The real reason why it's shoot on sight

[Reared'by'night 0]

The game simply isn't sustainable in its current form as a co-op game regardless if you are that special somebody that wants to play like that forever.

Disregarding the pussy snipers that picks off people for more than 800 meters away at a safe position, players are simply a more satisfying target vs a bad AI with bad pathing. It simply makes for more interesting play. My heart doesn't pump when I'm chased by 5 zombies but If I hear gunshots nearby, I start to worry A LOT. That's the feeling I want from a game. That's not even mentioning the game does everything it can to discourage random grouping. The latter is not necessarily a bad thing and certainly not a complaint but it is what it is.

You can't build a real world scenario around a game and expect players to act like they would in real life. In real life the consequences to onces actions are much more dire than spawning naked at the beach. If you had the ability to creat forrest fires in the game then all the forrests on every server would be on fire. It's the nature of sandbox games and the nature of gamers. Again regardless if you are that special somebody that's different

[CaptainPlanet (DayZ) 23]

Disregarding the pussy snipers that picks off people for more than 800 meters away at a safe position.

Someone sounds like they die to snipers, a lot.

[DemonGroover 8836]

Having other players is what makes Day Z. Imagine this as a single player game? It would get boring real quick.

Co-op can happen but players have a certain paranoia when they see another player.

[Reared'by'night 0]

Disregarding the pussy snipers that picks off people for more than 800 meters away at a safe position.

Someone sounds like they die to snipers' date=' a lot.

[/quote']

Only once and not enough to be upset about it but if i didn't make that statement then people would crawl down my throat if i used words such as "players make for a better competitive target" using snipers an example. Then I would have to debate that point instead my post as a whole

[Nylrem 12]

Not to mention that zombies can teleport through barriers and doors, so that you can't even hole up in a building and get them to siege you for hours on end. That would foster co-op. A group of peopled pinned in a building and running out of ammo... Then everyone else comming to help, or sniping the zombies from afar to clear a path for the survivors.... But no, they just pop through the barbed wire.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

It's cute how you're like "this game is not sustainable" and then go on to describe how PvP is really fun and exciting.

You can't build a real world scenario around a game and expect players to act like they would in real life.

Where does it say he's trying to build a real world scenario?

Where does it say he expects people to behave as they would in real life?

"Hey guys, I invented a bunch of design goals the creators of the mod never stated were actually goals but here's why we can't achieve them."

Like, thanks.

Next tell us how we will never have working air hockey tables.

[vic6777@gmail.com 0]

The reason it might seem this way is because as it stands now, you gain more from killing a person than not killing them. The way to remedy this fairly, without breaking the current system, is to inflict some sort of penalty on a bandit. For example: If you kill a survivor, you are more likely to attract zombies from farther away. Requiring more stealth than usual if you plan to continue. The more you kill, the harder the game becomes for said player. It won't mess with people who tend to kill for killing, or kill for the loot since they have to decide early on. Does killing them merit me having a tougher time moving around? If so, go for it. But at a price.

So what this would do is give a simple decision on all players. Don't kill survivors and not take their loot. Or kill and take the loot, but make the game harder. That's what the game needs atm.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

The way to remedy this fairly' date=' without breaking the current system, is to inflict some sort of penalty on a bandit.

[/quote']

Uhh, how does that not break the current system?

You're new here so I'll let this one slide without making fun of you too much, but here's the deal: it's not happening. rocket has said from day one there will be no "punishments" for choosing one play style over another.

If YOU want to punish bandits get a gun and go do it. They're right out there waiting for their punishments. Go right now! Time is of the essence.

[Reared'by'night 0]

It's cute how you're like "this game is not sustainable" and then go on to describe how PvP is really fun and exciting.

You can't build a real world scenario around a game and expect players to act like they would in real life.

Where does it say he's trying to build a real world scenario?

Where does it say he expects people to behave as they would in real life?

"Hey guys' date=' I invented a bunch of design goals the creators of the mod never stated were actually goals but here's why we can't achieve them."

Like, thanks.

Next tell us how we will never have working air hockey tables.

