Why shoot.

[brazorf 46]

I think It's because in RL, when do (most) people ever get the chance to shoot somebody? Never. Same with racing games/sports games etc. Most people can't do it in RL, so we play a game for the experience. Simple.

 

I'm not sure with this argument. You play footbal games? If a friend calls for a football game  RL, you take your shoes and you go.

You play race games? If you have the chance to try kart races, or somehow have a trial on a real race circuit, you'll go.

I think the same doesn't apply to killing and shooting?

 

---

Because people have always killed other people. One could ask the same question about the Roman Colosseum.

 

And you? Did you ever kill someone?

Edited March 27, 2014 by brazorf

[brazorf 46]

Because people want to feel empowered. Same reasons someone would want to own/use weapons irl, only in a 'safe' controlled environment.

 

I'm not sure this is enough, but it certainly makes sense to me

[brazorf 46]

It explores the basic viciousness of the human mind in a consequence free environment.

 

 

This makes sense too, and it was some of the most rated when i talked about with some friends.

[brazorf 46]

The answer is competition, winning makes you feel better.

 

 

True. Still, seems like we like to win when some guy lose his life.

COD sold little more than, for example, kinect sports, which may have a higher competition rate, since you're challenging your mate and he stands beside you. At least, as a competition, i would probably have more fun meeting him online and headshot him.

[Publik 404]

And you? Did you ever kill someone?

Nope, which is why I do it in video games. Humans tend to drift in and out of a bloodsport phase. The US is currently starting to come out of the lower end of that (MMA, less "think of the children").

[pilgrim* 3514]

I'm sorry buddy, but i can't see your point here.

I'll try to explain:

 

If you use a word "Evil"; then you must have an opposite idea "Good", or else the word 'evil' doesn't make sense.

 

So instead of saying what you think is "Evil", try making a list of what you think is "Good". (i mean the opposite of evil, ok?)

Is it "good" to drive cars, or is it just useful, but bad for the environment

Is it "good" to kill enemy factory workers, or is it just economical to shorten a war and 'save' other lives?

Is it "good" to fight wars because the elected government decides to, or is it just the democratic rule of law?

 

These examples above are supposed to use the word "good" as meaning the opposite of "evil"

But if I say this is a "good" coke, I don't mean its the opposite of an "evil" coke.. I mean its an OK coke.

Maybe here "good" is the opposite of "bad", like "good apple - bad apple"... and there's no example of "good" meaning the opposite of "evil".

You tell me.

 

So you used the word "Evil" - so you must have an idea of its opposite, which is "Good" (or else the word "evil" doesnt make sense, right?)

 

So I just wondered what you personally think is GOOD the opposite of EVIL

 

I'm not talking Lord of the Rings here, just real life, ok?

 

Sorry to be heavy, no offence intended,, but if you're going to ask these kinds of questions - but you're not ready to work out WHAT EXACTLY you are talking about when you ask them - then you're never going to find the answers

 

People use words without ever asking themselves what those words even mean TO THEM

So how they ever going to find out what they are talking about themselves?

So how they ever going to get an answer to a question they can even understand?

 

No offence at all intended, friend - but you used the word 'EVIL'

You used it, not me

So what do you mean when you use that word, please? I'd be interested to hear what you mean by it.

 

Thanx

xx pilgrim

[brazorf 46]

Ok, got you.

 

Well, you sure have your reasons to give great weight to the word itself - which in effect has. In this context though the very same point would be made talking about good and bad, beautiful and ugly, and so on. 

 

To keep it simple, very simple, since you mentioned GTA, in this context these are my meanings:

- evil is walk around, baseball bat at the ready, and get the hell out of anybody for no reason

- good is the exact opposite, quite pointless to any game: clean driving, polite behaviour, stop at the red light.

 

The latter i usually do every day in my life. The first, well, i don't and hopefully i never will.

[brazorf 46]

Nope, which is why I do it in video games. 

 

Uhm. Are you saying that you do feel the need to kill people and since you can't in real life you do it inside a game?

[Dagwood 680]

You ever paintballed?

[Judopunch 523]

Funny how your answer looks so much like my question. Some fool could argue it's not an answer at all.

You could read the basic of what hes getting at. "Shooting people in games is fun".

 

However I find shooting / torturing people who are un-armed or not hostile very unfufilling. When I hunt players I hunt players looking to or already causing trouble. I dont go to the newbie spawn area and pick off some guy who has no way to defend them-self. People that do that, in my opinion, are kids with a magnifying glass. They probably have low self esteem and are trying to exert some kind of childish dominance on people who cant really fight back or challenge their behavior.

 

But thats part of what makes DayZ unique. The conflict that play styles create and the consequences of death.

[pilgrim* 3514]

They do say that the longer an animal species 'plays' the longer the total life expectancy of that species

And that 'play' is a way of training and learning the skills you need, or may need, in life

 

It's not really normal (since the dawn of time) for human beings to lead long calm quiet law-abiding lives, and obey speed limits, not drink too much, act reasonably in all situations, always reflect before acting, never rely on instinct, have no need for self-defense or quick reactions

 

My father went to war, my grandfather went to war, my great-grandfather went to war.

