' and thus fair game.

I cannot find sources for above point without a trip to the library, which is not going to happen a quarter to midnight.

Further, it seems that altruism is part of our biological makeup. An an article on evolution and ethics, Michael Ruse points out that the humans that survived and had progeny are the ones that had inclination to cooperate. (Michael Ruse: 'The significance of evolution' in 'A companion to ethics' ed. Peter Singer, Blackwell 1993, pg 500-511). So if we do not see another as a threat, we will probably see them as a possible candidate to join our tribe. This might be overruled in a situation where resources are scarce, and a person is a threat merely by claiming food that the tribe needs.

This does not mean that people kill each other on sight. Engaging in combat always carry a risk, and most people will need a serious incitement to take that risk. Even somebody on their own might survive simply by the risk that it is a scout, but will probably be robbed or killed once his loneliness is discovered. But again, given the tendency of people to band together, loners will be rare after the initial chaos. Specifically, I do not think that people will kill one another without reason, which is very much what a lot of KoS in DayZ is about.

[Claw 26]

2002 called and wants their argument back.

While Wikipedia is far from perfect it is no longer a repository of faulty sources it once was and links to scholarly sources in the footnotes (it links to this while discussing the evolutionary theories of guilt Pallanti S, Quercioli L. "Shame and psychopathology"). It is also a very reliable quick source for knowledge when looking into a subject. Sorry most of us do not want to respond to your freshman psychology course reading by going out to the library to compile the necessary research to complete a research paper, we are in fact on a game forum and not submitting a doctoral thesis.

As far as your thesis goes you gloss over the fact that humans are also predisposed to forming groups. The "KoS" mentality would exist but in a far less aggressive fashion as the current game offers. People would be wary of outsiders and would treat those outside the group as a threat, but it would not rise to the levels seen in this game. Claiming the feeling of guilt is only present around peers is also absurd, if it was a cultural construct you would find cultures where guilt was non existent. Guilt pops up in every human culture so we can reason that it is not a cultural construct that requires peers but is hardwired part of our evolution that served a purpose in the past.

So part of your argument is valid, humans do have a propensity for violence that is reflected in this mod. Where you lose people is by claiming other natural human instincts would all go out the window just because of an apocalypse scenario. You do not even touch on the fact that every single one of the people in this scenario would also have been influenced by their culture pre apocalypse.

The reason KOS does not exist in the real world as much ( and i stress as much ) is due to the obvious difference in repercussions ( regardless of prison as this may not be an issue if the world tunred lawless, death in rl is death not respawn) in a RL apocolypse as opposed to a computor game one. Hence why in rl a lot of bad deeds are well thought out and others are acts of random desperation or mistakes.In RL you just have to look at when people get slung into a situation where there is one winner, they will form groups and normally stab each other in the back for personal gain eventually, hence why we have wars throughout history and conflict will always be there, in the animal kingdom it's about nesecity , in our race its about greed, money power and conquest.

[Jamz 253]

Remember, the term 'Kill On Sight' indicates a premeditated and deliberate execution with no prior contact/dialogue.

[Tek (DayZ) 95]

This thread is asking if the way people play in this game will translate over to real life? Seriously? This is a video game. It has no bearing on real life. How someone acts in this game does not mean that is how they are going to act in real life.

No one will ever know how they are going to react in a situation until they are put in that situation. That is why the military trains so much, so that when you do get put in the situations you're trained for your actions will be driven by all the training you did.

People not trained may lock up, may turn into a hero, may turn into a coward and run away. Know one knows until it happens.

Video game =/= to real life.

[TheDesigner 1197]

lol ? kos most def does happen in RL- visit joberg in SA or bogata etc etc ( or even run down areas of most citys ) and why ? the comparison with dayz would be that the aforementioned places are struck with tough political standards and ppl are poor and need to survive? they have easier access to weapons than someone living in a nice middle class area due to the enviroment they live in and as such are bitter and angry with the world.

