DayZ and Basic Human Nature

[WildGunsTomcat 78]

Ok both of you' date=' we've made our point. Now lets stay on topic.

[/quote']

You got it.

Thanks for the help.

[CopperBarron 4]

Thanks for the great responses to my OP, the debates I have been reading are great and very interesting. It's clear to see a wide variety of responses to in game situations.

I would like to note that people will play this game in different ways (obviously), some will play it more seriously than others. That was part of the basis of my original post, how different people respond to different situations in this simulator and why they do so.

I look forward to reading more of your comments and debates!

Bill

[WildGunsTomcat 78]

Thanks for the great responses to my OP' date=' the debates I have been reading are great and very interesting. It's clear to see a wide variety of responses to in game situation.

I would like to note that people will play this game in different ways, some will play it more seriously than others. That was part of the basis of my original post, how different people respond to different situations in this simulator and why they do so.

I look forward to reading more of your comments and debates!

Bill

[/quote']

Ah okay, then that makes more sense.

The small amount of posts I read made it seem like people were trying to compare the game to reality...that's why I posted what I did.

It is interesting that a game could cause a moral response in some people.

For me, it doesn't. I guess because I know it's not real, so I know there's no real death or consequences to my actions...so I kill indiscriminately.

But in reality, I know for a personal fact that killing people is a completely different animal.

You don't watch the light leave their eyes in a video game...you don't hear the death rattle. You don't see them drown in their own blood. You see none of that.

You see a group of pixels fall to the ground and stop moving. And you know that the player is on the other end of the keyboard safe and sound.

Albeit more frustrated than before.

That was the point I was making.

[noego 0]

tl;dr this whole thread.

You guys need to get jobs for real. Go outside and be in the sun a while.

This is a game' date=' it isn't a morality experiment.

Quite frankly, some of you have never killed another person in real life.

If you're a combat vet, you know what the fuck I'm talking about here.

So please don't compare killing someone in a video game to killing someone in reality.

There is zero comparison. One is irreversible. One is a fucking inconvenience.

[/quote']

Would you consider it to be a valid experiment on willingness to cause inconvenience to a stranger for self-enrichment?

I would consider it to be a valid experiment on the ability of video games to warp the minds of people too weak to know the difference between reality and fantasy.

Killing pixels is not the same as killing a person, so I don't feel any morality one way or the other when I shoot someone in a video game. I have killed people in real life, so I know how bad it feels.

It irks me when people try to say that a video game is an excellent measure of morality. It isn't. At all. It's a game. It is meant to be enjoyed...nothing more. I enjoy getting a one-up on people in this game and stealing their shit.

I don't enjoy it in real life.

Do you suggest that morality comes into play only in the matters of life and death?

[WildGunsTomcat 78]

tl;dr this whole thread.

You guys need to get jobs for real. Go outside and be in the sun a while.

This is a game' date=' it isn't a morality experiment.

Quite frankly, some of you have never killed another person in real life.

If you're a combat vet, you know what the fuck I'm talking about here.

So please don't compare killing someone in a video game to killing someone in reality.

There is zero comparison. One is irreversible. One is a fucking inconvenience.

[/quote']

Would you consider it to be a valid experiment on willingness to cause inconvenience to a stranger for self-enrichment?

I would consider it to be a valid experiment on the ability of video games to warp the minds of people too weak to know the difference between reality and fantasy.

Killing pixels is not the same as killing a person, so I don't feel any morality one way or the other when I shoot someone in a video game. I have killed people in real life, so I know how bad it feels.

It irks me when people try to say that a video game is an excellent measure of morality. It isn't. At all. It's a game. It is meant to be enjoyed...nothing more. I enjoy getting a one-up on people in this game and stealing their shit.

I don't enjoy it in real life.

Do you suggest that morality comes into play only in the matters of life and death?

Do you suggest that morality even comes into play in a video game?

[Wüstenfuchs (DayZ) 105]

I tend to avoid killing any other players, and always try to communicate with them (often even with bandits). If things appear to go hostile, I rather move away and disengage than confront and end up killing him or dying.

One reason I do this is because I like the aspect of communicating, co-operating and helping the new survivors. I like realism and I think that is the way I would behave in real life if I would ever end up in such a situation.

