Why no Zombie children again?

[Wayze 549]

Yet another reason why children should not be allowed to post here

Believe it or not, but in like 50 years, killing kids in games will be as wrong as playing tetris. Add something like Oculus Rift, virtual reality, and you got your generation of totally confused children.

 

We all did raise up without facebook, without Call of Duty and all the other games. This world will change and we just can speculate about the effect the internet and the media will have to future generations.

What I  think is that morality and many other basic human thinking-processes will change. The world developes very fast and in 20 years we all will be old grandpa's, missing the world, the music, the movies, the games, how it all used to be.

[Conkykillz 791]

I am lost for words WHY the fuck would you WANT to KILL Children, is it a power tripping thing ?. Do you get some sought of sick kick ? Do you feel better within yourself for killing them? Fuck it let's put CANDY VANS in as well then we can all drive around having a gay old time. OH that's right the IMMERSION how could i forget cause that will make the game that much better pfffffffft  please.......

[h3l1x 327]

I am lost for words WHY the fuck would you WANT to KILL Children, is it a power tripping thing ?. Do you get some sought of sick kick ? Do you feel better within yourself for killing them? Fuck it let's put CANDY VANS in as well then we can all drive around having a gay old time. OH that's right the IMMERSION how could i forget cause that will make the game that much better pfffffffft  please.......

 

I think you are missing the point. It's not about wanting to kill kids, but wanting to have to moral dilemma and the guilts after killing them. What do I mean by that.

 

Personally I see DayZ as a social experiment, a medium that brings out someone's emotions/instincts. No rules, no scripted events, it's you and the world, you are choosing your path. Decisions, instincts, fear, excitement, loyalty/betrayal, guilts, cautiousness/carelessness, etc. All these emotions are the core, the driving force of DayZ.

 

Let me give you an example from another game. Have you played Bioshock? Do you remember the little sisters? You were given two choices, either harvesting them (killing them, getting all their blood) or saving them (getting a very small amount of blood). Personally I couldn't go on and harvest them. It was just wrong for me. And this is exactly why there should be zed kids (and player models) in DayZ. So people have a hard time killing them, being forced to either die or flee.

 

Do you understand what I'm saying? I don't want to kill kids in DayZ but I want them in the game for the psychological pressure they'll bring and all the other moral implications.

Edited November 8, 2013 by h3l1x

[Mullraugh 1151]

I'm sure there's some ethical and moral reasons they're not zombifying little children for people to kill.

 

Despite the dillemma, I think they should add them for the reasons in the post above.

They will be extremely annoying though - anyone who's played No More Room In Hell would know this.

 

Remember, they're not real children, it's a game.

 

Heck, even Minecraft has zombie children.

Edited November 8, 2013 by mullraugh

[Conkykillz 791]

Yeah i see your point, But their are far too many people will abuse it. We have had ideas posted here like Heads on a Stake i would not like to see kids heads on a stake but i bet they would be everywhere. I see it as a grieving tool nothing less.

 

I know they are only PIXELS, and they are not REAL, but i must make a MORAL stand on this issue i feel there is FAR too much VIOLENCE shoved down every kids throat now. 

 

I have four Children 5-19 yrs and i don't need to expose them too unnecessary mindless violence of being able to Splat some Zombie kids PIXEL head in.

 

So this is where i stand on this subject i just don't see them as a necessity for the IMMERSION of this game. Dayz has already provided me with more HEART POUNDING moments than i can count.......

 

Child Zombies NO

Edited November 8, 2013 by Conkykillz

[h3l1x 327]

Yeah i see your point, But their are far too many people will abuse it. We have had ideas posted here like Heads on a Stake i would not like to see kids heads on a stake but i bet they would be everywhere. I see it as a grieving tool nothing less.

 

First of all, topics about head on spikes and stuff are not relevant with this thread. This forum is full of idiotic suggestions, let's not get into that.

 

Second, so there are some immature guys which will abuse this feature. So what? Exactly the same complaint is present in the spraypaint thread "people will start drawing penises all over, so it's a no go". Ok then, let's leave all the brilliant features out of the game because 300 people are douchebags and can't handle the freedom of a game. Well, not. NOT. This game has potential, and it must evolve.

 

I've already suggested a logging system concerning spraypaint abuse on that thread. Douchebags can be punished, we shouldn't be punished because we want a deep game.

Edited November 8, 2013 by h3l1x

[Wayze 549]

First of all, topics about head on spikes and stuff are not relevant with this thread. This forum is full of idiotic suggestions, let's not get into that.

 

Second, so there are some immature guys which will abuse this feature. So what? Exactly the same complaint is present in the spraypaint thread "people will start drawing penises all over, so it's a no go". Ok then, let's leave all the brilliant features out of the game because 300 people are douchebags and can't handle the freedom of a game. Well, not. NOT. This game has potential, and it must evolve.

