DayZ Lack of Social Realism

[therandomredstone 432]

Players in dayz, come in only four different ways.

 

1.They kill you on sight no matter what

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.  They talk to you and if you sound annoying or not worth their time they shoot you.

 

 

 

 

3.   They act friendly for 5 minutes then stab you in the back and loot you

 

 

4. Or they are truly friendly and will follow you to the end and never betray you. Or they are friendly and part ways with you.

 

 

 

We have the most little amount of fours in dayz, then there is twos, then ones, then threes. People don't treat DayZ like its real, but if they did this game would be THAT much better, and safer.. But safe isn't always good... Now...

 

Share Some Times You Got Mugged, Killed, And Betrayed!

 

[leviathanapsu 94]

I remember one guy very early on when I first started playing. At the time NEAF was still full of military gear and I came up just as someone else server hopped and came running out of a hangar. He comes running at me yelling friendly and shooting at me at the same time. It was probably the worst attempt at deception I have ever seen in my life. My five year old could do better. Who would fall for someone yelling friendly /WHILE/ they shot at you?

[5mirkeh 98]

I only ever seen examples of 1 and 4

I am too stupid to get the drop on other people, Normally I do not have the patience or the perception

[budlime 29]

I had only been playing a few days, fell off the ship and died. Spawned just south of Svet. Ran into a guy while I was drinking from the well. He seemed pretty cool, so we teamed up for a little bit. He helped me gear up, SKS, ammo, backpack, food/water. He had me follow him to the train tracks where he had a buddy that had just gotten killed and was spawn hopping to get close to him again. I was killed and thanked for the loot. They laughed, I said some things over direct that weren't so nice.. You live and learn.

[Killawife 599]

I've been KoS:ed a hundred times, met friendlies maybe fifty times with varying results, knocked out by bambis twice and tricked by someone appearing friendly first and then killed twice.

[ChainReactor 922]

I'm a 4, always been. There's no point for me in being kitted out, I'm not looking for PVP and i will die eventually anyway. I encounter everyone friendly and i try to be entertaining to others. If they kill me, i dont mind, will simply start over again and meet new people.

 

Sure, that can be frustrating, and i ragequitted more than once after being KOS'd for the fourth time in a row, but i simply say "this ain't your day, just leave" and i will come back with the same mindset.

 

That gave me many unique encounters. People that see every player as an enemy automaticly miss so much.

[Pandema 352]

People don't act how they would in real life when playing a video game?

Color me shocked.

[UltimateGentleman 355]

One time I met some black chick, neither of us had mic's so we just sorta stood at the road for a second, she walked off while I dropped a bandage or something, I'm nice like that.

 

Figured fuck you then I'll leave it on the floor and walked off, turned round to check if maybe she picked it up and there she was with her fists up about to punch me >.>

Got a few hits in and then a zombie bro joined in, I was healthy and she clearly wasn't went down in like 5 hits between me and the zombie.

 

It was pretty funny really.

 

 

Another time I came across 3 people near the coast, fairly fresh looking cept one had a backpack, I was also fresh.

Stood and said "hey" a few times to no response then the two women of them kill the other dude and come after me.

 

Ran away for a bit, one veered off to loot a weapon in a house I guess so I knocked out the black girl chasing me and took her backpack, then the other showed up knocked her out too then punched her for a while to make sure she was dead, seemed like they both respawned.

Epic win and epic wut for me, mugging sure as hell went south for them.

[svisketyggeren 662]

And how will social realism be in a apocalypse?

 

Some ppl here seem to want a apocalyptic scenario without the desperate chaos that would accompany it.

Edited October 30, 2014 by svisketyggeren

[Whyherro123 2283]

And how will social realism be in a apocalypse?

 

Some ppl here seem to want a apocalyptic scenario without the desperate chaos that would accompany it.

http://www.cracked.com/article_21251_5-things-every-movie-gets-wrong-about-apocalypse.html

 

Incorrect. Whatever chaos you mention would be over relatively quickly.

[CJFlint 357]

I have seen all. I will also say I have come across friendly players, and even traded things. They are pretty rare though. Most are not freindly once they get armed with something lol 80 to 90 % are not friendly and that's not a stretch. 

 

The reason why is there is no real rewards for being nice, or bad toward other players. Your simply killing there avatar which will result in a re-spawn. You really don't lose anything. For many they just don't care. Nothing gets harmed other then ones pride. So of course people don't play to be social. LOL Its a prefect storm for KOS.

