DayZ "Gameplay Suggestion" Bias (Rant)

[TheDesigner 1197]

I came to a revelation earlier today. It was on how bias the DayZ community is, in general, towards factors that would infringe on bandits. I used to believe it was because they generally believed "DayZ shouldn't limit my play style", but I believe it really is "DayZ shouldn't make my Easy mode (AKA banditry) Hard". Think of it. Make it so bandits gain a head scarf when they kill enough innocent players and they freak because magically warping into those clothes is "unrealistic" and "infringing". Make Heros magically warp into neon white and blue clothes and no one lifts a finger.

It's ridiculous. You might argue "Oh well, people don't shoot Heros on sight as much as they do Bandits", but when 90% of DayZ players are "Dark and Edge-y" bandits, I beg to differ. I seriously noticed no difference in how much I was shot at as a normal survivor and a Hero. You might argue that the "Mentallity" players have is what causes the massive amount of bandits. I'll counter and say that mentallity isn't what makes KOS or Banditry the preferable path, it is DayZ itself. It pampers Bandits like newborn babies.

Anyone who played DayZ before the Babdit Boom would agree it was way more enjoyable. There was the now-unheard-of RP. You would get robbed instead of shot, because it both saved ammo and was quieter. Now the only player interactions I have are me and another unarmed guy or meeting up with a player in TS (1/100 times I'll find another player who doesn't shoot me, but not often). Every amateur Pyschologist on these forums claim it's realistic. I'm no Psychologist either, but once you've killed 50 people, you were either already insane or you are now. Not every play style should be pampered by DayZ, as with every other game. For comparison, lets just say DayZ is a stealth-like game, since when you raid towns, stealth should be the preferred method. Lets compare it to any other stealth game, like Dishonored or some levels in the newish Metro game. In those games, going in Guns-a-Blazin' is the worse path to choose. Going in stealth saves you ammo, health, time, and is generally more satisfying. DayZ? Shoot everything and you win. Part of it does have to do with sketchy zombies, but another part is Rocket & Co.'s inability to ignore the whines and just do it. Make "lone wolf" gameplay very hard, make banditry the undesirable path and only used in desperate times (starving/dehydrated), and make sanity a thing. Killing someone, even when they're trying to kill you is not a simple thing on the mind. Add zombies to it and the conditions for insanity rise.

TL;DR Bandits complain when something "infringes" on their Easy mode, yet if the same exact thing happens with Heros, nothing is said about "gameplay infringement".

Write this on mobile. Tried to break up paragraphs neatly, probably failed. Grammars might be horrid.

[applejaxc 2500]

For a mobile, the post wasn't half bad. However, I reserve my right to give you beans and here is why:

 

An "Insanity meter" doesn't fit into the game in my opinion. I think it's kind of silly. Not everyone is or goes crazy because they shot at someone. Your assumption that 50 kills = insane person, right? Well what about all the soldiers around the world, shooting and throwing grenades at each other through history? Most of them are still sane. And while statistically any given person serving in armed forces probably won't kill more than 20 people in their standard career (this isn't counting Navy SEALS, British SAS, American Special Forces and SOCOM, etc), the principle is still the same in the modern day: You go to hostile territory, where anyone could have an IED in their britches, and are expected to be friendly with everyone that isn't shooting at you.

 

So no, the only detriment to shooting other people in DayZ is maybe feeling bad, and having less ammo.

 

Furthermore, in the SA won't feature magical clothing changes anyway; everyone's outfit will be pick-and-choose.

[rn_max 202]

Lack of consequences associated with internet based activity and immaturity amongst the player base are more likely the root causes of selfish behaviour.  Being an arsehole is easy when afforded anonymity and impunity.

[Fonebook 126]

 Well what about all the soldiers around the world, shooting and throwing grenades at each other through history? Most of them are still sane.

 

If that were true the VA in the USA wouldn't be so busy treating PTSD. The macho man culture expects these men to not be affected by what they do, but the reality is something different. Sure it does not phase some people, but I have talked to enough vets to know that your statement above is quite cavalier.

[FrostDMG 398]

Good post, I like it. There's no downside to KOS (generally), in fact you are likely to gain more than from teaming up.

I also like the sanity idea, though not sure how it'd work exactly

[TheLastEmp 295]

I think that there should be a decent % chance for items on a player to be damaged when you shoot them.  There would be a lot less incentive to KOS knowing that you'd be better off sneaking up from behind and holding someone up so as to ensure you get your much needed beans, mountain dew, and antibiotics... I think there are a lot of interesting ways to deter KOS style gameplay...

[SalamanderAnder (DayZ) 1747]

I get what you're saying. But I don't think "insanity" is the solution.