I think there is way too much random killings, and way too few people who are helpful and want to co-operate. Probably it is more attractive to just kill others, or maybe people are just too scared and don't read the text chat. Once the voice chat in the direct communication channel is fixed, this will change, as you can shout your intentions to the other.

I'd like to see the ratio of good co-operative people vs bandits to be about 10/1, but now it seems that many new players just go and shoot anything that moves, without even attempting to communicate, even if you tell them "Friendly!" or "Don't shoot, I will not shoot you!".

[CopperBarron 4]

Ah okay' date=' then that makes more sense.

The small amount of posts I read made it seem like people were trying to compare the game to reality...that's why I posted what I did.

It is interesting that a game could cause a moral response in some people.

For me, it doesn't. I guess because I know it's not real, so I know there's no real death or consequences to my actions...so I kill indiscriminately.

But in reality, I know for a personal fact that killing people is a completely different animal.

You don't watch the light leave their eyes in a video game...you don't hear the death rattle. You don't see them drown in their own blood. You see none of that.

You see a group of pixels fall to the ground and stop moving. And you know that the player is on the other end of the keyboard safe and sound.

Albeit more frustrated than before.

That was the point I was making.

[/quote']

I understand what your argument is, and its a fair one. Of course this is only a game, yet many people talk about their hesitation to kill someone on it. Even the main developer mentioned in an interview with PC Gamer that after he killed a survivor by mistake, it was something that he thought about for a while afterwards "How long had that guy been play?".

It's those kind of responses that are interesting, because Day Z is a game, and few games have come close to creating those kind of emotions in a player.

[pendergraft 1]

I was saying that there is a difference between killing in a video game' date=' and killing in real life.

What I find incredible is people thinking that this game is somehow an interesting morality experiment. It's not.

Go kill someone in real life....and then come kill someone on a screen.

There's a difference.

Ask someone that has actually seen combat, not sat on his fat ass and played video games his whole life...then comes on here like an arm-chair intellectual...calling someone that makes a valid post "as intelligent as a shower curtain ring".

[/quote']

And I said that you didn't have the right of it with your preposterous staw man. I don't think anyone would compare shooting a player in a video game to actually killing a human being. That's not what's happening here. If you want to discuss the desensitization of our armed forces, by all means, start a new thread and we'll hop to it; it could be a fascinating subject. This thread is about human nature as it concerns Day Z. The actions you take in Day Z elicit a human response in ways that no game has really tapped into since Ultima Online -- and this is arguably more raw.

[WildGunsTomcat 78]

I was saying that there is a difference between killing in a video game' date=' and killing in real life.

What I find incredible is people thinking that this game is somehow an interesting morality experiment. It's not.

Go kill someone in real life....and then come kill someone on a screen.

There's a difference.

Ask someone that has actually seen combat, not sat on his fat ass and played video games his whole life...then comes on here like an arm-chair intellectual...calling someone that makes a valid post "as intelligent as a shower curtain ring".

[/quote']

And I said that you didn't have the right of it with your preposterous staw man. I don't think anyone would compare shooting a player in a video game to actually killing a human being. That's not what's happening here. If you want to discuss the desensitization of our armed forces, by all means, start a new thread and we'll hop to it; it could be a fascinating subject. This thread is about human nature as it concerns Day Z. The actions you take in Day Z elicit a human response in ways that no game has really tapped into since Ultima Online -- and this is arguably more raw.

Just because you find it preposterous doesn't mean it's invalid.

The OP even said it was a fair argument. So give it a rest.

[noego 0]

tl;dr this whole thread.

You guys need to get jobs for real. Go outside and be in the sun a while.

This is a game' date=' it isn't a morality experiment.

Quite frankly, some of you have never killed another person in real life.

If you're a combat vet, you know what the fuck I'm talking about here.

So please don't compare killing someone in a video game to killing someone in reality.

There is zero comparison. One is irreversible. One is a fucking inconvenience.

[/quote']

Would you consider it to be a valid experiment on willingness to cause inconvenience to a stranger for self-enrichment?

