Is there anything being planned that incentivizes not shooting on sight?

[muddyraccoon 176]

The only thing left for us to do without impunity, is hunt (unless you wanna add negatives for killing that lil bunny wabbit) and base building. 

 

 

Maybe the rabbit turns the gun around before you notice and you shoot yourself in the face causing your bill to spin around and then face the other way while your character says "This guy's encouragable."

 

Or you get an ACME safe dropped on your character and the rabbit chews mockingly on a carrot like Groucho Marx chews on a cigar.

 

That is essentially what people want, right?  This to be an animated game, where we walk around holding hands, hitting each other flat with a giant mallet, then springing up unhurt?

 

KoS is part of the game.  The only thing that can possibly save you is microphone communication.  But it can also hang you out to dry.  I kill when I communicate and get no response. 

 

Usually that involves me shooting someone while crying into direct chat 'I'M SORRY!  I'M SORRY!"

Edited February 18, 2014 by MuddyRaccoon

[Ovomaltine 30]

What does pictures in the sky bring to the game?  Apart from a drop in frames per second...

Ok i cant stop because you dont even see the easiest logical link.

They bring to the game an....waaaait fooor iiiiiiit...implementation of mental consequences for witnessing shocking events.

I am sure they can be programmed to be reduced in quality and blurry pixxely (like thoughts in your head are...) so that there wont be any

noticeable effect on the fps.

I dont know why you start arguing about the technical realization now when u dont like the idea at all.

Because the technical realization is the next step...

For example those daydreams could be depicted by alphatransparent sprites which blend in for 2 seconds and blend out again.

That would have 0 impact on fps.

But as I said I dont know why you start discussing game development issues if you dont like the idea itself.

[Ovomaltine 30]

You CANNOT force a psychological effect on a player in a game, especially this one, because to do so would mandate that the player in question is already bound to a certain psychological mindset. By forcibly implementing a particular psychological outcome on a characters actions, you immediately and irrevocably prevent the player from being able to immerse himself in HIS game, by making it YOUR game.

 

Since this is sandbox,and not a linear or story-driven game, each individual player is responsible for his own individual character. By forcing "rules" such as your proposed psychological effects, you have just stuck EVERYONE within a defined area of gameplay, thus limiting their individual playstyles. You, me, the devs, NO ONE knows how ANYONE is going to react in any situation, nor how they will react after the fact- so how can you possibly think that forcing a psychological aftereffect on a player is a just means of 'dealing' with a specific action?

 

Any player could very well represent, in game, an individual who has no morals at all, and thereby would feel absolutely zero remorse for killing over and over. Who are you to dictate that after X number of kills, said random player MUST be affected by anything at all? At the same time, how can you assume that the random carebear would NOT be overly traumatized by seeing their very first gunshot victim?

 

If this game was totally story driven, then having these types of effects might be justified to add. But since the game is completely sandbox, and interactions are dependent on each individual players choices, forcing any type of psychological effect as a result of any type of event is not only game-breaking bad design, but just plain dumb.

so much effort u make... for such a short answer i have for you:

NO. Implementing those effects would not limit individual playstyles. As I don't get why you cant continue KOSing when u see a 2 second image every 60 minutes in the sky.

[DaveyTheElder 1]

The way to defeat KOS is to avoid being seen, by being better at surviving all things, including encounters with other human beings.  If you want to interact with other players, do so in a controlled manner, where you control the outcome.  Keep your head on a swivel, always dig your corners, don't risk being seen until you are the one controlling whether or not you are seen. 

 

Easier said than done, but taking steps in that direction will increase your lifespan significantly.  It's a dangerous world out there.

Totally.  The best way to survive is to avoid gun fights all together, avoid being seen, and to eliminate all threats whenever you have the positional authority to do so. Never stay still after you fire, and always move within and to cover. But I think what a lot of people want out of Day z, is a game where there are more positive social interactions with strangers. When this happens in Day z, it is really a unique and wonderful experience. However, I don't think that there is a simple and desirable game mechanic that can "fix" the "KOS mentality," other than to DRAMATICALLY reduce the presence of ranged weapons/ammo. If there was a low chance that another player could kill you easily, then the incentives for killing any player "on sight," could be lowered enough to eliminate the "KOS problem." This actually might be a good idea, and might be fun, especially if there were a lot more things to do in the game, but ATM, there is shit all to do if you remove collecting weapons and attachments/ worrying about, or shooting up fellow survivors.

