(Sociology) Rocket: DayZ is Fundamentally Flawed, and I Agree - Here is Why.

[LaughingJack (DayZ) 767]

Again: This was discussed over and over and over. Final points were:

 

• We need more zombies
• We need more survival
• We need basebuilding
• We need less CoD kiddies (or BF kiddies? Can't remember)
• Characters life has no value to the player now

Which resulted in:  The game should be so freakin dangerous that player are FORCED to play together. Not because they have to, or because they can't shoot at each other, but because it's the only way to survive.

 

Edit: Also, what Nesuma and solodude said. Sorry i let your out of my prophecy. ^^

Edit2: Damn I forgot Grimey...he will also stop by and make a troll attempt, disguised as...well..most of the times I don't know what he writes.

 

And now i wait for my prophecy to come true because, as usual, the next 3 posters will read this and after that the debate will start all over again. Or maybe not even them, because they just read the title and maybe, maybe the OP and answered directly.

Edited March 4, 2014 by LaughingJack

[Gekkonidae 270]

I've now grouped up with random people, whom I've never met in real life or ever met on the internet before, to fight as a force and survive about 20 times in my DayZ SA career, ranging from 3 players to 15 at a time. All but a couple of those interactions ended very well, at least very well among our group. 

 

It may not be the way a lot of people play, but in my experiences, your chances for survival are greatly diminished if you travel alone and are spotted by someone who wants you dead. At least if someone starts firing on you, maximum 1 of you is taken out and the others extract revenge, leaving the killers bloody, lootless corpse hanging out to dry. Unless you're a very skilled lone-wolf, and I personally haven't seen very many of them in the game yet.

 

Again, these are my experiences and I can say that travelling with others who have a good "I've got your backs, I know you've got mine" trust going on tend to rule the map.

 

Also, I'm 32 and played with "Pros" in a few games over the past 5 or so years. I've had no problems keeping up while scrimming with or against any of them, but I simply don't have the time to invest into playing games 24/7 like I did when I was younger lad.   

Edited March 4, 2014 by Gekkonidae

[Nesuma (DayZ) 108]

Huehuehue
Let's start again.
I love and hate to discuss this topic because it reflects me (KoS person). But hey, don't call it CoD/BF Kiddies. I, for example am a Minecraft kiddy (daaaaayum) who enjoyed playing on hardcore PvP servers with griefing and clan system and all this epic PvP stuff. And I guess, because nobody teached me to play as a PvP-whore, some people just liking playing competitive. And no, I am not a psychopath in real life who can't stand people xD.
But maybe a well-educated person could tell me why some people like PvP and some don't?

[execpro22 128]

No not at all.  I agree with KoS; but I think there should be humanizing elements to the game is what I am saying.  I believe that there should be a level of trust - because humans are running away from "infected" people and trying to survive.  So, no KoS should be here to stay and this isn't a thread about that at all... or did you not read my post? lol. 

 

 

 

Read you post. You first say how you dont want to get rid of KOS and then in the next sentence say how KOS is the flawed concept in the game.... Did you read your own post lol?

 

 

 

I think that Rocket sees that this is just another PvP, just set in a zombie apocalypse and it is fundamentally flawed because there is no aspect of reality, or humanization - just killing. 

 

 

I think you are projecting your own feelings onto this topic with zero evidence to back up your claims. I get that you dont agree with KOS obviously, but how can you say that rocket feels it is flawed due to that with zero evdience except the fact that you dont like it...

 

 

 

 

 

So, please - read what I wrote.

 

 

Read it.  All I see is a thinly veiled attempt at KOS thread....

[Weyland Yutani (DayZ) 1159]

 

I'm not sure what your getting at by putting ALF in these sort of threads. If your the same guy that keeps putting ALF up; the first time I saw this I got annoyed, not sure why but I was. But now, I'm starting to enjoy seeing ALF in silly threads. Still not sure what you mean, but I find it funny. Thank you.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Weyland Yutani

[Hetstaine 10852]

When the apoc comes..we will all bow down and let Brad and Angelina lead us to the promised land of a new civilisation. Brangelina Land will be born, and we will all be beautiful and rich. 