My great grandfather was the only one who volunteered (but it was the done thing)

 

So maybe as human beings, its a genetic requirement to have other skills, as well as obeying stop lights. Playing helps you know what you can do in "less than usual situations". It helps you know who you are and what are your limits. Playing poker, playing FPS, playing tennis, any game has this quality.

 

Isn't this what 'play' is for?

And that's why it's fun (and real to-the-death matches are less fun)

Edited March 29, 2014 by pilgrim

[brazorf 46]

They do say that the longer an animal species 'plays' the longer the total life expectancy of that species

And that 'play' is a way of training and learning the skills you need, or may need, in life

 

It's not really normal (since the dawn of time) for human beings to lead long calm quiet law-abiding lives, and obey speed limits, not drink too much, act reasonably in all situations, always reflect before acting, never rely on instinct, have no need for self-defense or quick reactions

 

My father went to war, my grandfather went to war, my great-grandfather went to war.

My great grandfather was the only one who volunteered (but it was the done thing)

 

So maybe as human beings, its a genetic requirement to have other skills, as well as obeying stop lights. Playing helps you know what you can do in "less than usual situations". It helps you know who you are and what are your limits. Playing poker, playing FPS, playing tennis, any game has this quality.

 

Isn't this what 'play' is for?

And that's why it's fun (and real to-the-death matches are less fun)

 

So you say we are playing to discover and test other skills than we don't, or can not, use in every day life, right?

This is an interesting point of view.

You ever paintballed?

 

Nope

[brazorf 46]

However I find shooting / torturing people who are un-armed or not hostile very unfufilling. When I hunt players I hunt players looking to or already causing trouble. I dont go to the newbie spawn area and pick off some guy who has no way to defend them-self. People that do that, in my opinion, are kids with a magnifying glass. They probably have low self esteem and are trying to exert some kind of childish dominance on people who cant really fight back or challenge their behavior.

 

 

Got your point, but i'm not focusing on frustrated people who makes use of videogames to their self-satisfaction. I'm just talkin about anyone

[Judopunch 523]

Got your point, but i'm not focusing on frustrated people who makes use of videogames to their self-satisfaction. I'm just talkin about anyone

Confirmation bias also kicks in here. "Everybody KOS's" Is not really measurable. If one people in 100 go out of their way to kill people 'just because' the 99 people that did not kill you dont stand out in your mind. But that 1 guy made a negative impact. Because of how our brains work we grossly misrepresent that 1 in 100 because of the negative response it generates. I have NOT shot more people that I have run into than I have shot (unless they were looking to get shot). I have had a Mexican standoff while playing 'supplies for bambi' with 3 of us (they thought there were only 2 hehe) and 4 of them with their new friend.

 

You never remember the times when someone like me didnt shoot you, because I was a ghost. There are more like me. You dont remember all of the noobs who just ran away or past you. You dont remember the people who said 'watch out for that guy on the hill hes an ass'. But you do disproportionately do remember the one asshole who shot you and talked shit.

[liquidsnake 275]

Because there's something deeply satisfying about walking off into the distance as the victor of a kill-or-be-killed situation

[ptk (DayZ) 178]

It explores the basic viciousness of the human mind in a consequence free environment.

It is no coincidence that the best selling games are the most brutally violent in our pathetically PC society.

There is no modern outlet for our inner Viking.

Not to argue but in recent light, isn't there some speculation that the vikings weren't as savage as they have been portrayed in the past, namely a few bad apples pillaging and then being demonized as a whole?

Op, take a look at steven kings "on horror" essay (i believe it's called this). To sum it up, king basically says that reading horror allows us to play out fantasies that we couldn't openly do in society, to satisfy appetites of the human mind without risk of judgement. I think the same thing when it comes to gaming, escape into fantasy and do whatever we please without the constraints our society gives us (and for good reason in most cases).

this doesn't necessarily mean that we are all whack jobs with secret fantasies of forcefeeding people with disinfectant and shooting defensless people, that this gets our rocks off, but rather that being able to indulge in this behavior in a fictional medium helps maintain a healthy, mental presence...

Edited March 29, 2014 by ptk

[AryanBoogeyman 185]

Not to argue but in recent light, isn't there some speculation that the vikings weren't as savage as they have been portrayed in the past, namely a few bad apples pillaging and then being demonized as a whole?

Op, take a look at steven kings "on horror" essay (i believe it's called this). To sum it up, king basically says that reading horror allows us to play out fantasies that we couldn't openly do in society, to satisfy appetites of the human mind without risk of judgement. I think the same thing when it comes to gaming, escape into fantasy and do whatever we please without the constraints our society gives us (and for good reason in most cases).

this doesn't necessarily mean that we are all whack jobs with secret fantasies of forcefeeding people with disinfectant and shooting defensless people, that this gets our rocks off, but rather that being able to indulge in this behavior in a fictional medium helps maintain a healthy, mental presence...

 

 

The use of Viking was not in the negative sense.

 

It was meant to evoke the warrior/bloodlust ethos of the Viking raiders, not the entire civilization which to my knowledge was trading and agrarian based for the most part.