 

The fact of the matter is that other players are not very valuable to you as a self-oriented survivor. Their items are often times more valuable than their very life - and it goes both ways. They could betray you at any moment to their immense benefit. So you're right. The game does pamper lone-wolves and banditry. A lot.

 

The approach must be multi-faceted and some serious fundamental gameplay changes are going to have to happen in order to change people's motivations on an individual level.

 

1: the environment needs to be harder. Fortunately zombies are already getting pretty difficult to ignore, and infection has already prompted player trading, as antibiotics are incredibly rare.

 

2: We need cooperative actions in the game. If certain actions literally required another player to be present - then "lone-wolves" wouldn't be able to pull these things off. I'm talking about big projects, like building structures, repairing vehicles outside of your skill range, ect. Also moving heavy items and construction materials should be seriously considered. Providing players with logistical challenges that are easier with the help of others is a great way to get people doing things together and cooperating.

 

(Also, it would be nice to see some kind of "zoning" feature for bases or camps. Say, if a player has placed certain items in an area, that area will become "off-limits" as a spawn zone for returning players. So if someone tried to "ghost" into a camp via another server, they might come back to the original server and be automatically displaced, say, 300 m away from that location. That way people would actually have to infiltrate player camps on the server.)

 

3: Which brings me to my next point. In reality, individuals have specialized knowledge - which makes people valuable. Some kind of "learning curve" for certain actions would be really nice to see. Not everyone knows how to rebuild a car engine, or replace a fuel tank, for example. Our characters should have to go through learning curves and figure things out with repetition. Cooperating with more experienced players should assist players in learning new skills also, so people can teach each other these skills. Death should penalize these skills to some extent, making your life and therefore your acquired skills a highly valuable asset.

 

Even with these kinds of implementations, "banditry" is not going to go away. It's not a "problem" to be solved. The destructive side of human nature is what makes the game compelling.

 

So imagine that a group of survivors gets together and constructs a base and collects lots of supplies, ect. Other players who are not friendly are going to raid those kinds of camps, and even kill for fun still. There are always going to be players who do not want to cooperate with other people, and that's fine. They can do that if they want to, and in fact, it actually adds to the gameplay. Watching out for lone wolf bandit elements would become a major priority of cooperative, constructive survivors.

 

Furthermore, groups of bandits could also take advantage of these cooperative features and build their own bases, ect.

 

Adding cooperative gameplay features does not "punish" lone-wolves. It punishes everyone by giving them completely reasonable human limitations, which will prompt more cooperation from necessity. Even then, as I said, players could still survive on their lonesome, and it would actually be easier in some ways because it would give lone wolves or bandits yet another way to hunt down supplies, and/or prey.

 

But that's just my opinion. I'm sure a bunch of people are going to jump on my case and come up with 1001 reasons why they should be capable of erecting thousand pound walls and carrying entire engine blocks in their backpack by themselves.

Edited August 8, 2013 by SalamanderAnder

[TheLastEmp 295]

Well thought out Ander. I think fixing the humanity/hero/bandit balancing is probably the most important aspect of the game at the moment (only because I am confidant zombie tracking will be acceptable upon release).  And well thought out discussion is the best way for it to be both fun and balanced!!

[JIJOK 49]

to change bandit gameplay you must put something better than it or make it harder . how do it better , I am tired read OP - Harder , just less military weapons and/or harder zeds

[TheDesigner 1197]

To respond to Salamander:

I agree with certain realistic things requiring teamwork, but when you say survivors wouldn't see others as people, I disagree with you. Millions of years of evolution doesn't disappear in a few weeks, even years. All that "every man for himself" is Hollywood. If we are such killers at heart, we never could of advanced this far.

Point of this thread isn't to end Banditry, that'd be daft of me. It's to end the play style that DayZ pampers, which is Kill on Sight.

[SalamanderAnder (DayZ) 1747]

To respond to Salamander:

I agree with certain realistic things requiring teamwork, but when you say survivors wouldn't see others as people, I disagree with you. Millions of years of evolution doesn't disappear in a few weeks, even years. All that "every man for himself" is Hollywood. If we are such killers at heart, we never could of advanced this far.

Point of this thread isn't to end Banditry, that'd be daft of me. It's to end the play style that DayZ pampers, which is Kill on Sight.