[Martmital 436]

 

So yes, this game is fundamentally flawed, as it goes against everything most humans would do: Help each other to survive.

 

ah yes, the rich west really help out... even in a world of plenty people still feel the need to take other peoples shit.  Quite often by force.

 

Life would be brutal, DayZ replicates this quite well.  If anything it would be a return to a medieval society.  Look after your family, friends and village, while fucking over the next village and strangers.

 

You are between the ages of 35-40, yet you appear to be very naive...  

[blurhitz 244]

Just to add some input here

Why do you think "humanity" is something good in a human?  :huh:

Humans are, 90% of the time, assholes. Therefore humanity is what makes you an asshole. It's a horrible thing for a person to have!

About starting civilizations, it is explained in the hydraulic causal theory, humans started grouping up because of the importance of water, at nile, tigris and euphrates.

About killing, down in the mesolithic, killing was actually more common than grouping up. A lot more common, if you look at the researches!

[dusty_nuttles 130]

Four hour interview chopped into bits and we get thread after thread of nonsense.

 

Go read Halls reddit. He says DayZ is not the perfect multiplayer game, that is all.

 

You can't speculate on e-rag edits and be credible.

[shadyrider 1]

This topic reminds me of what goes on in a movie, The Book of Eli. No zombies but end of the world scenario just the same. The bandits kos travelers to loot them for books and supplies. The one and only "hero" battles them all movie. Bandits always out number the heros, in these post dooms day worlds. And in my opinion, that makes the game fun. Spawn in, run like hell to the woods. Figure out where you are and start finding the basics. Find a gun and learn how to use it.

I'm not Dean so I don't pretend to know what he's thinking. I'm am very happy with his product and the future of this product is exciting. I'm 30 years old and would have killed to have a game like this 15 years ago. But golden eye 007 for N64 is what I had.

[dusty_nuttles 130]

I'm not Dean so I don't pretend to know what he's thinking.

 

If you want to know what Hall is thinking, read his reddit!

 

http://www.reddit.com/user/rocket2guns

[shadyrider 1]

If you want to know what Hall is thinking, read his reddit!

 

http://www.reddit.com/user/rocket2guns

Sorry friend, guess I should have worded different. I don't pretend to know what he's thinking, I just play the game. Ha, wasn't sure what a reddit was until I clicked the link. I'm just an old school gamer.

[minime1000 78]

It is a video game. Expecting accurate human behavior is lol

[shadyrider 1]

It is a video game. Expecting accurate human behavior is lol

Agree, saw one guy post "wish he could run around his home town in a clown mask and no pants". Yeah it is a video game hahaha.

[kroms001 99]

Read you post. You first say how you dont want to get rid of KOS and then in the next sentence say how KOS is the flawed concept in the game.... Did you read your own post lol?

 

 

 

 

 

I think you are projecting your own feelings onto this topic with zero evidence to back up your claims. I get that you dont agree with KOS obviously, but how can you say that rocket feels it is flawed due to that with zero evdience except the fact that you dont like it...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read it.  All I see is a thinly veiled attempt at KOS thread....

obvs troll is obvs because I never stated that I wanted to get rid of KoS.  Or canz u not read bro?   I agree with KoS; THE TOPIC IS: Why I think Rocket *Dean Hall* believes the game is fundamentally Flawed; or those words too biggg for u?  I never once stated removing KoS; Ever - Quote me: show me. Or go troll elsewhere.  The concept of reading must be new to you.

[kroms001 99]

Just to add some input here

Why do you think "humanity" is something good in a human?  :huh:

Humans are, 90% of the time, assholes. Therefore humanity is what makes you an asshole. It's a horrible thing for a person to have!

About starting civilizations, it is explained in the hydraulic causal theory, humans started grouping up because of the importance of water, at nile, tigris and euphrates.