 

I've already suggested a logging system concerning spraypaint abuse on that thread. Douchebags can be punished, we shouldn't be punished because we want a deep game.

Bad idea. Talking about freedom and then punishing players for doing what they want.

[h3l1x 327]

Bad idea. Talking about freedom and then punishing players for doing what they want.

 

Did you even bother to read what I've just said? Seriously now, did you?

 

I talked about people "not being able to handle the freedom". People who have no limits, who will abuse stuff for personal gain, trolling, ego, fame, griefing, etc. People that need someone to supervise them because they are unable to be responsible for their actions and the future consequenses. There are many of them. If you think people are already enlightented/mature enough to appreciate true total freedom then this is your opinion. There are legal/copyright/ratings/banning and other kinds of factors involved concerning both the spraypaint feature and the zed kids feature.

 

And to be more specific. Freedom is not doing whatever you want. Freedom is doing whatever you want AND not harming/causing damage to someone else. Under the legal/justice system we have, there are rules to be followed. I am free to choose how to live my own life, but I'm not free to enter your house and take your computer. Same thing here. We should be free to do whatever we wanted in the game, BUT if I started spraypainting your mom's personal phonenumber all over cherno I should be banned. Can you grasp now the difference between freedom with boundaries and total freedom?

 

Was that really hard to understand? No. You just had to post something that looked clever.

Edited November 8, 2013 by h3l1x

[Wayze 549]

Did you even bother to read what I've just said? Seriously now, did you?

 

I talked about people "not being able to handle the freedom". People who have no limits, who will abuse stuff for personal gain, trolling, ego, fame, griefing, etc. People that need someone to supervise them because they are unable to be responsible for their actions and the future consequenses. There are many of them. If you think people are already enlightented/mature enough to appreciate true total freedom then this is your opinion. There are legal/copyright/ratings/banning and other kinds of factors involved concerning both the spraypaint feature and the zed kids feature.

 

And to be more specific. Freedom is not doing whatever you want. Freedom is doing whatever you want AND not harming/causing damage to someone else. Under the legal/justice system we have, there are rules to be followed. I am free to choose how to live my own life, but I'm not free to enter your house and take your computer. Same thing here. We should be free to do whatever we wanted in the game, BUT if I started spraypainting your mom's personal phonenumber all over cherno I should be banned. Can you grasp now the difference between freedom with boundaries and total freedom?

 

Was that really hard to understand? No. You just had to post something that looked clever.

My friend, you should calm yourself. We all are human beings and we all share a common sense of socialibility, right? So please just try to realise that there are people out there, who have another opinion.

Your theories and assumption might seem correct to you, but to others they may not. This is something you have to accept.

 

What freedom is, well we could discuss it here, but we would never get a result other then "freedom is subjective". It depends from person to person.

If freedom was "doing whatever you want without harming others", freedom would no exists. I cannot do whatever I want to, I cannot go out there and fly like a bird. For me freedom was always an illusion, even the "free will" does not exists. Like I said this is a very complicated and subjective topic we are talking about.

 

Anyways, a game is a game. You can do what you want to do. You can troll as long as you want. Why should it be forbidden if you are able to do it? Because you think it is not funny. Because you think it is immersion and gameplay breaking. Because you think it is harming others. But what if the majority of the people actually does like to troll? What if the majority of the people has another opinion?

Clearly, if the game gives us the oppurtunity to do something, we as human beings tend to do what we are capable of doing. Testing the limits.

A feature that allows to "spraypaint my mom*s personal phonenumber all over cherno", is in my opinion a wrong one. It is very badly designed if it needs an investigation to prevent people from doing such things.

Give 10 people 10 weapons. After one of them kills another one he goes to jail. 1 human is dead and the other one will stay in jail for the rest of his life. You could've prevented all of this by simply not giving them the weapons.

 

But I don't think we are talking about these people, who really harm others. I mean, the most people will just do stupid things. As you said yourself they will troll. They will write things like "Call of Duty ftw!" on the walls.

You want to bann someone for doing so? He did not harm anyone with it, he just did something because in his opinion it was right. We all surely agree that these things are very immersion breaking, but you cannot punish these people for using the game to have fun. What kind of logic is this?

I tell you, it is your logic. I got another one. And this is why human beings are so successful, we do not agree with each other. I have my opinion and you have yours, that is totally fine. But next time don't be so intolerant please.

 

If something looks clever, it usually is. But that depends on the opinion of the observer.

Edited November 8, 2013 by Wayze

[h3l1x 327]

My friend, you should calm yourself.

-snip-

If something looks clever, it usually is. But that depends on the opinion of the observer.