 

I am starting to realize many players who start playing the stand alone completely mis understand what DayZ is really like. They probably think about buying it and you tube it. Then morgan freeman, frankie and the like. It paints this picture of what dayz sa is like in there minds. But its a total falsehood, those are staged videos. Or there clips taken out of several hours of game play. But Its not what dayz is like at all. Then they come to dayz sa after pondering buying it and the 1st person they try to talk to shots them right in the face. Then they come to the forums and start these huge threads about how bad KOSing is LOL over and over. Because DayZ wasn't this Mel Gibson sort funny/tough guy world that frankie painted to be. It so true. DayZ SA has never been a friendly game and it never will be, get over it! Its really not a social game at all I hate to break it to people, unless your in team speak LOL We really need to move on.

 

If you want to meet friendly players who play dayz...Join a clan or Team Speak group.  

Edited October 30, 2014 by CJFlint

[svisketyggeren 662]

http://www.cracked.com/article_21251_5-things-every-movie-gets-wrong-about-apocalypse.html

 

Incorrect. Whatever chaos you mention would be over relatively quickly.

 

I think human social behaviour is more complex and mulitifaceted than that...sure the link u provide would describe some aspects of human behaviour in an apocalypse. Never doubted that. But its easy to show humans can act completly nonaltruistic in similar situations.

 

The question becomes..are humans good or bad? Are we good only if there is a reward for it? I have a fair bit of psychology from university and know not to take results from social sciences at face vaule. Humans good or bad is a philosofical question...some aspects of it can be tackled by science...but we have certainly not figured that one out yet.

 

And secondly...we dont know how far out we are in the zombie apocalypse in Dayz...since the military seems to have been wiped we are probaly in a state of full chaos.

 

So no Whyherro...not incorrect. But u do have a valid point.

Edited October 30, 2014 by svisketyggeren

[Mor (DayZ) 57]

People don't act how they would in real life when playing a video game?

Color me shocked.

Actually, this exactly how people act online in real life*. If someone interrupt you in the middle, you shoot him down; if someone is boring\annoying, you shoot him down; if you have a common language (goal) or the person is interesting you play along for the time being...

Some times it feels that people expect the game should provide them with gaming companions (even female companions), even though in real life they can't small talk or maintain a conversation for a minute.

[Whyherro123 2283]

I think human social behaviour is more complex and mulitifaceted than that...sure the link u provide would describe some aspects of human behaviour in an apocalypse. Never doubted that. But its easy to show humans can act completly nonaltruistic in similar situations.

 

The question becomes..are humans good or bad? Are we good only if there is a reward for it? I have a fair bit of psychology from university and know not to take results from social sciences at face vaule.

 

So no Whyherro...not incorrect

Did I say that the apocalypse would be made of rainbows and kittens? No. It just wouldn't be all "burning the churches and defiling the women" that people on this board make it out to be.

 

Most people wouldn't die from violence. They would instead die from starvation (or, more likely, malnutrition, and the diseases that arise from malnutrition), as well as the reemergence of communicable diseases.

 

People would group up, almost immediately. There would be few-to-no "lone wolves", of the sort we have in Day Z, as they would have no support to draw off of, and would die out first.

 

These groups would be extremely close-knit, and treat outsiders with suspicion. Look up "endemic warfare", as it is the closest source of "realistic PvP" that a real-life situation would be.

 

There wouldn't be any "wars of annihilation": the post-collapse societies wouldn't have the werewithal (resources, desire) or number of warriors to wage such battles. Cattle raids, stealing/burning crops, and slave raids would be far more common.

 

People also have a tendency to actually give a shit about each other when the need arises, apparently. Case in point: In New England, we had a bad hurricane hit a couple years back. A lot of places lost power (including my home town), and several people died. For the space of about a week, we were on our own; the State-level emergency response was still holed up in their bunker.

 

People opened their doors to complete strangers, pulling generators in order to power refrigerators and wells, houses with wood stoves cooked hot meals for the neighborhood, people with tools cleared the downed trees out of the roads, and used personal vehicles to bring injured neighbors to hospitals when the EMT's couldn't get through. We actually had several cases of groups breaking into houses in order to check on the elderly, who had lost power and fallen down in houses with no heat or light.