About killing, down in the mesolithic, killing was actually more common than grouping up. A lot more common, if you look at the researches!

the leaders of humans are 90% assholes; but the sheep follow suit because... leaders lol.  Does the population of one country ever want to go and destroy another countries population by default? Or is it always some asshole leader that sends the poor off to fight the poor in a war?  Mostly propaganda fuels the flames - sure, hate them because of this, that - but usually, a regular person isn't going to want to go over to another country and kill people for no reason.  Sure, people drive like assholes, people get in road rage fights over driving habits - but it is a rare thing when someone gets out of a car and kills someone just because that person pissed them off. 

Humans started grouping up because of breeding, water, accumulation of food, and if they didn't we would have died off.  Nearly every animal on this planet groups; it is the most common structure in nature.  "The Wisdom of the Crowd."

Anyway; this is just a game, and we are in the Zombie Apocalypse fighting for our lives.  I have no qualms about KoS, Hell; if someone has a weapon raised and I try to talk to them and they don't put it down immediately I light them up.  What I am bringing up is the fact that while this is a game of epic proportions, it can be even more epic.

 

Picture thousands of zombies rushing into Electro as people barricade the city, troops dropping supplies from helicopters from unknown outposts; more maps where if a player gets a vehical, boat, plane or what ever - they can go almost anywhere on earth.  Give it a goal, a cure for those infected or vaccination for those not infected.  Imagine armies of people fighting over control of a territory, fighting over a cure, fighting over everything.  Conscripts invading cities to pick up new recruits by force... The possibilities are endless.

And yes, ancient humans used to kill each other, as we also do today.  Since we have a much larger population than the ancients, we surely kill a lot more people than they would have.  Usually the killings were territorial disputes. "Hey buddy, that was my mammoth tusk." Today, we fight each other over different resources, but generally the same reasons: Our tribal leaders suck.

[Slyguy65 499]

Oh look, it's another one of these threads...

Gee maybe cause a lot of people feel this way...

 

If you hear about a nuclear war happening will only one person talk about it...when dale earnheart died did nascar fans only mention it once and never again, when people brought up how religious tim tebow was, did they just say it once and move on, no, cause relevant shit is relevant shit

[strangelyquiet 67]

 

If a child is born and is only given food, but no affection and no attention - that child will die; it is a proven fact.  

 

 

So yes, this game is fundamentally flawed, as it goes against everything most humans would do: Help each other to survive.

 

Sorry, I've gotta disagree here on two points. 

 

1) The only proven fact is that a child will die without food and water. You can live to a ripe old age without affection and attention. That's a fact, and one of those funky scientific ones.

 

2) More seriously - I think you have a misguided idea of what would happen. An extinction event would lead to the breakdown of civil society. Without the rules, both legal and moral, that glue our lives together, day to day life would break down very quickly. What's much more likely is that society would go through a period of extreme breakdown where the need to survive would trump all else for most people. I do think though that there's a chance that after a certain period of time survivors would begin to come together to rebuild what they have / stay alive. But that would come later.

 

History is littered with the corpses of failed / collapsed societies. The Hittites, Olmec, Anasazi, Indus Valley Civilisation and the societies of Easter Island, the Polynesian Pitcairns and Greenland Norse to name just a few. A number of experts in the field hypothesize about future societal collapse - almost none support the argument that the beginning would be anything other than civil warfare as society fell apart.

 

OP - have a read around the subject it's fascinating stuff. And the golden rule of thumb? - we only learn about the future by learning from the past.

[Nesuma (DayZ) 108]

Picture thousands of zombies rushing into Electro as people barricade the city, troops dropping supplies from helicopters from unknown outposts; more maps where if a player gets a vehical, boat, plane or what ever - they can go almost anywhere on earth.  Give it a goal, a cure for those infected or vaccination for those not infected.  Imagine armies of people fighting over control of a territory, fighting over a cure, fighting over everything.  Conscripts invading cities to pick up new recruits by force... The possibilities are endless.

And yes, ancient humans used to kill each other, as we also do today.  Since we have a much larger population than the ancients, we surely kill a lot more people than they would have.  Usually the killings were territorial disputes. "Hey buddy, that was my mammoth tusk." Today, we fight each other over different resources, but generally the same reasons: Our tribal leaders suck.

