The topic of realism and player killing

[ponc 100]

THESE! ARE! MOVIES!!!!

M O V I E S!!!!!

stop talking about realism while you are talking about MOVIES!!!!

omg is the youth really THAT stupid??

They are a happy group of people because the SCRIPT says so and needs it so!

[Kageru 18]

Actually the essence of most zombie movies I've seen is the issues of trust and dealing with the sense of hopeless loss and society collapsing. And that only really comes out in a social setting. Hiding in the hills or sniping people from rooftops has no personal drama, because there is no need for any trust or interaction and they've already given up on civilization (plus they make boring movies).

On the other hand many PvP people are focused on harvesting player tears. Zombies don't really interest them other than as a background since they don't get upset when hours of game-time are reset to zero. Betrayal of trust is the very best source of upset players and highly sought.

I actually like the idea of PvP, but there should also be a balancing in which the advantages of working together and co-operation are allowed to exist. It doesn't have to be much, some stable representation for reputation like in my suggestion, would go a very long way. Guilds / Clans would be another and would represent how people form teams / groups / tribes in any real world crisis.

---

THESE! ARE! MOVIES!!!!

And this is a game based on a scenario from movies and literature.

Did you have a point?

[LunaTiK (DayZ) 45]

I agree' date=' they do come across people that attempt to kill them, but they aren't being killed 99% of the time. When they see people, they actually travel towards them in order to make human contact. Law and order didnt exist in Walking Dead. I believe the scene with the group in the old people home, and the 2 bandits in the bar displayed that well. If you have seen the lastest episode (still season 2) Then you would see that even when meeting a random stanger, they dont just start killing the other person. Yes, attacks happen, but they arent as persistent as dayz.

[/quote']

Because they stay away from every one. They know people are going to be killing them and to be honest people will be people. You take the law away and realistically people are going to start killing to stay alive. When supplies get scarce people start killing each other.

To the OP. Grow some balls you fairy. It's a cruel world get used to it mommy boy.

[fml 29]

I agree' date=' they do come across people that attempt to kill them, but they aren't being killed 99% of the time. When they see people, they actually travel towards them in order to make human contact. Law and order didnt exist in Walking Dead. I believe the scene with the group in the old people home, and the 2 bandits in the bar displayed that well. If you have seen the lastest episode (still season 2) Then you would see that even when meeting a random stanger, they dont just start killing the other person. Yes, attacks happen, but they arent as persistent as dayz.

[/quote']

Because they stay away from every one. They know people are going to be killing them and to be honest people will be people. You take the law away and realistically people are going to start killing to stay alive. When supplies get scarce people start killing each other.

To the OP. Grow some balls you fairy. It's a cruel world get used to it mommy boy.

So if you dont like to play dayz like it is coutner strike, then youre a mommas boy. Got it. I'm gonna get on dayz and kill everyone, since that is the definitive way the game is meant to be played. Thanks for your input.

---

Actually the essence of most zombie movies I've seen is the issues of trust and dealing with the sense of hopeless loss and society collapsing. And that only really comes out in a social setting. Hiding in the hills or sniping people from rooftops has no personal drama' date=' because there is no need for any trust or interaction and they've already given up on civilization (plus they make boring movies).

On the other hand many PvP people are focused on harvesting player tears. Zombies don't really interest them other than as a background since they don't get upset when hours of game-time are reset to zero. Betrayal of trust is the very best source of upset players and highly sought.

I actually like the idea of PvP, but there should also be a balancing in which the advantages of working together and co-operation are allowed to exist. It doesn't have to be much, some stable representation for reputation like in my suggestion, would go a very long way. Guilds / Clans would be another and would represent how people form teams / groups / tribes in any real world crisis.[/quote']

I love the idea of both existing within the game too. However it seems like since this is a game, it wont exist without people accusing it of carebear-ism.