[UltimateGentleman 355]

I think human social behaviour is more complex and mulitifaceted than that...sure the link u provide would describe some aspects of human behaviour in an apocalypse. Never doubted that. But its easy to show humans can act completly nonaltruistic in similar situations.

 

The question becomes..are humans good or bad? Are we good only if there is a reward for it? I have a fair bit of psychology from university and know not to take results from social sciences at face vaule. Humans good or bad is a philosofical question...some aspects of it can be tackled by science...but we have certainly not figured that one out yet.

 

So no Whyherro...not incorrect.

Not really the amount of crazy stupid people vs normal smart people who want to survive in a realistic fashion would substantially be in favour of the latter.

 

People would get more geared to kill as time went on but they wouldn't just go solo right away, they might have to survive solo for however long but upon meeting people it just makes sense to stick with them and form a community.

Even though we're inherently violent we're also very social animals, we form groups and get territorial most violence would be directed towards other groups than just absolutely everyone.

 

This aspect of the Walking Dead is about the only thing they get right really, people need security and that comes with numbers.

 

I mean is that not proved by the world today? Why do we have cities, markets and governments at all if most of us just want to lone wolf it in the wild? The world today wouldn't exist if that were the case.

[Whyherro123 2283]

I think it is a good measure of personal character to see just how an individual thinks about what would happen if there were no laws to stop them, as well as how they view the world.

 

Somebody thinks the world is ready to explode into violence and depravity the second people get the chance? Maybe  they might just join in. Pessimist

 

Somebody thinks that people would help each other when they really needed it? Probably  would stay true to their word. Optimist.

[Kirby12352 67]

I'm fairly new to DayZ, and have only met 5 players so far. The first one was the second time I had ever died. I spawned in right next to a zombie, which started attacking me since I didn't see it right away because it was behind me. I sprint for maybe 10 seconds, turn around and think "Maybe I can kill it with my fists". So I start punching it, and right when I was about to give up and run, some girl walks up and starts punching the zombie. I seized the opportunity and ran for the woods. The other two friendlies I met were basically just guys who were like "Hey bro I'm friendly" and then just kept on looting the town I was in.

 

For the guys that tried to kill me, I was looting a small house when out of nowhere some guy with a baseball bat flies in and starts attacking me. He caught me completely off guard, so I ran out of the house, took out my fire extinguisher, and started smashing him with it. But then his friend runs up with another bat, but right when I was preparing to run, a group of 5 or 6 zombies runs up and starts attacking the two guys. The zombies managed to kill the first guy's friend. I put my weapon on my back and started running again. The whole time I hear the one guy on his mic yelling "Cowaaard" and "You're gonna bleed out soon, bro". I turned around, pulled out my fire extinguisher, and killed the first guy. I ran into a house, and right when I was making rags, I bled out. Even though I died, I was happy I at least managed to take them out, especially since I had no previous PvP experience with this game.

[svisketyggeren 662]

 

I mean is that not proved by the world today? Why do we have cities, markets and governments at all if most of us just want to lone wolf it in the wild? The world today wouldn't exist if that were the case.

 

In that argument u have to factor in that we didnt evolve our society in apocalyptic conditions...we evolved our society in mostly peaceful conditions.

 

If u ask me its not a question of...are we inherently good of bad...it depends on the conditions we live in.

[Whyherro123 2283]

Not really the amount of crazy stupid people vs normal smart people who want to survive in a realistic fashion would substantially be in favour of the latter.

 

People would get more geared to kill as time went on but they wouldn't just go solo right away, they might have to survive solo for however long but upon meeting people it just makes sense to stick with them and form a community.

Even though we're inherently violent we're also very social animals, we form groups and get territorial most violence would be directed towards other groups than just absolutely everyone.

 

This aspect of the Walking Dead is about the only thing they get right really, people need security and that comes with numbers.

 

I mean is that not proved by the world today? Why do we have cities, markets and governments at all if most of us just want to lone wolf it in the wild? The world today wouldn't exist if that were the case.

This, pretty much. 

 

Bandit: Give me all your stuff!

Guy: Yeah, yeah, take it! Just don't kill me!

Bandit: Yeah right! -shoots- LOL

--time passes--

Group: Hey, you see a guy pass through here recently?

Bandit: Yeah, what about him?

Group: Well, he was one of our guys. Since you are the only people here, we are gonna have a problem.