 

The trouble with day z's "KOS mentality" is the trouble with all extra-societal human interactions in which both parties can reasonably suspect that the other party is armed. If there is no law, then each person must protect themselves, and the best and most fool proof way to do this is to eliminate all threats, and EVERYONE represents a threat. The only types of interactions in Day z which do not regularly lead to KOS are encounters between the unarmed, or the dramatically mismatched. This is because in both of these situations, threat is not felt from both parties, in order for KOS to make sense (other than from boredom and having just found a long range scope,) BOTH parties must be able to threaten the other.

 

If you don't want to be killed on sight. Avoid being seen, and don't carry a weapon :) sound fun? That's not the game, that's human nature that the game reflects and this is the best part of day z

[real meatshield 424]

So little effort you make to justify your ridiculous idea in response to a statement that destroys it.

 

I can and would continue to KOS, that is not the issue. The issue is that I am being forced to suffer a consequence that has no bearing on my character. My character is heartless, soulless, devoid of any feelings, compassion, or morals. Hence my character would never suffer from these frivolous maladies that YOU want to see forced upon him, JUST BECAUSE you dont happen to like the KOSer, or the KOS mentality, does not mean that I should have to suffer with some inane bullshit you think is "fair".

 

Do you want realism? Or do you only want your own specific implementation of realism?

[napalmdog 71]

I hold of the true solution is what the game originally intended; zombies. Lots and lots of zombies. It may be fun to play as bandit, but right now all that equates to is playing is a troll. There's not a high enough attrition rate in gear nor supplies that justify playing as a bandit in order to survive. In fact playing as a bandit lowers my chance of survival.

 

I do not fear dying and losing my many cans of tuna nor my M4. I can easily replace all my things in my character's value is the same. So my conclusion is to give some sort of incentive to the individual life and you give incentive to not shoot on sight. This doesn't need to come from the game overall, in all honesty. It can simply come from private hives, just like it did before. You can run as a bandit on one server, A hero on another. It's easier to develop your community and friends. And you kill farming, ghosting and to a degree combat logging; all are nailed to one server.

[Ovomaltine 30]

So little effort you make to justify your ridiculous idea in response to a statement that destroys it.

 

I can and would continue to KOS, that is not the issue. The issue is that I am being forced to suffer a consequence that has no bearing on my character. My character is heartless, soulless, devoid of any feelings, compassion, or morals. Hence my character would never suffer from these frivolous maladies that YOU want to see forced upon him, JUST BECAUSE you dont happen to like the KOSer, or the KOS mentality, does not mean that I should have to suffer with some inane bullshit you think is "fair".

 

Do you want realism? Or do you only want your own specific implementation of realism?

and my character is the invulnerable HULK when he gets mad. please give me a in-game option to enable this attribute of my character. thx.

oh wait sorry that was a mix up. actually my character is a very labile and anxious person, but still it doesnt reflect this in game at all.

please implement that my character has a heart, has feelings and has a soul and can also suffer from traumatic happenings.

you know what: the medical system in dayz is very complex, so why shouldn't it cover mental effects also?

why should you be able to suffer from heart attack, blood loss, unconsciousness,

diseases by eating rotten stuff, colds, but not from mental illnesses?

how is a mental illness or condition not part of human life?

[DaveyTheElder 1]

Helicopter Hunter,

I think what has made your idea so unappealing to everyone is that it completely breaks the existing reality of the game. How would this idea of yours make any sense in a Godless world, in a world without positions of authority outside of yourself, in a world without some kind higher power, a Big Brother, a corporate omnipresence watching and recording everything you do. Your idea is exactly the kind of thing that DOESN'T exist in an apocalypse.  It breaks the "fourth wall," and demonstrates that, in fact, a game maker is running the show. In short, it is fundamentally destructive to the Day z universe. 

[Ovomaltine 30]

erm. no. its a medical condition for which even a genetical disposition exists.

how you realize the effect in game is another question.

but PTSD is an illness, same as blood loss, or sickness, or a cold

Edited February 18, 2014 by Ovomaltine

[Ramalamadingdong 2]

So little effort you make to justify your ridiculous idea in response to a statement that destroys it.

 

I can and would continue to KOS, that is not the issue. The issue is that I am being forced to suffer a consequence that has no bearing on my character. My character is heartless, soulless, devoid of any feelings, compassion, or morals. Hence my character would never suffer from these frivolous maladies that YOU want to see forced upon him, JUST BECAUSE you dont happen to like the KOSer, or the KOS mentality, does not mean that I should have to suffer with some inane bullshit you think is "fair".