In dayz why with the mod being full of weapons would anyone scratch their head for it not to exist is beyond me ( the only why to change it in dayz is with factions and punishment for tk within them)

In regards to natural distasters etc i can guarante you 100 % there will always be a percentage of ppl that will be on the make or doing dastadly deads. To put it very simple " good " wouldnt exist without bad ( as sad as it sounds ) the word has no meaning without its's oposite. Mankind has ( and still does ) do horible things over the years, unfortunatley human nature is so individual and hard to predict that you cant guarante one type of behaviour as we are all such individuals deep down ( why comunism doesnt work in all countrys without years of conditiioning )

History is littered with acts of kindness as is with acts of evil- its quite simple.

Joberg? I googled it and got no results, 'crept for Joburg, South Africa. While using some random African city in a country ranked first for rape and second for assault and murder seems like a good idea to prove your point, it's not. You're going to the extremes to try and say "Look! This is what humans do!" When in reality, that place is just, excuse my French, fucked up. Africa in general has been plagued with violence for centuries.

Also, as some one else pointed out above, "KoS" means "Kill on Sight". So it's somebody killing another person at the moment he sees him, for no reason at all. They kill there for food, water, and supplies, but for no reason? Maybe a few, but that is going to happen everywhere because if psychopaths.

Edited July 1, 2013 by TheDesigner

[-Gews- 7443]

Yup, I'd say it does. I quite frequently go around shooting random people, so does almost everyone I know.

Yeah I doubt it.

[TheRaptorFence 17]

While this is virtual reality and an actual scientific experiment is a bit...difficult to pull off in such a scenario I wouldn't be surprised to find anthropologists and sociologists studying the interactions of players in DayZ (as has happened in WoW https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrupted_Blood_incident#Models_for_real-world_research), especially because there is a lot of authenticity to the interaction itself. It's true people don't go around shooting each other in real life, but the point of the game is to simulate an apocalyptic event beyond that which has been seen by mankind in thousands of years. Disasters such as the Japanese tsunami and Hurricane Katrina don't cut it because there is still a government to fall back on, a world which still exists beyond the event itself.

I couldn't definitively say one way or another that DayZ's player interaction would hold up in a zombie apocalypse, but then again I don't know if I could say that until a global disaster on that apocalyptic level happened.

[joe king 5]

This is quite interisting. It made me think of when the USS Indianapolis was sunk and although near 900 seamen survive the initial sinking of the ship, only a handfull survived to tell the tale. Thrown into a situation such as they were (In shark infested waters in the pacific ocian, facing exposure, dehydration and shark attacks, with no one looking for them for days) many of the men were drove to drinking sea water, losing sanity, and murdering one another. More men died at the hands of there fellow seaman than they did from dehidration or shark attacks.

This was a great doco showing how desperate Humans become and to what lengths they will go to survive:

Edited July 2, 2013 by Joe King

[billyangstadt 272]

I'm sorry, but hiding in a bush and sniping anyone that walks by doesn't fall into your theory.

[SoWeMeetAgain 100]

While this is virtual reality and an actual scientific experiment is a bit...difficult to pull off in such a scenario I wouldn't be surprised to find anthropologists and sociologists studying the interactions of players in DayZ (as has happened in WoW https://en.wikipedia...-world_research), especially because there is a lot of authenticity to the interaction itself. It's true people don't go around shooting each other in real life, but the point of the game is to simulate an apocalyptic event beyond that which has been seen by mankind in thousands of years. Disasters such as the Japanese tsunami and Hurricane Katrina don't cut it because there is still a government to fall back on, a world which still exists beyond the event itself.

I couldn't definitively say one way or another that DayZ's player interaction would hold up in a zombie apocalypse, but then again I don't know if I could say that until a global disaster on that apocalyptic level happened.

In Katrina there WERE roaming gangs raping, pillaging and killing.

The government then made it worse by confiscating the guns people legally owned so no one who wasn't lieing about having a gun didn't have one any more... against the 2nd amendment btw.

I wouldn't "just murder" anyone in an apocalypse. However, I would kill anyone who threatened me or my family without a third thought. I'd given them the second thought though. :thumbsup: I really don't know if the game does reflect reality. No guns where I live, generally peaceful life, so it's hard for me to say. :)

you mean no "legal" guns where you live ;)

[ImageCtrl 719]

In Katrina there WERE roaming gangs raping, pillaging and killing.