 

-hangs bandit clan from the streetposts, bandit problem dealt with-

[slippery gypsy 107]

you silly fools will all be sold into slavery come the apocalypse first time you try to talk to a group of armed strangers 

[svisketyggeren 662]

I think it is a good measure of personal character to see just how an individual thinks about what would happen if there were no laws to stop them, as well as how they view the world.

 

Somebody thinks the world is ready to explode into violence and depravity the second people get the chance? Maybe  they might just join in. Pessimist

 

Somebody thinks that people would help each other when they really needed it? Probably  would stay true to their word. Optimist.

 

havent we all seen several instances of rampant looting during a crisis?

 

Like this example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_blackout_of_1977

 

The New York City blackout of 1977 was an electricity blackout that affected most of New York City on July 13–14, 1977. The only neighborhoods in the city that were not affected were in southern Queens and neighborhoods of the Rockaways, which are part of the Long Island Lighting Company system.

Unlike other blackouts that affected the region, namely the Northeast blackouts of 1965 and 2003, the 1977 blackout was localized to New York City and the immediate surroundings. Also in contrast to the 1965 and 2003 blackouts, the 1977 blackout resulted in city-wide looting and other disorders, including arson.^[1]

 

 

My guess is that in the Dayz scenario ppl will cluster around groups and violence will have a high probability of breaking out between groups depending on how desperate the situation is.

 

 

 

Edited October 30, 2014 by svisketyggeren

[Whyherro123 2283]

In that argument u have to factor in that we didnt evolve our society in apocalyptic conditions...we evolved our society in mostly peaceful conditions.

 

If u ask me its not a question of...are we inherently good of bad...it depends on the conditions we live in.

Not.....really.

 

The modern world is easily the "most peaceful" the world has ever been, with the amount of "war-related deaths" at the lowest point of recorded history. (Look it up)

 

See that thing I mentioned earlier, "endemic warfare"? Nigh-constant low-level skirmishes, non-stop since 40,000 years ago. Only recently (in the last 300 years), has warfare been organized and a clash of nation-states (which actually limits casualties, especially "civilian" ones) instead of civilian-soldiers murdering members of an opposing tribe/region/group.

 

Native American tribes? constant endemic warfare. Europeans only really added firearms to the mix.

Medieval Europe? constant endemic warfare. 

Classical Mediterranean? constant endemic and state warfare.

Neolithic farming villages? constant endemic warfare.

[UltimateGentleman 355]

In that argument u have to factor in that we didnt evolve our society in apocalyptic conditions...we evolved our society in mostly peaceful conditions.

 

If u ask me its not a question of...are we inherently good of bad...it depends on the conditions we live in.

No internet, no means of communication, no farmable food sources/tinned goods or knowledge about them initially, primitive weaponry, no guns, more powerful predators, no knowledge of disease and what to avoid.

 

Are you going to tell me people of the past had an easier time than people in an apocalypse with the collective knowledge we've gained for thousands of years?

 

 

Also people in DayZ don't want a realistic survival game they want a survival game where they or their group can just kill everyone and everything and become the alpha dogs of the landscape, the DayZ community doesn't reflect the social reality it's world would have what so ever. This isn't how people would survive because people play DayZ that way they're largely children(or seem to act like it) playing a game.

[svisketyggeren 662]

Not.....really.

 

The modern world is easily the "most peaceful" the world has ever been, with the amount of "war-related deaths" at the lowest point of recorded history. (Look it up)

 

 

U misunderstood what I said

[Whyherro123 2283]

havent we all seen several instances of rampant looting during a crisis?

 

Like this example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_blackout_of_1977

 

The New York City blackout of 1977 was an electricity blackout that affected most of New York City on July 13–14, 1977. The only neighborhoods in the city that were not affected were in southern Queens and neighborhoods of the Rockaways, which are part of the Long Island Lighting Company system.

Unlike other blackouts that affected the region, namely the Northeast blackouts of 1965 and 2003, the 1977 blackout was localized to New York City and the immediate surroundings. Also in contrast to the 1965 and 2003 blackouts, the 1977 blackout resulted in city-wide looting and other disorders, including arson.^[1]

 

That is the city in general, as well as being one of the largest cities on Earth. Urban centers in general are going to behave differently than the population at-large.

 

And, even still, we have groups forming up, even during that Blackout. Neighborhoods and related gangs formed up to fight off invaders and looters. Not all that much different from what I mentioned above, is it?