 

Do you want realism? Or do you only want your own specific implementation of realism?

 

 

Urm if your character was a "heartless, soulless, devoid of any feelings, compassion, or morals" he is already suffering from those effects, people just don't become "heartless, soulless, devoid of any feelings, compassion, or morals" with no external stimulus or other side effects at all.

[real meatshield 424]

and my character is the invulnerable HULK when he gets mad. please give me a in-game option to enable this attribute of my character. thx.

oh wait sorry that was a mix up. actually my character is a very labile and anxious person, but still it doesnt reflect this in game at all.

please implement that my character has a heart, has feelings and has a soul and can also suffer from traumatic happenings.

you know what: the medical system in dayz is very complex, so why shouldn't it cover mental effects also?

why should you be able to suffer from heart attack, blood loss, unconsciousness,

diseases by eating rotten stuff, colds, but not from mental illnesses?

how is a mental illness or condition not part of human life?

If you want to be a carebear, let your ACTIONS in game reflect that you are a caring, morally just person. Go out of your way to help people. No one here is going to prevent you from playing that way, although I will make every effort in game to hinder you in your attempts. Neither of us should suffer repercussions from, or benefit from, either of our actions. If I kill you, I may get a usable morphine, or I may ruin everything. If you heal someone, you may make a friend- or he may get up, punch you in the face, and take all of your gear.

 

The medical system in game is NOT all that complex. Basic first aid, really, is all that it amounts to. Adding Freudian and Jungian psychology is well beyond the scope of what is intended here.

 

And again, you are STILL trying to force a mental condition on my character that he would not have, solely for the sake of making YOU feel better about the fact I am going out and killing everyone I see, just for the sake of doing it, regardless of how you or anyone else feels.

[DaveyTheElder 1]

Well, Helicopter hunter,

As I see it, the trouble with including psychological maladies in day z is that YOUR mind is the mind of your AVATAR. Your avatar does not have a mind or emotions that can be effected by your actions, YOU are the mind and your body is your avatar. That is the basic relationship. When I speak of what I am doing in Day z, I don't say, "My character is heading to zeleno," I say, "I"m going to zeleno." Me and my body, are going to zeleno. With psychological effects added, the question becomes, "who is the person suffering psychological effects?" Who is it?

[real meatshield 424]

Urm if your character was a "heartless, soulless, devoid of any feelings, compassion, or morals" he is already suffering from those effects, people just don't become "heartless, soulless, devoid of any feelings, compassion, or morals" with no external stimulus or other side effects at all.

Says who? You? 

[Ramalamadingdong 2]

You CANNOT force a psychological effect on a player in a game, especially this one, because to do so would mandate that the player in question is already bound to a certain psychological mindset. By forcibly implementing a particular psychological outcome on a characters actions, you immediately and irrevocably prevent the player from being able to immerse himself in HIS game, by making it YOUR game.

"You CANNOT force death on a player in a game, especially this one, because to do so would mandate that the player in question is already bound to a certain life state. By forcibly implementing a particular life state onto a characters, you immediately and irrevocably prevent the player from being able to immerse himself in HIS game, by making it YOUR game."

 

How is that any different to killing other players? its OK for you to destroy someone elses game but you cant suffer any consequence because of it? this should be a game about consequences (of which pvp is an outcome) not a PvP deathmatch with no consequences.

 

Everything you typed in your post could be applied to you going around KOS people.....but seems you can only see it from your point of view.

Edited February 18, 2014 by Ramalamadingdong

[Ramalamadingdong 2]

Says who? You? 

*sigh*

 

So you are using RP to justify your dickhead actions....not having dickhead actions happen because of RP?

Edited February 18, 2014 by Ramalamadingdong

[real meatshield 424]

"You CANNOT force death on a player in a game, especially this one, because to do so would mandate that the player in question is already bound to a certain life state. By forcibly implementing a particular life state onto a characters, you immediately and irrevocably prevent the player from being able to immerse himself in HIS game, by making it YOUR game."

 

How is that any different to killing other players? its OK for you to destroy someone elses game but you cant suffer any consequence because of it? this should be a game about consequences (of which pvp is an outcome) not a PvP deathmatch with no consequences.