I would consider it to be a valid experiment on the ability of video games to warp the minds of people too weak to know the difference between reality and fantasy.

Killing pixels is not the same as killing a person, so I don't feel any morality one way or the other when I shoot someone in a video game. I have killed people in real life, so I know how bad it feels.

It irks me when people try to say that a video game is an excellent measure of morality. It isn't. At all. It's a game. It is meant to be enjoyed...nothing more. I enjoy getting a one-up on people in this game and stealing their shit.

I don't enjoy it in real life.

Do you suggest that morality comes into play only in the matters of life and death?

Do you suggest that morality even comes into play in a video game?

I think that morality comes into play in nearly all human interactions. As far as games go, I think there's a scale. On one end is team-killing other player in a casual shooter with 5 minute respawn periods. On the other end is maliciously destroying someones intricate creation on a multiplayer minecraft server. Somewhere in the middle is killing a player in Day-Z mod and effectively nullifying last 5 hours of his play.

[Syrius 0]

tl;dr this whole thread.

You guys need to get jobs for real. Go outside and be in the sun a while.

This is a game' date=' it isn't a morality experiment.

Quite frankly, some of you have never killed another person in real life.

If you're a combat vet, you know what the fuck I'm talking about here.

So please don't compare killing someone in a video game to killing someone in reality.

There is zero comparison. One is irreversible. One is a fucking inconvenience.

[/quote']

Would you consider it to be a valid experiment on willingness to cause inconvenience to a stranger for self-enrichment?

I would consider it to be a valid experiment on the ability of video games to warp the minds of people too weak to know the difference between reality and fantasy.

Killing pixels is not the same as killing a person, so I don't feel any morality one way or the other when I shoot someone in a video game. I have killed people in real life, so I know how bad it feels.

It irks me when people try to say that a video game is an excellent measure of morality. It isn't. At all. It's a game. It is meant to be enjoyed...nothing more. I enjoy getting a one-up on people in this game and stealing their shit.

I don't enjoy it in real life.

Do you suggest that morality comes into play only in the matters of life and death?

Do you suggest that morality even comes into play in a video game?

No disrespect to you , but I think you are very biased towards morality experiments. Probably due to your own personal experiences. While killing people in real life is not comparable directly to killing people in a game , some aspects of it bleed over. Our brains are weird like that :D

It would be inhumane to kill people for the sake of experiments so duplicating sensations using a video game is an apt way of going about this kind of an experiment.

[statistx 5]

Do you suggest that morality even comes into play in a video game?

Yes. It is not about shooting pixels, it's not the morality issue about killing someone, it's the morality issue of "Do i want to waste that other guys last hours of playtime and probably take away that persons fun, if he is one of those "Taking the game too serious" type of guys.

I don't care if i die, i almost never find any good gear anyway, but that's just me.

[WildGunsTomcat 78]

Would you consider it to be a valid experiment on willingness to cause inconvenience to a stranger for self-enrichment?

I would consider it to be a valid experiment on the ability of video games to warp the minds of people too weak to know the difference between reality and fantasy.

Killing pixels is not the same as killing a person' date=' so I don't feel any morality one way or the other when I shoot someone in a video game. I have killed people in real life, so I know how bad it feels.

It irks me when people try to say that a video game is an excellent measure of morality. It isn't. At all. It's a game. It is meant to be enjoyed...nothing more. I enjoy getting a one-up on people in this game and stealing their shit.

I don't enjoy it in real life.

[/quote']

Do you suggest that morality comes into play only in the matters of life and death?

Do you suggest that morality even comes into play in a video game?

I think that morality comes into play in nearly all human interactions. As far as games go, I think there's a scale. On one end is team-killing other player in a casual shooter with 5 minute respawn periods. On the other end is maliciously destroying someones intricate creation on a multiplayer minecraft server. Somewhere in the middle is killing a player in Day-Z mod and effectively nullifying last 5 hours of his play.

Fair enough. In that light I can see how morality would come into play. But for me personally, I guess I would say that I really don't care how long a guy plays the game...because that is the consequence of playing the game...you die sometimes. I would rather kill another player and live than be killed by that player and have my 5 hour experience wiped out.