[funionz 7]

I agree' date=' they do come across people that attempt to kill them, but they aren't being killed 99% of the time. When they see people, they actually travel towards them in order to make human contact. Law and order didnt exist in Walking Dead. I believe the scene with the group in the old people home, and the 2 bandits in the bar displayed that well. If you have seen the lastest episode (still season 2) Then you would see that even when meeting a random stanger, they dont just start killing the other person. Yes, attacks happen, but they arent as persistent as dayz.

[/quote']

Because they stay away from every one. They know people are going to be killing them and to be honest people will be people. You take the law away and realistically people are going to start killing to stay alive. When supplies get scarce people start killing each other.

To the OP. Grow some balls you fairy. It's a cruel world get used to it mommy boy.

So if you dont like to play dayz like it is coutner strike, then youre a mommas boy. Got it. I'm gonna get on dayz and kill everyone, since that is the definitive way the game is meant to be played. Thanks for your input.

On Counterstrike you don't kill your teammates, thus you don't kill everyone. You're really doing well with these comparisons tonight aren't you?

[Beebs (DayZ) 0]

>makes thread regarding realism

> references works of fiction (some of which actually contrary to his point)

I have a better idea. Lets look at REAL LIFE since that is what we are emulating, not some Simon Pegg black comedy. Without a strong social structure, the human life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

DayZ sounds awfully realistic to me.

[fml 29]

>makes thread regarding realism

> references works of fiction (some of which actually contrary to his point)

I have a better idea. Lets look at REAL LIFE since that is what we are emulating' date=' not some Simon Pegg black comedy. Without a strong social structure, the human life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

DayZ sounds awfully realistic to me.

[/quote']

I added "The Road" to my post to reach a broader audience. Adding works of fiction dont necessarily mean they are based on sci fi or supernatural. They have writers work on the script, you know something believable and something that could actually happen.

Also, a zombie apocalypse has never happened, how am I to reference a real life event? How about the holocaust. How is that for non-fiction. Did the refugees kill eachother for the little bread they recieved each day? No, there was a threat out there, and they couldnt do anything but work together to survive.

I agree that "without a strong social structure, the human life is 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.'" But even since the beginning of times, humans lived in caves and hunted and traveled together. There is no example you could give every person in the scenario ran around and shot eachother on sight, no matter if they had good intentions or not. The closest example is the walking dead, in which I can relate myself to nearly every character on the show.

Are you really going to kill everyone you see on sight, just because there are zombies around?

[DedPan 0]

Of course people band together since there's strength in numbers. At the same time though, lots of people seem to be complaining about bandits killing them, without giving a single regard to the fact that there seems to be little to no non-bandit cooperation. Just looking at the forums, there's clearly lots of people who are pro-cooperation, yet people are still getting shot. I have a strong feeling the problem isn't so much bandits anymore so much as a system distrust of one another that has developed.

[Beebs (DayZ) 0]

yes I was clearly referencing specifically a zombie apocalypse. There is no other possible parallel to be made. Furthermore, there are zero instances in history where breakdown in leadership led to outbreaks in violence and anarchy.

Also, I met someone today. traded him a blood transfusion for some AKM mags. we then searched the berezino tents together before going our seperate ways. This idea that everyone is shooting everyone else on sight is a projection of your own deathmatch mentality.

[gizm0 96]

Of course people band together since there's strength in numbers. At the same time though' date=' lots of people seem to be complaining about bandits killing them, without giving a single regard to the fact that there seems to be little to no non-bandit cooperation. Just looking at the forums, there's clearly lots of people who are pro-cooperation, yet people are still getting shot. I have a strong feeling the problem isn't so much bandits anymore so much as a system distrust of one another that has developed.

[/quote']

Really could you shed light on a way to do so that a determined asshole can't just keep coming back under different names?

[Duckman404 37]

I added "The Road" to my post to reach a broader audience. Adding works of fiction dont necessarily mean they are based on sci fi or supernatural. They have writers work on the script' date=' you know something believable and something that could actually happen.