If this was in the off-topic section, then yes, I'd reply to you in a psiloshophical way, but it's not. I'm not here to discuss what freedom is or how I perceive it, you, or someone else does. Neither to talk about flying. There is a topic and this is zed kids in DayZ. I was being specific when using the words freedom and such. I did provide arguments, examples, and metaphors. In case you missed my points you can read again my post.

[Wayze 549]

If this was in the off-topic section, then yes, I'd reply to you in a psiloshophical way, but it's not. I'm not here to discuss what freedom is or how I perceive it, you, or someone else does. Neither to talk about flying. There is a topic and this is zed kids in DayZ. I was being specific when using the words freedom and such. I did provide arguments, examples, and metaphors. In case you missed my points you can read again my post.

 

 

Did you even bother to read what I've just said? Seriously now, did you?

 

I talked about people "not being able to handle the freedom". People who have no limits, who will abuse stuff for personal gain, trolling, ego, fame, griefing, etc. People that need someone to supervise them because they are unable to be responsible for their actions and the future consequenses. There are many of them. If you think people are already enlightented/mature enough to appreciate true total freedom then this is your opinion. There are legal/copyright/ratings/banning and other kinds of factors involved concerning both the spraypaint feature and the zed kids feature.

 

And to be more specific. Freedom is not doing whatever you want. Freedom is doing whatever you want AND not harming/causing damage to someone else. Under the legal/justice system we have, there are rules to be followed. I am free to choose how to live my own life, but I'm not free to enter your house and take your computer. Same thing here. We should be free to do whatever we wanted in the game, BUT if I started spraypainting your mom's personal phonenumber all over cherno I should be banned. Can you grasp now the difference between freedom with boundaries and total freedom?

 

Was that really hard to understand? No. You just had to post something that looked clever.

 

Uhm, yeah...

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

1968

 

[PhilB 230]

We got onto a toughy here, lol.

 

I'm reminded of the fact that in ancient urban areas there was an abundance of lewd graffiti and we still see it in places such as the inside of a bathroom stall. These are places that didn't have police or are places where policing is impractical. Much the same exists in DayZ. But we do have a meta law guiding some fundamental things. For instance, there is no racist comments or racial epithets allowed on side chat. And rightly so, I think everyone will agree. So one could say the same for racist graffiti in the game. It may be in the rights of the server owner to ban a player for that kind of conduct. Or maybe not. It would be amazing if the game could regulate that behavior on its own. Pretty much everyone knows and abides the no side chat rule these days. At least that's been my experience last few months.

 

It'd be cool if a server population could vote on a server action in which a voted player would be suspended or permanently killed off that particular server after he got killed. Kinda stupid idea, but the end goal would be to make it so that the other players on the server can take it out on the bad dude in a contextually realistic way.

 

So the same might go with the child zeds. There may be servers that have unwritten rules that say no killing child zeds ever. And if caught doing it, you're gonna be kos.

[Xeiom 3]

Seems they do plan to sell this I very much doubt we'll see Zombie children from the official Devs.

 

They have implied there will be modability and I'm sure some people will be happy to add elements like this to tailor the game experience toward what some groups would really enjoy, or like to see.,

[Target Practice (DayZ) 1335]

Yeah, I don't get people's fascination with killing zombie children. Just about every zombie game I play, there's a bunch of people complaining and whining about the fact that they're not allowed to shoot something that looks like a child. Whilst I'm not going to imply that there's something wrong with that, it doesn't exactly do the public perception of gamers as bloodthirsty maniacs any favours.

 

Personally, it doesn't bother me either way - I don't have a strong objection to shooting a slightly smaller model as opposed to a larger one, but on the same note, I really don't ever notice the absence of them when they're not there - if I had to go one way or the other, I'd go against, simply because it's got the potential to garner negative press, and gaming doesn't need any more of that. Why risk it for something that would make zero difference to gameplay?

[NagsterTheGangster 388]

I believe dean said it would take to much time or something like that. plus it would be kind of pointless. almost all of the zombies in the game you mentioned are shamblers, besides reanimated players. so having zed children adds a challenge because they can run. in dayz all the zed are runners so the only real difference would be the model.

But even still with it being the same model, it adds emersion to the game.. and a little more challenge from zombies would be good in SA, plus children are just scary in general in creepy situations lol

[joe_mcentire 2073]

add, for the sake of an eerie and creepy atmosphere, signs that there have at least existed children at some point. toys, kindergardens, treehouses, playgrounds, strollers, cuddly toys... there is nothing eerier than the absence of childrens laughter and happiness   :|

 

a must for atmosphere. you all know that! anyone remembers Silent Hill's elementary school?

Edited November 10, 2013 by joe_mcentire

[RedTailedLizerd 12]

Basically, most games don't include ANY kind of murderable children is because it is really bad. Killing children is bad.

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

Basically, most games don't include ANY kind of murderable children is because it is really bad. Killing children is bad.