Really? This is all you have? Just delete your troll account already.

[DaveyTheElder 1]

Why are you guys all being so unpleasant? I understand why Helicopter Hunter likes this idea, but I do think that, if you read my post about Mind/body(avatar) relationships, you will see the problem. In a linear game, the game makers want to be able to tell their own story, and since you usually play as the main character they have to give your character, a personality. Since you are playing as someone else, it makes sense then that they might suffer from psychological maladies. However, in a game without a story, where you are playing a character of your own creation, the MIND of your AVATAR is your mind. You even speak as your player in game. It makes no sense to create a mind of your avatar, and separates your relationship to that avatar.

[DaveyTheElder 1]

How do people feel about a liberal policy of disarmament for lowering KOS? I imagine that could be controversial? Very few weapons, very little ammo, base building, defensive strategies abound. Only the ultra powerful are armed. 

[real meatshield 424]

*sigh*

 

So you are using RP to justify your dickhead actions....not having dickhead actions happen because of RP?

What the fuck does this even mean? Why am I a dickhead, just because my actions make you butthurt? Maybe I see you as the dickhead, for helping out the assclown freshie that tried to go fight club on me and steal my gear- and you just encouraged more of it by helping him?

[real meatshield 424]

How do people feel about a liberal policy of disarmament for lowering KOS? I imagine that could be controversial? Very few weapons, very little ammo, base building, defensive strategies abound. Only the ultra powerful are armed. 

This is actually planned for in the future. I will happily craft a bow and arrows to shoot people with, if I cannot find a weapon.

[pillock 850]

 

How is that any different to killing other players? its OK for you to destroy someone elses game but you cant suffer any consequence because of it? this should be a game about consequences (of which pvp is an outcome) not a PvP deathmatch with no consequences.

 

 

 

Consequences are good. But Psychological trauma is just not going to happen. It's too complex, too imprecise, too problematic to form the basis of a gameplay mechanic. I agree that consequences for actions are good, but this is not a good example. It's a bad idea, and unworkable.

 

It'd be great if bandits could build up some sort of infamy, could be identified, so other players could form posses and hunt them down to administer some form of justice - that would be a good consequence, befitting the scenario. But I fear this isn't very feasible without locking characters inside a single server (which is what I'd like to see happen, albeit unlikely).

[Martmital 436]

Ok i cant stop because you dont even see the easiest logical link.

They bring to the game an....waaaait fooor iiiiiiit...implementation of mental consequences for witnessing shocking events.

I am sure they can be programmed to be reduced in quality and blurry pixxely (like thoughts in your head are...) so that there wont be any

noticeable effect on the fps.

I dont know why you start arguing about the technical realization now when u dont like the idea at all.

Because the technical realization is the next step...

For example those daydreams could be depicted by alphatransparent sprites which blend in for 2 seconds and blend out again.

That would have 0 impact on fps.

But as I said I dont know why you start discussing game development issues if you dont like the idea itself.

 

Having pictures in the sky wont replicate it to a satisfactory standard.  Random noises I could understand and would be a better way to simulate it.

 

Just because I don't like the initial idea does not mean that you can't sway me by showing a good and working implementation of it.   T'is what forums are here for.

[DaveyTheElder 1]

Locking players to single servers will happen as soon as any server specific structures of permanence are added. If there are bases, or vehicles, people are much more likely to stay on one server. Vehicles can't work exactly as they did in the Mod however because in a world where you don't spend all your time, you have to be able to lock things up. 

[Ovomaltine 30]

Having pictures in the sky wont replicate it to a satisfactory standard.  Random noises I could understand and would be a better way to simulate it.

 

Just because I don't like the initial idea does not mean that you can't sway me by showing a good and working implementation of it.   T'is what forums are here for.

now you are making progress...you have learned to apply constructive criticism.

random noises as the buggy noises that still exist paired with very subtle imagery.

but i thought you dont like the idea at all :D

there is your zombie

http://indulgy.net/LB/3f/S1/263319909432297865oRzFEdqic.jpg

Edited February 18, 2014 by Ovomaltine

[Martmital 436]

now you are making progress...you have learned to apply constructive criticism.

random noises as the buggy noises that still exist paired with very subtle imagery.

but i thought you dont like the idea at all :D

there is your zombie

http://indulgy.net/LB/3f/S1/263319909432297865oRzFEdqic.jpg

 

 

I don't like the idea...  I think it's pointless and unneeded.