[/quote']

In The Road, I have no doubt that the protagonist would have happily killed the cannibals and the traveling group, if he had more than 2 shots left in his revolver. He did his best to avoid most people, too, which is what a lot of people in DayZ do if they don't plan on getting shot.

The fact that you included Shaun of the Dead in your examples is just plain stupid; that movie was based around black comedy, and the zombie outbreak was just a plot point - it wasn't meant to be 'realistic' in any way, at all.

And the Walking Dead is a prime example of how not to survive in a post-apocalyptic situation. The majority of the characters in that show were acting irrationally, the script sent everything into a nosedive for 'drama'.

Also' date=' a zombie apocalypse has never happened, how am I to reference a real life event? How about the holocaust. How is that for non-fiction. Did the refugees kill eachother for the little bread they recieved each day? No, there was a threat out there, and they couldnt do anything but work together to survive. [/quote']

The holocaust is another stupid example. Do you even know what went on in a concentration camp? They didn't kill each other because then they'd be killed themselves. They didn't steal each other's bread because they were too busy eating their own.

If you want to compare to reality, then the previous example of the aftermath of hurricane Katrina was an excellent example that you seem to be ignoring.

I agree that "without a strong social structure' date=' the human life is 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.'" But even since the beginning of times, humans lived in caves and hunted and traveled together. There is no example you could give every person in the scenario ran around and shot eachother on sight, no matter if they had good intentions or not. The closest example is the walking dead, in which I can relate myself to nearly every character on the show.

[/quote']

DayZ doesn't give much opportunity for any such strong, continuous community to arise. This is why organizing groups in skype or on forums/steam groups is pretty much a must; it means you can get together on the same server at the same time without too much fuss.

It's pretty clear that you're either having a string of bad luck, or you're just no good at making friends in Chernarus. I've had quite a few experiences where I've not been shot at, or not shot at someone, and we'd either loot a town together or head on our merry ways.

Are you really going to kill everyone you see on sight' date=' just because there are zombies around?

[/quote']

If this is what it breaks down to, then your fundamental argument is a little broken.

People aren't shooting other people on sight because of zombies; they're shooting each other because they are choosing to take the easy, low-risk approach, rather than trying to act nicely. Trusting someone is a very difficult thing to do in DayZ.

Currently, DayZ does not encourage people to work together. It doesn't discourage players from killing each other. Yes, it's a problem, but it's not as big as it's made out to be, especially now that rocket removed the bandit skins and forced direct chat.

If you want to make friends, then running up to them without saying 'Hi, friendly?' and getting shot by a crossbow isn't the best way to go about it. When you get near enough for direct chat, you shouldn't be putting yourself on the firing line.

And if someone comes up on you by surprise, and shoots you on sight? Well, that's too bad. Right now, it's much less risky to simply shoot on sight than rob someone, since you can't tell what that person has on him, and risking them having enough time to draw a weapon isn't worth it.

Sensible suggestions that would help reduce the incentive to kill on sight (such as including a tazer or other non-lethal way of disabling someone) are going to be much better received than a big old whine about how people killing other people isn't realistic. Because it's not; it's a game, it's still being developed, and the risk/reward level is biased towards a kill-on-sight mentality, but recently not by much.

So, either try different approaches of finding people that want to cooperate, or get better at avoiding them. This includes finding people on forums or chat groups. Using a mic is also a much more reliable way of talking to a possible new friend, since you're not leaving yourself vulnerable while typing, and the sincerity of your 'friendly' plea is much easier to discern.

Or maybe wait a while for factions to become a thing (I'm fairly sure rocket has plans of implementing coloured armbands in the future to signify factions), and for people to become less aggressive in their playing style.

[funionz 7]

Of course people band together since there's strength in numbers. At the same time though' date=' lots of people seem to be complaining about bandits killing them, without giving a single regard to the fact that there seems to be little to no non-bandit cooperation. Just looking at the forums, there's clearly lots of people who are pro-cooperation, yet people are still getting shot. I have a strong feeling the problem isn't so much bandits anymore so much as a system distrust of one another that has developed.

