Ten Reasons why Kill on Sight is 'Realistic'

[thywolf@live.ca 3]

If you really believe that if this was a 'real' simulation and there was 'consequences' to your actions if you murder someone and people would for some reason 'not' kill each other in a zombie apocalypse. You're deluded. Shooting on sight might just be your key to survival - any interaction you take with another person would be entirely at your own risk. Who's to say they won't just shoot you first?

So saying 'IN A REAL SITUATION!!' is moot really ... in a 'real' situation it would be doggy dog and people would kill each other just as viciously as they do in the game.

What else are you going to do with an AS50' date=' a backpack full of ammo and a range finder.

[/quote']

I give you 5 minutes before you a skull on someone's dashboard.

What would I do with an AS50 and a backpack of ammo?

Fucking eat like a king

[Rigel (DayZ) 0]

Put yourself in this scenario: zombie apocalypse. Decimates 90% of the population. You are solo or even with a group of others. You hear on the radio that there is a relatively large group of survivors in a city 100 miles from you, let's say 300 people. Humans would gravitate to that developing group. I can't come up with a reason why people wouldn't. I wouldn't be too surprised if some small bandit groups would choose not to, but I think the majority of people would try to group up for safety's sake. I mean, why do we group up today? Why do we have nations, rather than tribes? It's because massive civilized societies tend to be safer and more beneficial to everyone involved.

Now those are reasons for grouping up. As for shooting someone, I would be more prone to just let him go by without interruption. Killing is quite drastic. I'm not gonna say that I would never kill anyone, but I would leave it as the very last resort.

[DemonGroover 8836]

Put yourself in this scenario: zombie apocalypse. Decimates 90% of the population. You are solo or even with a group of others. You hear on the radio that there is a relatively large group of survivors in a city 100 miles from you' date=' let's say 300 people. Humans would gravitate to that developing group. I can't come up with a reason why people wouldn't. I wouldn't be too surprised if some small bandit groups would choose not to, but I think the majority of people would try to group up for safety's sake. I mean, why do we group up today? Why do we have nations, rather than tribes? It's because massive civilized societies tend to be safer and more beneficial to everyone involved.

[/quote']

+1 what he said.

[*Regulator* Curt 93]

1. That's not a reason to kill on sight, you don't have to feed two mouths if you go your separate way. Additionally, by shooting, you risk drawing Bandits and Zombies to your position -- for little to no gain. Life works in pros and cons, do the pros outweight the cons? You might find a little bit of food by mudering an innocent human being (a con that comes with the pro) and you might draw bandits/more survivors that could end up getting you killed. This isn't at all factoring in multiple survivors, some that may have guns etc.

You think of things in a far too simplistic way -- it's unrealistic at best.

2. I think you're a bit off track here. We're talking about reasons to kill on sight. Kill on sight or team up aren't the only two options, you can always go it solo. Thus, this point is completely invalid.

3/4/5/6/7. These are all essentially the same thing, that you threw in there for filler. It seems you're trying to force a dichotomy here, you either must help them, or you must kill them -- there are no other options! This is false at best. While I can very easily argue that grouping up would, in fact, be more likely to occur and more beneficial, that is not the point of this argument. We're trying to determine if the 'shoot on sight' mentality is realistic/beneficial -- I'm saying it's not.

The reason these reasons fail, is simple. You don't have to trust this person, you don't have to give go near him and risk infection etc. You point your gun, you threaten to kill him, and as a last resort you injure him and make your escape. There is no benefit to killing on sight -- as long as he isn't heavily armed.

8. If this guy (is he armed?) is part of a bandit pack, you shooting would alarm the bandit pack. Your only option is to escape, or are you saying it's realistic for you to solo a bandit pack? In fact, I'd suggest, shooting even in this situation should be a last resort. How do you know that he's part of one? You're going to shoot everyone because they may be part of one?

9. I won't flip out at you for this one, it's sad but it may be true. Woman were a commodity in the past, and if men are running around with guns and without laws, they may become so again. I really don't want to insult anyone with this -- we're not saying they're not equal or anything like that. Just that men really like women... it's a compliment... really!

Oh, and my response to this is: therefore she must be shot on sight? Can't have her as a companion so... must kill her?

10. Okay, that's fair, but that doesn't deny anyone any form of area. Okay, so you killed this one for coming near your territory... what about the next one? What about the one that sneaks in while you're sleeping? What about the bandit pack that will eventually find you? You've not stopped any of them, you've killed one person that you didn't need to.

This leads to my next point. Your only chance for serious long term survival is to start some form of group, and become organized. Eventually due to anything: bandits, looters, accidents, disease, hunger, thirst, boredom... you will almost certainly die. This world isn't easy to survive in, throw in zombies and bandits, LOL. Your only hope, is to get with others, rely on each other, protect each other. You cannot survive this world on your own, that is a thing that has proven time and again throughout history.

Sorry buddy, there's simply no good reason to shoot random survivors on sight. Too many cons, not enough pros.