 

 

What are you talking about? I never said "every man is a killer at heart." What I said was, there will always be individuals who want to kill other people - in DayZ. You seem to forget that we are in fact, playing a video game. The reason players act the way they do is out of simple adaptation to the game environment. Change the environment, and you can change player behavior *generally.*

 

However, human conflict is always inevitable. " If we are such killers at heart, we never could of advanced this far." No way. Look back through human history. Time and time again we see people (individuals and groups of people) demonstrating violence and savagery that is present in human nature. Look at the holocaust. Terrorist attacks. Everyday murder in the streets of America. Did you know that over 3,000 African Americans are killed from gang violence every year? Let's not forget that the United States, as well as other "civilized" countries around the world, actually upheld the doctrine of human bondage for centuries! Did you also know that to this day people are still captured and sold into slavery?

 

If human beings were so "advanced," we wouldn't do this type of thing in the first place. Even then, it is often true that human advancement reaches a point where conflict is the only thing that can bring advancement. For proof of this, one need only look at the Civil War. Conflict that brought advancement.

 

 

My point here is that Kill on Sight is never going to completely end in DayZ, and to assume it will is horribly naive. You'd have to disable friendly fire. People are going to kill each other, whether it's group v group; group v individual; or individual v individual. This will never change. Some people just want to play the game as a murderous bandit, and those people will always kill on sight.

 

The only way to balance the gameplay is to give cooperative players something to do and the ability to defend themselves from said destructive players. Please don't misunderstand me. I agree with your views on the current gameplay issues. I'm simply pointing out that there is a more fundamental issue at large, and I don't think an "insanity" system is an effective way to make banditry harder. It's both a: unfair to certain players, and b: kind of gimmicky. The real solution is not to take away gameplay options, but rather to provide more options for coop players.

 

This way you actually make banditry harder by giving them better defended targets. Instead of getting "easy pickings" all the time, bandits might actually find themselves going up against cooperative groups of players who have built a base. It's a total shift in gameplay. It gives both sides more to do. Honestly, it would give me a reason to be a bandit at times, (sort of) since I love action stealth games and sneaking into an encampment guarded by real human beings is a splinter-cell die hard's wet dream. So I might even violate other people, but it would be for my own survival if I did. I would probably use said items to support my own group. Or, I might choose to approach the other group and trade with them as a friendly passerby. The different decisions will always exist. That is literally what separates a bandit from a hero. People have choice in this game, and you shouldn't try to take that away from them. The reality is that humanity is very ambiguous. This is why we ask ourselves questions like "do the ends justify the means?"

 

For some people, the answer to them is automatic. They've played FPS shooters before. Zombies, not much to worry bout. Survival, rather easy actually. Now what? Oh look, a sniper rifle. And we wonder why kill on sight, sniper camping, griefing, hacking, ect. are huge problems. Clearly there is just very little to do. I think rocket recognizes this, which is why he's said on multiple occasions that the solution is "giving people more to do."

 

I agree. And I also think that giving people more to do together is even more important. Seriously, this game absolutely must support persistent, reliable base building, or else I fear it will shrivel and die. It has to become more of an accomplishment to get a vehicle running. You should be looking another player in the eye and thinking "Thank you! Yes!" At least for a moment. These are the kinds of things that will make the game seriously compelling. Right now, everyone's complaining that they're "bored." They want more "scary stuff" more gore, ect. ect. What we want is more story. I think most people who play a video game really enjoy the experience more when they start getting emotionally attached. And think about it, what better way to get someone attached than to let them do things with another real human being? 

 

Suddenly that moment when your partner dies is would become much more grim. It would be a true loss. What if he was particularly good at fixing cars? Fuck. Ect.

 

On the flip side, the people who want to play as lone-wolfs, or as bandits, will have even more to do. More to interact with. Imagine coming on to a player controlled trade post? You have so many options! Attack them? Steal from them? Snipe them? Maybe, you could trade with them. Maybe, they could ask you to scrounge up some gear, thus earning their trust a little. Maybe you could join them. Maybe you could betray them. Maybe they could betray you. The possibilities are endless.

Edited August 8, 2013 by SalamanderAnder

[GoldenPSP 24]

I haven't been playing all that long.  And I haven't had many negative encounters with bandits.  But then again I have only been to Elektro and Cherno once each.

 

There are lots of things I could go into, but honestly I think one of the biggest issues right now is the duping bug.  It's so easy (it's happened to me without trying) that you can quickly gear up to the point there really isn't much else to do, so you go to the most populated areas and blow off some mags of ammo.

 

To put it in perspective,  I finally last week found an M14, but no ammo.  I was so excited, but ulitmately dropped it as I couldn't find even one DMR mag in like forever.

 

Then one day I happened across 4 standing corpses, all identical.  These corpses were tricked out.  Ghillie suits, M9SD, DMR and probably 20-30 mags of ammo plus assorted goodies.

 

When someone can do that, you can quickly have more weaponry and ammo than you could almost even use.

 

Basically there is little you can do for game mechanics while this exists.