[/quote']

Really could you shed light on a way to do so that a determined asshole can't just keep coming back under different names?

It's part of the game, must you complain about this in every post you make?

[gizm0 96]

Of course people band together since there's strength in numbers. At the same time though' date=' lots of people seem to be complaining about bandits killing them, without giving a single regard to the fact that there seems to be little to no non-bandit cooperation. Just looking at the forums, there's clearly lots of people who are pro-cooperation, yet people are still getting shot. I have a strong feeling the problem isn't so much bandits anymore so much as a system distrust of one another that has developed.

[/quote']

Really could you shed light on a way to do so that a determined asshole can't just keep coming back under different names?

It's part of the game, must you complain about this in every post you make?

No but I'm just pointing it out, and asking a question.

[kookucatchu@yahoo.com 0]

There are many posts about realism on this forum.

Is "The Walking Dead" not realistic?

Is "28 Days/Months Later" not realistic?

Is "The Shaun of the Dead" not realistic?

Is "The Road" not realistic?

They band together' date=' gather supplies, work together, etc. If that is realistic then why are they not shooting eachother on site, as in dayz?[b'] Imagine if Rick and Lori met a person that only had tylenol and a band aid. Do you think they would shoot them?

I imagine co-operation being much more relative in dayz. In a zombie apocylypse, "What would you do?"

Technically, if you were trying to survive, you wouldn't ideally want to work with someone who had nothing anyways. They'd be unable to contribute much at that point and would just be another person utilizing the supplies you find and need. Also, in DayZ you can't exactly tell what a person has usually. I found a person dead on a beach with every toolbelt accessory, blood bags, and morphine, yet he had no weapon on him.

I'm in no way a shoot on sight person, I'm just saying that I don't think the reality of actions are entirely eschewed as people think. People who kill everyone because they don't feel safe in absolutely anyone's presence or simply in hope of supplies is a perfectly understandable reality. The only false actions are the people who simply kill people to rack up murders. <_<

[fml 29]

I've never read "The Road" and in Shaun of the Dead, I know that a stupid example, but they are still co-operating to survive the threat of zombies. They aren't killing eachother just because its an apocalypse. And while I agree that the walking dead turned into a huge drama fest, I am still, only trying to make the point that they arent killing eachother on sight. Remember when Glenn saw Rick in the tank surrounded by zombies? He didnt shoot him, he helped him. He even risked his life to save him. You never see that in dayz.

They didnt kill eachother for fear of being killed themselves just adds to my point. People know they are going to die too. They still kill eachother for no reason, but not in the real life example. Too busy eating their own bread? Have you any idea how deprived of food they were? The only reason they didnt turn on eachother and steal their food is because they were united. In that horrible place, they knew they had to stick together if they wanted to live. In dayz it doesnt matter what you have, you are killed for sport.

In The Road' date=' I have no doubt that the protagonist would have happily killed the cannibals and the traveling group, if he had more than 2 shots left in his revolver. He did his best to avoid most people, too, which is what a lot of people in DayZ do if they don't plan on getting shot.

The fact that you included Shaun of the Dead in your examples is just plain stupid; that movie was based around black comedy, and the zombie outbreak was just a plot point - it wasn't meant to be 'realistic' in any way, at all.

And the Walking Dead is a prime example of how not to survive in a post-apocalyptic situation. The majority of the characters in that show were acting irrationally, the script sent everything into a nosedive for 'drama'.

The holocaust is another stupid example. Do you even know what went on in a concentration camp? They didn't kill each other because then they'd be killed themselves. They didn't steal each other's bread because they were too busy eating their own.

If you want to compare to reality, then the previous example of the aftermath of hurricane Katrina was an excellent example that you seem to be ignoring.

DayZ doesn't give much opportunity for any such strong, continuous community to arise. This is why organizing groups in skype or on forums/steam groups is pretty much a must; it means you can get together on the same server at the same time without too much fuss.