Feel free to edit the wiki about Katrina. It´s easy with proof. WIKI: Reports of carjacking, murders, thefts, and rapes in New Orleans flooded the news. Some sources later determined that many of the reports were inaccurate, because of the confusion.^[95] Thousands of National Guard and federal troops were mobilized and sent to Louisiana along with numbers of local law enforcement agents from across the country who were temporarily deputized by the state. "These troops are fresh back from Iraq. They are well-trained, experienced, battle-tested... They have M16s and are locked and loaded. These troops know how to shoot and kill and I expect they will," Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco said. Additional acts of unrest occurred following the storm, particularly with the New Orleans Police Department. In the aftermath, a tourist asked a police officer for assistance, and got the response, "Go to hell, it's every man for himself."^[50] Additionally, several NOPD officers were arrested weeks after Katrina for suspicion of vehicle theft.^{[52] You should watch the Video I posted. Some parts are about Katrina.} Edited July 2, 2013 by NoCheats

[FaustianQ 8]

Can't agree with the sentiment that DayZ in anyway represents a post-apocalyptic situation or that KoS is realistic behavior. A major component missing is the need to group up to survive, it's damn near impossible to subsist on ones own let alone with a group, yet DayZ makes it a thing. Humans are predisposed to work together, second only to the instinct for survival, because its maximizing reward with minimizing risk.

Relentless, mindless aggression is a poor strategy for a human, you're betting against the House and the House always wins, you will get killed eventually, through injury or sickness.

I also heavily disagree with the assertion that humans like killing in anyway but can agree that escaping death (and thus fulfilling the survival imperative) is extremely rewarding, having escaped death myself at least 3 times, 7 if you count things not immediatly life threatening. I can testify that walking away from near death is one of the more thrilling things I've felt, but at no time was anyone else in danger but myself, so the source of elation was not having "truimphed" and killed another, it was because I cheated death.

In turn, I've held someone(thing)'s life in my hands before, and it's simply the most terrifying, unpleasant and guilt ridden experience I've ever had. Those weren't feelings after a time of introspection, they were passionate feelings immediatly replacing whatever rage I had that ended me up in the situation, anger enough to kill replaced by empathy. I would never be able to kill another without killing myself on some level, so the very idea that I could grow to like it is preposterous to me.

[Claw 26]

Joberg? I googled it and got no results, 'crept for Joburg, South Africa. While using some random African city in a country ranked first for rape and second for assault and murder seems like a good idea to prove your point, it's not. You're going to the extremes to try and say "Look! This is what humans do!" When in reality, that place is just, excuse my French, fucked up. Africa in general has been plagued with violence for centuries.

Also, as some one else pointed out above, "KoS" means "Kill on Sight". So it's somebody killing another person at the moment he sees him, for no reason at all. They kill there for food, water, and supplies, but for no reason? Maybe a few, but that is going to happen everywhere because if psychopaths.

Yes Joberg in SA - And there are tons of other examples- You cant excuse certain countrys just because you feel its an extreme minority, you confirm the troubles in africa over the years but for some reason want to remove them from the rationale ? Africa is a big place and is a huge example of human nature in certain situations or do you just want to include a white picket fence enviroment only :|

I remember a documentry where this women was telling a story about her son was just standing with a friend in the street in a shanty town and a guy comes up to him. The guy asks him for a cigerette , the son gives him a cig and the guy guy gunned him down dead for no reason. Maybe look for stats on murders in cold blood with no motive etc etc. Its not just isolated incidents. Near where i used to work in london the local estate had police line do not cross on daily basis for shootings, yes a lot the police atribute to gang shootings but this is not really disimular to dayz * if you level out the obvious difference in repercussios between a game and rl * Anyone most ppl meet in dayz are treated as a rival and squads in dayz are nothing more than gangs. You canot have perfect matching examples in rl to game comparisons, so slightly stark analogys must be stuck.