 

My only point is.... they are no longer children.

 

Diseases don't discriminate.

 

Did you have problems with shooting dogs in Resident Evil as well?

 

I have no trouble separating pixels from reality.

 

If I had my choice they would be in the game and rarely be seen.

 

More atmosphere as described by joe_mcentire and within that super creepy abandoned kindergarten or nursery there is a small chance for a tiny ravenous hellspawn that will bite your nads off.

 

That's not too much to ask.

 

If by keeping zombie children/babies out of the game it avoids a lot of trouble with regional laws regarding content and allows them to blanket release the game, then I am all for it.

[Conkykillz 791]

 

If I had my choice they would be in the game and rarely be seen.

 

More atmosphere as described by joe_mcentire and within that super creepy abandoned kindergarten or nursery there is a small chance for a tiny ravenous hellspawn that will bite your nads off.

 

That's not too much to ask.

 

If by keeping zombie children/babies out of the game it avoids a lot of trouble with regional laws regarding content and allows them to blanket release the game, then I am all for it.

I think that is a fair veiw, if they were rare and not in every heard or on every corner than yes i would like to see them implimented

 

Beans to you Sir as you have turned me from a hater of the idea to someone who can see the benifit of such an idea.

 

Thank you

[Tyrone Chicken 5]

*snip* nvm lets just reinvent the whole genre

Edited December 24, 2013 by Tyrone Chicken

[Wayze 549]

From a PR standpoint, it's best to avoid things like zombie children, because of people's stupid and subjective morals, but from a standpoint of realism and logic, you need to have things like zombie children. From the realism camp, children don't just magically disappear because of the apocalypse and from a logic standpoint, morals need to be out of the question because not only are they entirely subjective (you know, meaning my morals can easily be different than yours), but also because it makes literally no sense what so ever to be upset about shooting kids (who are also trying to kill you), but be perfectly fine with gunning down a few thousand people every release of COD. 

 

I will be upset and angry if the team gives in simply because of illogical and subjective things like morals. Should we not be able to kill, lets say cows because they are sacred to the hindus? How about goats? I mean the Bigajos worshiped them. How about sheep? Some of the Egyptians thought they were sacred. It is stupid to cater to the massive minority over little things like this.

Logical standpoint?

 

The virus kills victims that are to weak (old people and children), there you got your explaination. The virus in DayZ kills 90% of the infected people, 9% turn to zombies and 1% are immune.(that is how I remember Dean talking about it when the mod came out)

 

The immunesystem of children is not as strong as the one of grown people. They die due to the effect of the virus. Logic? You can turn it as you want, it is a game.

Edited November 14, 2013 by Wayze

[Tempus (DayZ) 1062]

I remember the European versions of Fallout 1 and 2 that had children hastily removed, which would lead to plot stoppers in quests and other bullshit like invisible kids stealing from you. It sucked.

 

Regardless whether I think they would benefit the game, I'm against adding them (and I'm pretty certain they won't). The game just couldn't be released around here and some other places. As much as that sucks and I hate the excessive censorship, that's just the way it is.

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

Logical standpoint?

 

The virus kills victims that are to weak (old people and children), there you got your explaination. The virus in DayZ kills 90% of the infected people, 9% turn to zombies and 1% are immune.(that is how I remember Dean talking about it when the mod came out)

 

The immunesystem of children is not as strong as the one of grown people. They die due to the effect of the virus. Logic? You can turn it as you want, it is a game.

 

 

Logic.

 

That's why they would be very rare.

 

Diseases that kill the weak and infirm don't kill ALL the weak and infirm.

 

One of the single most common fear and moral mechanics in most popular zombie movies is the infected or possibly infected child.

 

The parents protect the child, the child turns, kills a parent or survivor and then is finally killed (or some similar turn of events).

 

If in movie is fine then in game should be fine too.

Edited November 14, 2013 by BioHaze

[OfficerRaymond 2064]

Logical standpoint?

 

The virus kills victims that are to weak (old people and children), there you got your explaination. The virus in DayZ kills 90% of the infected people, 9% turn to zombies and 1% are immune.(that is how I remember Dean talking about it when the mod came out)

 

The immunesystem of children is not as strong as the one of grown people. They die due to the effect of the virus. Logic? You can turn it as you want, it is a game.

An immune system builds immunity to viruses after the bodies have been exposed to viruses. Children only have weaker immune systems than adults because they haven't been exposed to viruses. Technically they aren't weaker, they're just less mature.

When exposed to a virus that has no ability to be cured by the body, immunity would make little difference. Children from the age group of 1 to 10 may die due to immaturity odd the actual body, but above that age, the body could certainly survive in many individuals.

The idea that the virus automatically kills anyone and everyone under or over is utterly ridiculous and unrealistic. Sure many would die, but many would "survive".