It's pretty clear that you're either having a string of bad luck, or you're just no good at making friends in Chernarus. I've had quite a few experiences where I've not been shot at, or not shot at someone, and we'd either loot a town together or head on our merry ways.

If this is what it breaks down to, then your fundamental argument is a little broken.

People aren't shooting other people on sight because of zombies; they're shooting each other because they are choosing to take the easy, low-risk approach, rather than trying to act nicely. Trusting someone is a very difficult thing to do in DayZ.

Currently, DayZ does not encourage people to work together. It doesn't discourage players from killing each other. Yes, it's a problem, but it's not as big as it's made out to be, especially now that rocket removed the bandit skins and forced direct chat.

If you want to make friends, then running up to them without saying 'Hi, friendly?' and getting shot by a crossbow isn't the best way to go about it. When you get near enough for direct chat, you shouldn't be putting yourself on the firing line.

And if someone comes up on you by surprise, and shoots you on sight? Well, that's too bad. Right now, it's much less risky to simply shoot on sight than rob someone, since you can't tell what that person has on him, and risking them having enough time to draw a weapon isn't worth it.

Sensible suggestions that would help reduce the incentive to kill on sight (such as including a tazer or other non-lethal way of disabling someone) are going to be much better received than a big old whine about how people killing other people isn't realistic. Because it's not; it's a game, it's still being developed, and the risk/reward level is biased towards a kill-on-sight mentality, but recently not by much.

So, either try different approaches of finding people that want to cooperate, or get better at avoiding them. This includes finding people on forums or chat groups. Using a mic is also a much more reliable way of talking to a possible new friend, since you're not leaving yourself vulnerable while typing, and the sincerity of your 'friendly' plea is much easier to discern.

Or maybe wait a while for factions to become a thing (I'm fairly sure rocket has plans of implementing coloured armbands in the future to signify factions), and for people to become less aggressive in their playing style.

[/quote']

The Hurricane Katrina example is a good one for simulating chaos and post apocalypse.

However, they were just looting, not killing eachother 99% of the time they make eye contact. Granted they did murder people, but the murder rate was hardly different from what it was even before that. New Orleans is full of thugs that murder eachother everyday anyway. They dont, however, have a zombie threat outside that will chew their faces off. They would surely band together then. The only reason they had chaos, was because they had little to no reprocussions since no one was watching them loot.

---

On Counterstrike you don't kill your teammates' date=' thus you don't kill everyone. You're really doing well with these comparisons tonight aren't you?

[/quote']

You are only proving my point.

---

Technically' date=' if you were trying to survive, you wouldn't ideally want to work with someone who had nothing anyways. They'd be unable to contribute much at that point and would just be another person utilizing the supplies you find and need. Also, in DayZ you can't exactly tell what a person has usually. I found a person dead on a beach with every toolbelt accessory, blood bags, and morphine, yet he had no weapon on him.

I'm in no way a shoot on sight person, I'm just saying that I don't think the reality of actions are entirely eschewed as people think. People who kill everyone because they don't feel safe in absolutely anyone's presence or simply in hope of supplies is a perfectly understandable reality. The only false actions are the people who simply kill people to rack up murders. <_<

[/quote']

Ideally you would band together for more man power. Thats why we have cities today. You can tell if the player has no items though, and if he is running on the beach, and 99% of the time he only has painkillers and a bandage.

---

If this is what it breaks down to' date=' then your fundamental argument is a little broken.

People aren't shooting other people on sight because of zombies; they're shooting each other because they are choosing to take the easy, low-risk approach, rather than trying to act nicely. Trusting someone is a very difficult thing to do in DayZ.

Currently, DayZ does not encourage people to work together. It doesn't discourage players from killing each other. Yes, it's a problem, but it's not as big as it's made out to be, especially now that rocket removed the bandit skins and forced direct chat.

If you want to make friends, then running up to them without saying 'Hi, friendly?' and getting shot by a crossbow isn't the best way to go about it. When you get near enough for direct chat, you shouldn't be putting yourself on the firing line.