So please no more " we are talking about KOS here" where 2 ppl say are running along see each other and gun each other down , well that is so much linked to a computor game rather than real life as a good percentage of those ppl wouldnt do it unless the world became lawless. People say you never know somebody untill you live with them, well try that same phrase with a zombie apoc and tons of guns around like dayz and you would prob be amazed at true colours or panic, because thets face it KOS happens for a multitude of varibles in dayz , and most actions have a reason deep down . Its not as black and white as Stable minded - Psycho.

Again If you want a pve + pvp< survivor game then you have to have factions and punishment for tk etc i truely see this as the only way it will work. . I mostly play wasteland and have only been tk' like 2 or three times by idiots or glitches in marker. You cant control Human natuure in game without the aforementioned or a niche group of like minded ppl.

There are good eggs in life and bad eggs in life. yes a lot of people will team up in rl in a bad situation but a lot would be very bad as well.

[Jamz 253]

So please no more " we are talking about KOS here" where 2 ppl say are running along see each other and gun each other down , well that is so much linked to a computor game rather than real life as a good percentage of those ppl wouldnt do it unless the world became lawless. People say you never know somebody untill you live with them, well try that same phrase with a zombie apoc and tons of guns around like dayz and you would prob be amazed at true colours or panic, because thets face it KOS happens for a multitude of varibles in dayz , and most actions have a reason deep down . Its not as black and white as Stable minded - Psycho.

Just to expand on what you have touched on there, The main reason for so much indiscriminate (or indeed discriminate) killing in DayZ as I understand it is because that's the most 'fun' thing to do for most people in game. In a computer game.

In life of course there are a multitude of different things to do, you can interact with everything and you're certainly not likely to want to kill the way the game encourages you to. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a computer game/simulation to reflect the reality of a certain situation because it lacks reality itself - this is the question being asked and while people would kill people for sure, wouldn't happen as it does in game. DayZ is more of a Battle Royale situation at the moment and cases of KOS are far greater then they would be in the situation DayZ portrays because of this.

If it happened for real then of course people would kill people, criminals amongst us who are kept in check by society could run free, but as a percentage of the population they would be a very small number. I believe the majority of deaths would be accidental through panic induced by the high stress of the situation, more manslaughter than murder. This is a situation never before encountered so no similar historic events can be used as comparison... people being attacked by infected loved ones and authority figures would be confused and scared, maybe even kill to defend themselves but it's unlikely they would kill regularly.

The way things are portrayed in game, food would not be scarce at all, but getting to it may be difficult so groups would form quickly and in some cases fight each other, but I suspect the most successful groups would be the ones who established order and saw the potential value of each surviving human being. If DayZ followed this course, there would be groups forming on every server and occupying areas to survive.

[gummy52 57]

If it was possible to make progress, even a little, then people would work together and form an isolated civilization. If DayZ were real life and your mutual enemy infinitely existed and reappeared without end and there was no possible way to ever change that by working together... then yes, everyone would be forced into a situation where it was every man for himself. The only people who would work together would be fools who falsely believe its possible to fight back against the mutual enemy. They die off. That also describes new players to DayZ rather well, wouldn't you think?

[Chaney.A 32]

The amygdala is a part of the human brain. One of the most primal and important parts of our brain. It is the part that creates fear and panic. Information reaches the amygdala at 3 times the speed it reaches our frontal lobe. ... Translation. We're designed to be panic over making a rational choice.

The Navy SEALS are a great example of what I'm about to explain.

In Navy SEAL training, to help the SEALs familiarize themselves with fast response techniques, they put a sound proof helmet over their heads and a sack to cover their eyes. Then they set up a scenario, could be a guy asking for gas, or three guys staring you down with assualt rifles. But what this does, is it sharpens your reaction times and it puts these scenarios in their head. So that when they are confronted with a similar situation. The brain waves reach the amygdala and it says, "I've been here before, do this. Don't panic." Allowing the messages to travel on to the frontal lobe and skip the whole panic button.