[Maderas 12]

Those of you saying it's human nature to band together and help one another are trying to have your cake and eat it too. It's human nature to band together, it's certainly not human nature to treat everyone you meet with the same benevolence you'd show to your own little tribe. Entire swathes of the planet have been plagued by civil war and genocide for literally decades, closer to centuries in some areas. Obviously there are significant portions of the human population who are less hung up on this whole murder thing than the posters on this forum. Unsurprising, since you lead a pampered life to have the spare time to play a video game in the first place.

Would everybody turn into mass murdering maniacs if civilization collapsed? Most likely not, no. But saying they would is just as unrealistic as acting like everybody you came across would fall all over themselves to accommodate and help you just because you're both members of the same species.

[rick57@gmx.de 38]

tl:dr

I betcha' OP would wet his Pant during a real Apocalypse :heart:

[perestain 33]

lol

So according to this the best way to stay out of trouble in a zombie apocalypse is clearly running around shooting at people.

One question, are social situations making you nervous?

[Hunter5 2]

Put yourself in this scenario: zombie apocalypse. Decimates 90% of the population. You are solo or even with a group of others. You hear on the radio that there is a relatively large group of survivors in a city 100 miles from you' date=' let's say 300 people. Humans would gravitate to that developing group. I can't come up with a reason why people wouldn't. I wouldn't be too surprised if some small bandit groups would choose not to, but I think the majority of people would try to group up for safety's sake. I mean, why do we group up today? Why do we have nations, rather than tribes? It's because massive civilized societies tend to be safer and more beneficial to everyone involved.

[/quote']

+1 what he said.

This is true, and possible.

But this game is missing something.

Step one:

Scavenge.

Step Two:

Slay.

Step Three:

Survive.

Step Four:

Rebuild.

Without the ability to rebuild, we will never stop killing each other.

[DemonGroover 8836]

lol

So according to this the best way to stay out of trouble in a zombie apocalypse is clearly running around shooting at people.

One question' date=' are social situations making you nervous?

[/quote']

Ha ha, you mean IRL do you look at someone and think - "Would that guy shoot me?", or "I wonder if he has any beans on him"

[sandorski 17]

Thread is not about Realism, it's about an attempt to justify one's choice of Gameplay.

[Techercizer 82]

Thread is not about Realism' date=' it's about an attempt to justify one's choice of Gameplay.

[/quote']

I hope not. It's really shitty at accomplishing that.

[Tempered Saint 1]

If you really believe that if this was a 'real' simulation and there was 'consequences' to your actions if you murder someone and people would for some reason 'not' kill each other in a zombie apocalypse. You're deluded. Shooting on sight might just be your key to survival - any interaction you take with another person would be entirely at your own risk. Who's to say they won't just shoot you first?

TEN Reasons why I would kill anyone I met in real life during a zombie apoc:

(assuming they ignored warnings to keep away .. or I just needed something)

1. Supplies. They are short' date=' and two mouths to feed is harder than one. And face it, you might just be carrying something I can use.

2. Liability. If at any point they are bitten / converted / hungry / infected / hurt I would have to use rationed supplies of medical gear to support and/or aid them. Medical gear that I could use on myself.

3. Trust. Who is this stranger? Are they going to kill me for my limited supplies? How can I trust him/her. There is a high possibility at the point in which I sleep I may never wake up again.

4. Experience. Everyone reacts to a disaster differently. There are some that huddle together and pray, others that loot the rubble of a city shattering earthquake and others again that simply learn rapidly to adapt to their surroundings. There is no telling what kind of murderous experiences this person has had to do to survive. Including killing friends, family members and relatives.

5. Fear. Quite simply at the point where a world has been turned upside down I'd be petrified of just about everything. A realistic approach to any situation. Panic sets in and fight or flight takes over - trust goes out the window.

6. Disease. I don't know who you are, where you've been or what you are carrying. My survival may rely on what little medical supplies I could scavenge together and in a world where a cold or diarrhea could be fatal - I want you as far away from me as possible.

7. Mental Distress. Many disorders occur during high stress situations, including mental distress, dementia, over self preservation, delusion etc. There is no telling what kind of mental state a person is in after that kind of traumatic experience. There is also no telling what mental state I would be in - you have to factor in the fact that you might just go bat shit crazy. You never know, maybe its you who are the crazed bandit that finds power in numbers and goes around killing and taking what you need. Whats stopping you?

8. Bandit Packs. I hate to say this but yes, it would happen. People would band together and forge a new life for themselves, strongest first. Weakest second. The meek are not the mighty.

9. Oppression. Women would become a commodity. People have needs and without law and order, people take what they want. And often kill for it. A persons rights no longer exist when there is no law or repercussions. I for one would immediately turn away anyone of female gender as a companion due to their pull and / or value in such a situation. (I know this is sexist, but lets be 'realistic' here for a minute.)

10. Area Denial. If you're making a living in a 256 x 256 square mile radius and there are fifty other people or more trying to stay alive in the same area - you're going to have some conflict. Zombies or no someones going to want to take someone out. Whats mine is mine, whats yours can also be mine.

So saying 'IN A REAL SITUATION!!' is moot really ... in a 'real' situation it would be doggy dog and people would kill each other just as viciously as they do in the game.