And if someone comes up on you by surprise, and shoots you on sight? Well, that's too bad. Right now, it's much less risky to simply shoot on sight than rob someone, since you can't tell what that person has on him, and risking them having enough time to draw a weapon isn't worth it.

Sensible suggestions that would help reduce the incentive to kill on sight (such as including a tazer or other non-lethal way of disabling someone) are going to be much better received than a big old whine about how people killing other people isn't realistic. Because it's not; it's a game, it's still being developed, and the risk/reward level is biased towards a kill-on-sight mentality, but recently not by much.

So, either try different approaches of finding people that want to cooperate, or get better at avoiding them. This includes finding people on forums or chat groups. Using a mic is also a much more reliable way of talking to a possible new friend, since you're not leaving yourself vulnerable while typing, and the sincerity of your 'friendly' plea is much easier to discern.

[/quote']

I obviously don't play like that video. But for some reason people like to believe that is the issue here, shitty players that is.

Im not whining about people killing other people not being realistic. I know thats realistic. I live in the district that has the most murders in the U.S.A. Trust me I know all about it. What I'm "whining" about is that co-operation, what rocket considers a fundamental part of this game, is lacking, and damn near impossible unless you use a third party voice chat.

People that want to survive and meet up get penalized from every direction, and to meet up with randoms is not a viable option, as it is in real life.

[Duckman404 37]

Then use a third party voice chat. Ask people you've met if they use one, or if you're on a server that advertises its Mumble or Teamspeak, then join that! It's easier and usually results in higher quality, less laggy audio, but it doesn't stop you from still using your mic in-game.

It's a game. It's still in development, and there are many things that would promote cooperation that Rocket just hasn't made yet, such as player-built structures (think watch-towers, little buildings, tents you can walk in, maybe even storage lockers?) and an armband based faction system.

Because it's an alpha, such large features have simply not been created yet, because of the large amount of effort required to code them.

So if you want to meet up with people, cooperate, and get into a group, do it the way everyone else is doing; through forums, group chats, and third party voice chats. The game Rocket is building is nowhere near finished, and yes, in it's current state there is very little incentive to cooperate! Everyone knows that! Rocket knows this!

Guess what? Most of the time, you're going to get shot at by players that trust no one, or players who want your beans. The current spawn system where you start with nothing has significantly reduced this. There will be more things in the future that will further reduce this, and promote groups and cooperation.

Right now, whining on a forum about it isn't going to help. Go find some groups if you want to work in a team; it's not that hard, but it yes, does require the use of things other than in-game direct chat. That's just how things are at the moment. If you want to keep playing how you are, which seems to result in getting yourself shot, then by all means, keep playing. Just don't expect everyone else to start skipping through the fields, hand-in-hand.

[fml 29]

[Sparhawk40 0]

I dont know why people are discounting Shaun of the Dead. that movie is more "realistic" than most of the genre. for example, when they were in the bar and couldnt shoot for shit lol. Cant tell me everyone in the apocalypse can shoot a zombie in the head all the time.

[Yammazul 0]

There are many posts about realism on this forum.

Is "The Walking Dead" not realistic?

Is "28 Days/Months Later" not realistic?

Is "The Shaun of the Dead" not realistic?

Is "The Road" not realistic?

They band together' date=' gather supplies, work together, etc. If that is realistic then why are they not shooting eachother on site, as in dayz? Imagine if Rick and Lori met a person that only had tylenol and a band aid. Do you think they would shoot them?

I imagine co-operation being much more relative in dayz. In a zombie apocylypse, "What would you do?"

My belief is that people just dont play the way they would navigate a zombie apocalypse in real life, and just utilize the game as a pvp fps zombie game, since there are no repercussions for killing. What are your thoughts? Why do you think there is such a big gap in what media portrays, and what people project in this game?

[/quote']

Because if they all shot each other the movie/s would last about 20 minutes and would make for a terrible story and poor entertainment.