 

Wouldn't go with DayZ.

What you're describing is good, but has to be another game. You can't change DayZ into this, even if you could programm all this and it worked, you would have designed a new game.

[Karmaterror 982]

I agree with OP. In an apocolypse situation people would band together as they meet. It would be us vs them(the zombies). Having that common enemy would only enforce the need to work together. Now as KoS said there are psycopaths, murderers and rapist in prisons. But lets just put that into perspective. A prison with its few hundred inmates is surrounded by thousands and thousands of people who are not any of that. They live peacefully and get on with life. Also not everyone in prison is there for violent crimes.

 

You've been on your own for days.....your starving and close to death.....you really do believe your the only one left alive. But then you see another person, your 1st thought isn't going to be "I wonder if I can whip the cuffs on and feed him some bleach"....its going to be more along the lines of "omg another person, how did he survive, maybe he knows a safe place....maybe he has food".

 

Iv seen people use "the Walking Dead" a lot as an example, saying look at that guy who lost his daughter. I say ok, but he was one rouge element, and caused a lot of shit. However, besides his one or two sheep that were also a lil messed up, the majority of his group were being fed lies, lies designed to push them into war with ricks group. Now when he finally gets taken out of the equation what happens? Ricks group accept the other into there prison and life goes on. A lot of good men have died over the course of history, due to one figurehead and his/her agenda. And while the apocalypse isn't immune to questionable leaders, the vigilante justice that I expect would emerge, could soon see a lot of these types weeded out. Making way for us to rebuild :)

[Ozar 108]

i totally aggree with this thread.

 

just imagine one Thing:

DayZ would not be Online and just a single-Player game with other survivers controlled by an AI.

nobody would shoot on sight then. nobody would rape an AI, am i right ?

 

The reason behind it: the shooter would not have the feel that he just pissed of another REAL Person.

 

so ALL the arguments: KOS is neccessary to stay alive bla bla. is just bullshit.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Ozar

[Jex 1104]

Unless you're a very skilled lone-wolf, and I personally haven't seen very many of them in the game yet.

 

LOL if they were skilled you wouldn't see them so how do you know! They're all in bushes watching you run by ;)

[Jex 1104]

Now as KoS said there are psycopaths, murderers and rapist in prisons. But lets just put that into perspective. A prison with its few hundred inmates is surrounded by thousands and thousands of people who are not any of that. They live peacefully and get on with life. Also not everyone in prison is there for violent crimes.

 

Likely that most of them would get zombiefied or even starve to death being unable to get out

[Tr1x 53]

I find so much enjoyment in murdering people in DayZ. I don't know why but nothing compares to sneaking up behind someone and slamming an axe into the back of their head or putting a bullet in their brain. I don't even kill people for loot anymore. I think of it as a sport really. You guys can come on the forums and complain about people killing people, but in the end this is what makes the game enjoyable for a vast majority.

 

Mad cuz someone shot you? Then stay hidden and stealthy. Trust only those you are friends with and are part of your group.

[kroms001 99]

Sorry, I've gotta disagree here on two points. 

 

1) The only proven fact is that a child will die without food and water. You can live to a ripe old age without affection and attention. That's a fact, and one of those funky scientific ones.

 

2) More seriously - I think you have a misguided idea of what would happen. An extinction event would lead to the breakdown of civil society. Without the rules, both legal and moral, that glue our lives together, day to day life would break down very quickly. What's much more likely is that society would go through a period of extreme breakdown where the need to survive would trump all else for most people. I do think though that there's a chance that after a certain period of time survivors would begin to come together to rebuild what they have / stay alive. But that would come later.

 

History is littered with the corpses of failed / collapsed societies. The Hittites, Olmec, Anasazi, Indus Valley Civilisation and the societies of Easter Island, the Polynesian Pitcairns and Greenland Norse to name just a few. A number of experts in the field hypothesize about future societal collapse - almost none support the argument that the beginning would be anything other than civil warfare as society fell apart.