Now put this idea into DayZ and imagine it like this. In DayZ you're running through a small town with a rifle. You see someone, you fire, you miss, they return fire, etc. Then once the fight is over, you've had this scenario presented to you, though in a game, your BRAIN still translates it to experience. Now if you come across this situation sometime, you're not going to panic or be afraid. Your brain is going to walk you through it, with a calm and collected reaction from both the experience stored in the amygdala and the amygdala allowing the frontal lobe to alter the previous experience to make it match over this new one.

I firmly believe, that if you kill someone in a game, it can still satisfy that desire for the kill.

[geogeorgegeo@hotmail.co.uk 50]

No not like in Dayz, but there would be a death toll of kills from other people that would rise steadily over the months after a zombie apocalypse but plenty of them would be friendly fire.

[HMS 115]

No. And people don't even run toward the sounds of fighting dogs, nevermind the sound of screaming and gunfire.

Oh and there would be a lot more yelling "WTF DON'T SHOOT"

However, DayZ _is_ a good litmus test for who are the little sociopaths who will be the first lined up against the wall when I am in charge.

[billyangstadt 272]

There's a difference between KOS and hunting. Being hunted is what you most experience in DayZ, not KOS.

For the most part, if a player is not quite geared up and he see's you with decent gear, they'll probably avoid you if they don't think they have the advantage.

What you're most experiencing is the players who gear up and head back South to look for trouble, which I don't think is realistic.

Killing for survival may be natural, but having everything you need and going to look for trouble is not.

[SalamanderAnder (DayZ) 1747]

Just gonna go on the record here and say that I think Ozelot is right. Human nature is pretty predictable. Panic spreads like a disease. I think more people would group together in reality, since we have real physical limitations and needs. Not to mention family members, friends, ect. However, there'd undoubtedly be just as much human combat over resources and ego.

[FaustianQ 8]

Just gonna go on the record here and say that I think Ozelot is right. Human nature is pretty predictable. Panic spreads like a disease. I think more people would group together in reality, since we have real physical limitations and needs. Not to mention family members, friends, ect. However, there'd undoubtedly be just as much human combat over resources and ego.

Then you're not really agreeing with Ozelot, you're agreeing with most other sane people in the thread. Ozelots stance is that without a controlling force, humans are mostly frothing at the mouth killers aiting to be unleashed, which ignores the fact that while killing is something that is a part of life as a concept, civilization and thus the controlling force which prevents us from being those "rabid killers" is entirely a human construct.

It'd be more logical to say that humans prefer peace and co-prosperity and only when our advanced social skills and instincts fail us do we resort to violence, either calculated or passionate. To think we prefer violence as a primary solution basically ignores human achievement and flies in the face of our evolutionary history. If we we're killers born, we'd look like bears, not a series of compromises intended to maximise social capability and creativity while being able to defend ourselves.

[jovial 17]

lol this thread again. :)

[terminal_boy 860]

Have we mentioned rape yet?

The apocalypse is going to feature a lot of rape.

[tylahfoo 10]

Reading through all of this has given me much to think about. Most people are coming from a psychological background, which I do not have much experience with. I just want to add what I would think would happen through my time studying political science and history. I do believe that there would be an initial outbreak of violence as people begin to hoard and flee the major cities. However, I doubt that this would be kill on sight in the majority of cases; instead, many people would get into some type of conflict over goods or resources which leads to the killing.

From there, I feel that WBK is correct when he says we would move towards living in tribal groups. Some of these groups would be more readily willing to attack other groups for their goods. Meanwhile, you would have groups that would just want to rebuild and form a new society. They would realize that working together would help them survive, and being together would make life more livable.

Now, we can go to Rousseau or Hobbes and say life is all about murder and war. However, for me at least, I believe that there is no one human nature and individuals will choose different lifestyles depending on their backgrounds and experiences before the apocalypse occurs. We do not go into any conflict or situation as blank slates. The decisions and actions we make are based off of countless years of living a certain way. As Locke says, we each have our own individual strengths that we can use to take down our foes or to use to survive. For some this will be brutal killings, for others it will be grouping up.

Lastly, this is a video game. I do not believe kill on sight would be as common in the real world. Why? Neither party will respawn if they get shot after engaging an individual.