---

Would you consider it to be a valid experiment on willingness to cause inconvenience to a stranger for self-enrichment?

I would consider it to be a valid experiment on the ability of video games to warp the minds of people too weak to know the difference between reality and fantasy.

Killing pixels is not the same as killing a person' date=' so I don't feel any morality one way or the other when I shoot someone in a video game. I have killed people in real life, so I know how bad it feels.

It irks me when people try to say that a video game is an excellent measure of morality. It isn't. At all. It's a game. It is meant to be enjoyed...nothing more. I enjoy getting a one-up on people in this game and stealing their shit.

I don't enjoy it in real life.

[/quote']

Do you suggest that morality comes into play only in the matters of life and death?

Do you suggest that morality even comes into play in a video game?

No disrespect to you , but I think you are very biased towards morality experiments. Probably due to your own personal experiences. While killing people in real life is not comparable directly to killing people in a game , some aspects of it bleed over. Our brains are weird like that :D

It would be inhumane to kill people for the sake of experiments so duplicating sensations using a video game is an apt way of going about this kind of an experiment.

Also fair enough. I don't see it that way but I can see how you would see it that way. ;0)

[CopperBarron 4]

As I Was Told Today Entering An Exam

"There Are No Right Answers, Only Good Arguments"

[Syrius 0]

As I Was Told Today Entering An Exam

"There Are No Right Answers' date=' Only Good Arguments"

[/quote']

The irony of writing this as I'm procrastinating instead of studying for my own exam in 8 hours :P

[CopperBarron 4]

As I Was Told Today Entering An Exam

"There Are No Right Answers' date=' Only Good Arguments"

[/quote']

The irony of writing this as I'm procrastinating instead of studying for my own exam in 8 hours :P

Ha Same! My last one!

[jordnz 102]

"There Are No Right Answers' date=' Only Good Arguments"[/quote']

This thread now adheres to this rule :p

[Goldstein (DayZ) 46]

I'm about to crack open a big can of worms-

I see two types of people, those who see it as a 'game' and those who see it as a simulation of a survival scenario.

I'm in the latter. L4D is a game, this is a simulation based on software that is used to train people to be effective killers.

I don't play simulators for fun, I play them to experience something as quasi-realistically as possible that I wouldn't have the chance to IRL. And I suspect a lot of people use this to experience being a psychopathic trigger-fiend.

So here's a moral dilemma: How is this different from firing up Flight Sim 98 and heading for the twin towers. That's a game right? Yet if someone confessed to doing that, they'd probably be banned and on the CIA watch list. But it's just a game.

There's a double standard, and from my experience those who use the 'It's just a Game' argument are the first to cry me a river when things go pear-shaped ingame for them.

[JinxX 11]

You sound like FOX News reporting on Hurricane Katrina.

The stories they posted about its chaotic aftermath were mostly fictional: there were no mass lootings' date=' unbridled rapes, or murders on a whim: There simply are no accounts of such chaotic post-disasters scenarios, here is a good read on this: http://www.amazon.com/Paradise-Built-Hell-Extraordinary-Communities/dp/0670021075).

[/quote']

It seems like you wan't a philosophical dispute instead of a nonsensical one.

I'm not FAUX News, in my theoretical doomsday scenario zombies were the enemies. In Americas day and age people DO see Family and close friends as an extension of themselves.

Despite what Old Age cultures beliefs held true at the time if a zombie apocalypse where to occur today and cause the world to paralyze, here in the States after enough time people will definitely fight each other to the death to protect whats theirs and who is theirs.

You keep thinking of the Human species from this text book eyeglass, where the average man knows how to raise animals and survive off the land. In reality the Average American man doesn't know any of this. Even worse there are human eating monsters out there that rise out of the corpses of the dead. I'm NOT talking about a catastrophe that effects one state, or one nation, like hurricane Katrina did. I'm talking about a catastrophe that effects the world, that stops global development.

What do you do when the lights go out? I don't know about anyone else here but I can imagine they all sit around and wait, what do you do when a hurricane hits? Whatever you can to stay safe with friends or family long enough for HELP to arrive. But what if 'Help' never comes people will eventually be launched into a survival mindset. People won't necessarily kill each other, but desensitized by murdering Zombies i'm sure they wont have a problem doing it.