I think in a real apocalypse you would see the darker side of humanity unleashed, we have already seen what people are capable of when they feel they will not be held accountable or there is no authority to control or punish them. The end of the world wont be sunshine, happiness and co-operation, its going to be hell on earth, survival at all costs and everyman for himself, time to get real, the strong will prey on the weak, there will be murder rape and other atrocities on a daily basis.

I'm not saying we need these kind of extremes in the game but people need a reality check in human nature and what this kind of scenario might bring out in people.

Below is just a one night occurrence of what people are capable of, this was in one city, while the police were out in force, imagine if this happened across the entire country and people were dropping dead then coming back to life and eating each other, imagine the police had failed and the military was gone then try and imagine how much worse it would get in the days and weeks to come as more and people died, there was no communication with the outside world or signs of rescue/a cure, little food and water, no light/electricity in the nights, what do YOU think that would do to people?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qEjDjtujaQ

[ReaperOne1Two2 0]

People who are using a story as a basis are off very much as in DayZ I am sure 90% of the players just assume there is no story or it doesn't effect there game-play at all.

I think one of the main issues are there is no advantage to teaming up basically. Teaming up doesn't help you in searching towns basically nor does it help in survival against zombies basically. Its only real advantage is for pvp but even though most lone players will do fully fine.

Also killing for food etc... due to scarcity isn't an excuse as items are plentiful in DayZ for the most part currently so people are just killing for killings sake basically.

As it stands the the only items to encourage teamwork are blood transfusions and vehicles(These really only apply to larger premade groups normally)

[dallas 5195]

I just want to add.

The Road is a short read.

The Road is a must read.

[thealgerian 2]

98% people shooting on sight is anything but realistic.

What happens is the game gains popularity and attract morons who are just bored of their generic CoD shooters and just want a 225km² map deathmatch.

[trig 1]

The word REALISM mentioned when the majority of players play with 3rd person 360° view is rather a contradiction.

[fml 29]

The word REALISM mentioned when the majority of players play with 3rd person 360° view is rather a contradiction.

The world Realism when mentioned the majority of player instantly kill eachother no matter the level of threat is rather a contradiction. We can go in circles all day but I chose not to. Have fun debating kids.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Is "The Walking Dead" not realistic?

Yes. You know how in walking dead peope's loyalties to each other are constantly put to the test' date=' up to and including killing each other just for a chance at surviving a little longer? Do you remember when they encounter other survivors whose intentions they are unsure of? You know how those are the most compelling parts of the story, those tense moments when you as the reader/watcher are also unaware of what's going to happen?

Is "28 Days/Months Later" not realistic?

Yes. Do you remember the part in 28 Days Later when they finally arrive at the military base and supposed safety, only to realize that the men inside cannot be trusted in any way? They grow suspicious, and then fearful, finally culminating in sexual violence and the iconic scene in the movie which is not zombie-on-human but human-on-human violence.

Do you get it? That a central theme there is that humans in this situation would be every bit as dangerous, savage and unpredictable as the infected? That's, like, a central theme to the entire film and something rocket has captured incredibly well in just a short period of time.

Is "The Road" not realistic?

Did you read The Road? Did you get to the parts where people eat each other to survive? Did you get to the parts where they encountered other humans and were so afraid that at one point they inadvertantly murder a man in fear for their own safety? Remember?

Once again we see the theme of uncertainty, and inhumanity that results form the struggle for survival and fear for ones wellbeing.

My belief is that people just dont play the way they would navigate a zombie apocalypse in real life, and just utilize the game as a pvp fps zombie game

Okay, so what? Does everyone have to play the game exactly like you in order for you to enjoy it? Why not find people who think like you, group up with them, set some goals and begin accomplishing them. The other people in the game, the ones who are completely free to play the game they want to play, will make things more interesting for you and your friends in a lot of ways. Let them. It's not a bad thing if you have to play strategically or think about your own personal safety before you go wandering off into the wilderness.

Why do you think there is such a big gap in what media portrays, and what people project in this game?

There's not?