As for being shot in game, if you take the chance to help someone out / take them out completely its an unrealistic in game decision. A lot of people play this game for the experience - and once that experience is over they turn to banditry. What else are you going to do with an AS50, a backpack full of ammo and a range finder. You could die and loot it all again or you can shoot people.

[/quote']

Load of crap. I'm sure you would be one of the first to be eaten while you slept. So no need to worry about you shoot first loner types. Strength in numbers has always been the way of human survival.

[iomegadrive1 9]

Sorry buy only #4 applies to the game. Nobody else feels any of those for the most part.

[Valec 55]

Most of what people against shooting on sight have to say about people shooting on sight is exactly why they would be those who are shot on sight.

You guys are all correct. People will band together. Some will band together and try to rebuild some semblance of a normal life. You guys are right about that.

However you ignore the fact that there would, in fact, be plenty of roving 'bandit' type groups as well.

Stop comparing a total apocalypse to natural disasters. They aren't comparable. Society will never return to normal and this is going to be a factor on how people behave. Just take a look at any place in the world RIGHT NOW where law and government has completely broken down. Look at Africa. Look at Somalia. Hell, look at Mexico, where they still have a government(that's completely overwhelmed by the cartels).

Explain to me why you think a total apocalypse would somehow bring out the greater good in people. How would living in a world with absolutely no hope create this situation where everyone thinks 'hey, let's rebuild. sure, this zombie apocalypse is still happening and will never end, but let's all be nice guys together!'

It's ridiculous. The strong WILL prey on the weak in any situation resembling an apocalypse.

[Al Bundy (DayZ) 0]

Both "sides" of this thread is hilarious to me. On one side you've got the socipaths just waiting burst nd on the other you've got the people who've never struggled a single day in their life talking about how "most" people on the planet would band together and then they'd protect each other with rainbows and lollipops.

I wish my real life so black and white.

[Valec 55]

Both "sides" of this thread is hilarious to me. On one side you've got the socipaths just waiting burst nd on the other you've got the people who've never struggled a single day in their life talking about how "most" people on the planet would band together and then they'd protect each other with rainbows and lollipops.

I wish my real life so black and white.

I love how anyone that acknowledges the grim reality of human(see: animal) nature is a psychopath. Once again, you only have to look at any time or place in human history(or present) where law and government are broken down to see exactly what would happen.

Nobody wants to do that though.

[_IX_ 0]

"doggy dog" ? O_o

Is that your interpretation of the expression "dog eat dog" ?

[dallas 5195]

After the remaining 2% of the population realize they have survived the infection and are immune, they promptly seek out other non-infected humans and kill them on sight, seems like a natural reaction for a generation raised on violent video games and gangster rap.

[Bucket (DayZ) 0]

Load of crap. I'm sure you would be one of the first to be eaten while you slept. So no need to worry about you shoot first loner types. Strength in numbers has always been the way of human survival.

So true. In reality, assholes like this would be fried from sleep deprivation after being too scared to fall asleep since, you know, they wasted all their ammo on the people who might have been willing to keep watch.

[dds__@hotmail.com 5]

What we have here are two groups of people in the thread:

1) Good, honest, normal people and what "they" think is normal

and

2) Social psychopaths and what "they" think is normal

[Techercizer 82]

What we have here are two groups of people in the thread:

1) Realistic people and what "they" think is normal

and

2) Wannabe social psychopaths and what "they" think is normal

ftfy

[CrossShade 4]

What we have here are two groups of people in the thread:

1) Good' date=' honest, normal people and what "they" think is normal

and

2) Social psychopaths and what "they" think is normal

[/quote']

Psychology and major catastrophes prove the OP's point.

Rape, Killing on sight and hunting humans would occur.

So would grouping.

Unfortunately one style beats the other, a minor study in Evolution shows after x period of exponential time the stronger (violent) factor would be the dominant one.

Argue back with QQ you know nothing without providing any Evidence.

My Evidence personally is any major catastrophe within the last X years, pretty much all of them (where civil law and government has broken down keeping in mind) have huge forms of violence that outweigh banding together.

[Deviant (DayZ) 43]

Delicious tears.

People will choose to make their own choices. If other people don't want to play the game your way, that's life. There are many survival CO-OP missions on armaholic you can play if you can't learn how to play the game.

[Techercizer 82]

Have a source for that?

My evidence is that we're all sitting where we are right now, in functioning societies full of people who cooperate, born because people at some point gathered together, created rule and order, learned to care for one another, and only then decided to go kill everyone who wasn't like them.

[seraosha 3]

As a vet, and hurricane survivor that was in Louisiana when Katrina hit, I can honestly say that very few of you dumbasses would survive long enough to procure a firearm, muchless use it correctly.

Not hating, just pointing out that if you don't already have a firearm in your possesion, that you are trained to use , and already have supplies, travel plans, ammo and a group of folks that you have already made a plan to meet up with WTSHTF, or it's TEOTWAWKI, you are just a can of beans.

But it's just a game...and only in alpha at that.

No basis in reality, right.

;)