Fear, Starvation, an indestructible enemy, lack of supplies, all of these in combination will make Humans act irrational. Some people will flee to the hills, some will try to find help or civilization, others will try their best to get by hoping something is being done by any government to cure or fix this.

You keep talking about people as being naturally loving, caring, kind. While this is very true, Human nature with certain circumstances degenerates quickly. We aren't talking about the Ancient man who could go out into the wilderness build a home and survive, we're talking about people who barely know how to start a fire without match sticks, who are used to eating food they get from the nearest market, who will die out in the woods for less then a week.

-- TL;DR : A worldwide Zombie Apocalypse =/= Hurricane Katrina in any way shape or form can't compare rationality of humanity in events that are as minute as Katrina compared to a worldwide devastation such as a Zombie creating Virus.

[CopperBarron 4]

The average life expectancy dropped rapidly yesterday from around 3 hours to only 30 minuets, is this due to the increase in Zombies or the fact that everyone was placed back into the coast causing more PvP kills?

Or maybe its the huge influx of new players? Who knows!

[Syrius 0]

I'm about to crack open a big can of worms-

I see two types of people' date=' those who see it as a 'game' and those who see it as a simulation of a survival scenario.

I'm in the latter. L4D is a game, this is a simulation based on software that is used to train people to be effective killers.

I don't play simulators for fun, I play them to experience something as quasi-realistically as possible that I wouldn't have the chance to IRL. And I suspect a lot of people use this to experience being a psychopathic trigger-fiend.

So here's a moral dilemma: How is this different from firing up Flight Sim 98 and heading for the twin towers. That's a game right? Yet if someone confessed to doing that, they'd probably be banned and on the CIA watch list. But it's just a game.

There's a double standard, and from my experience those who use the 'It's just a Game' argument are the first to cry me a river when things go pear-shaped ingame for them.

[/quote']

I agree with the double standard , I also outlined the fact that people are biased one way or another towards this , some have personal experience in real life others don't. This makes things tricky.

I find the excuse of "Its just a game" is one of the biggest cop outs that exist for gaming. It just shows that they fail to comprehend the game.

[Raug 0]

You must not forget that in DayZ you can get the most valuable loot by killing another player. The game-mechanics encourage you to kill, because you can get food, ammo and other tools so much faster by shooting other players. It takes a long time and some luck if you try to get it by raiding small villages - which is what I do, because I play it as a survival-sim, not a PvP-game.

I avoid all form of human contact, I don't shoot at people who don't shoot at me but I will try to get away as quickly and safely as possible, no matter how nice the other guy seems to be. Takes more time to survive and I will get less cool stuff, but hey, I don't die. I haven't died once since I started with the game, 4 days ago.

[fapoo 2]

I'm about to crack open a big can of worms-

I see two types of people' date=' those who see it as a 'game' and those who see it as a simulation of a survival scenario.

[/quote']

I would say I'm in the latter too. I'm not too interested in how many zombies/bandits you've put down or what weapon you have.

I'm more curious to know how would you behave if tomorrow you woke up and the world was in a shit storm with a deadly zombie virus going around and everyone you knew was dead, there was no contact with anyone else apart who you met and you were on the menu for the now infected mass population.

Seeing as the chances of this actually happening are next to nil, Day Z makes for an interesting observation when played as a simulation rather than a game.

[Gontak 1]

I don't recall Hobbes talking about Zombies in his state of Nature, but the man was so paranoid I wouldn't be surprised if he imagined it with something similar.

To be honest, I do see this as a game, it is more realistic than games like L4D etc. But ultimately it's a game. There's no way the many people on here would kill mindlessly like they do in game if they knew it had real consequences, but you know that person is going to be spawned back on the coast and within 30 minutes probably well geared again if they know where to look. And as much as people on here would like to claim they'd be the bad boy in a zombie apocalypse not trusting anyone and killing all they come across, well they'd probably not survive the initial infection stage anyway, but if they did I have serious doubts that they would.

[proxzor 3]

I just do as I learned, never think about your victims that you've hurt and you're all good to go. Seems to work for me, luckily this is just a game ;)