 

OP - have a read around the subject it's fascinating stuff. And the golden rule of thumb? - we only learn about the future by learning from the past.

 

FACT: Your development depends on your attachment/interactions with other humans.  If you do not get that affection as an infant, you can not develop mentally or function in society.  It is a proven fact, that in eastern block orphanages children who were only fed and not held - died.  It is a proven fact that the children that were held rarely survived but could not function because their brain activity was less than children that are held and nurtured. Source: Infants Toddlers and Caregivers by Janet Gonzalez-Mena and Dianne Widmeyer Eyer

Also

"It's only natural for a parent to want to hold their newborn baby, but do you know what happens if an infant is not held or touched? Believe it or not, they die."

http://voices.yahoo.com/infants-die-if-they-not-touched-10343551.html

and

"Many children who have not had ample physical and emotional attention are at higher risk for behavioral, emotional and social problems as they grow up." http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/infant-touch/

I could keep going, using reference after reference.  We have a physical and mental connection to other human beings since birth, it is a proven fact.  If we don't get that physical and mental stimulation we either die, or are abnormal in development.  Physical and mental connections is detrimental to our development not only as an individual, but as a species.

 

Fact: there were a few extinction level events that nearly wiped out humanity, yet here we are.  Something nearly killed us all of (drought? disease? Volcano?) Numbers dropped to only a few thousand people (links posted as references) yet; omg, here we are because our ancestors worked together in small groups to survive.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2012/10/22/163397584/how-human-beings-almost-vanished-from-earth-in-70-000-b-c

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/04/25/study-humans-almost-became-extinct-70000-years-ago/

 

If you really look into your argument against mine, it actually re-enforces what I have stated.  Those civilizations died, but humanity didn't - why?  Because small tribes survived by grouping together, and helped each other.  If everyone was lumped in with each other, in one place on earth; we would not exist.  Societies break down and end all the time, yet - here we are.  Even when complete anarchy happens and there is a  loss of governmental structure, humanity still shows historically that it doesn't resort to killing each other en mass.

Also, you never got into why those civilizations vanished; drought, disease, famine, war?  The issue that seems to have gone over your head is that the majority of the ancient civilizations that you mentioned that disappeared - well, some were segregated from most of humanity; especially the Polynesians and the people of Easter Island.  The other civilizations that were not segregated absorbed in some way or another into other societies that existed at the time that were near them.  The Anasazi are hypothesized to have picked up and left because of drought and famine. Olmecs were absorbed or evolved into other cultures/states (Toltec, Mayan, Aztec): we know this because their religious beliefs, social structure, agriculture and architecture carried on without them. So, in my opionion - those are poor examples.  Find an example where the majority of people in a society had some tragic event happen to them and they ended up going completely nuts, attacking everything they saw just to kill.  You can't.  No one can find that example because there simply isn't one.

 

I love how people try to focus on the negative aspects of the human race, but can't put together an argument valid enough to prove their point.  If all of this rage, killing, and negativity about us is true as a species, people would give fuck all about any laws and the majority of humanity would be dead by now.  The fact is; even in anarchistic states, people generally help each other out.  Do some research about the Spanish Anarchist Revolution where it was "estimated that about eight million people participated directly or at least indirectly in the Spanish Revolution, which "came closer to realizing the ideal of the free stateless society on a vast scale than any other revolution in history."

 

That kind of blows all the arguments out the window about lawlessness without a structured governmental base.  The only reason people kill en mass (on a large scale) is because the leaders of their society tell them to, and they obey.  They are still acting as a group.

 

"History is littered with the corpses of failed / collapsed societies."

 

Eventually, every society collapses - you should know that from history.  There isn't one society that hasn't been changed from history.  All ancient civilizations have fallen, it is the way of the world.  That only proves that people evolve in their way of thinking about governance/territory - not that after an apocalyptic event that everyone would kill each other.  There are no references anywhere that state such a behavior.

 

Where is the "A volcano exploded, killed most of the people in the city so the survivors killed each other" reference in history bro?