[/quote']

He never did but yet I see those comments all the time trying to draw paralells to the real world and how unrealistic it is for people to shoot on sight. Take a chill pill douche

[Hawk24 94]

If you kill a survivor, you are more likely to attract zombies

Already in the game

Gunshots attract zombies when close enough, amazing isn't it?

[Reared'by'night 0]

The reason it might seem this way is because as it stands now' date=' you gain more from killing a person than not killing them. The way to remedy this fairly, without breaking the current system, is to inflict some sort of penalty on a bandit. For example: If you kill a survivor, you are more likely to attract zombies from farther away. Requiring more stealth than usual if you plan to continue. The more you kill, the harder the game becomes for said player. It won't mess with people who tend to kill for killing, or kill for the loot since they have to decide early on. Does killing them merit me having a tougher time moving around? If so, go for it. But at a price.

So what this would do is give a simple decision on all players. Don't kill survivors and not take their loot. Or kill and take the loot, but make the game harder. That's what the game needs atm.

[/quote']

The obvious solution to the kill on sight and to promote more co-op is to hinder the "free to do as you want" concept of the sandbox. and to allow spawning next to a buddy when you both start at the beach. Even if you couldn't loot other players you would still get the shoot on sight mentality simply because killing zeds becomes stale.

I'm not sure I would like any restrictions or nerfs to promote more grouping to be honest. I'm just thinking out loud what it would take

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

hinder the "free to do as you want" concept of the sandbox.

So hard to tell if some of you ridiculous clowns are serious.

Yes. Please "hinder" the exact aspect of the game that makes it unique and amazing.

Or, how about this brilliant idea - like, if you don't want to play a sandbox game go play a game that's not a sandbox game.

Doesn't that seem like a much more obvious solution than choosing to play a sandbox game and then bitching about it?

[Reared'by'night 0]

hinder the "free to do as you want" concept of the sandbox.

So hard to tell if some of you ridiculous clowns are serious.

Yes. Please "hinder" the exact aspect of the game that makes it unique and amazing.

Or' date=' how about this brilliant idea - like, if you don't want to play a sandbox game go play a game that's not a sandbox game.

Doesn't that seem like a much more obvious solution than choosing to play a sandbox game and then bitching about it?

[/quote']

Fail reading is fail

[eightiesmullet 0]

Zedsdead - bit rude, no?

[vic6777@gmail.com 0]

The way to remedy this fairly' date=' without breaking the current system, is to inflict some sort of penalty on a bandit.

[/quote']

Uhh, how does that not break the current system?

You're new here so I'll let this one slide without making fun of you too much, but here's the deal: it's not happening. rocket has said from day one there will be no "punishments" for choosing one play style over another.

If YOU want to punish bandits get a gun and go do it. They're right out there waiting for their punishments. Go right now! Time is of the essence.

Um.. Thanks?

I'm not really bashing the current play style really, if that's what you're defending. I'm quite content with the way things are right now. I'm just pointing out, to the OP that as it stands now, you gain more from killing someone than just guessing if he's a bandit or you let him live.

As for what I said as to fixing the banditry was a simple solution so being a bandit doesn't outweigh being a survivor or viceversa. It's a system to counter the pluses of being a bandit. Nothing else.

Again, I'm not coming here to go on a screaming spree to say the current system is flawed. Cause it's not. I just wanted to give my perspective on what I think would remedy this. Sadly I was not aware that this topic is taboo to even comment on.

[Reared'by'night 0]

The way to remedy this fairly' date=' without breaking the current system, is to inflict some sort of penalty on a bandit.

[/quote']

Uhh, how does that not break the current system?

You're new here so I'll let this one slide without making fun of you too much, but here's the deal: it's not happening. rocket has said from day one there will be no "punishments" for choosing one play style over another.

If YOU want to punish bandits get a gun and go do it. They're right out there waiting for their punishments. Go right now! Time is of the essence.

Um.. Thanks?

I'm not really bashing the current play style really, if that's what you're defending. I'm quite content with the way things are right now. I'm just pointing out, to the OP that as it stands now, you gain more from killing someone than just guessing if he's a bandit or you let him live.

As for what I said as to fixing the banditry was a simple solution so being a bandit doesn't outweigh being a survivor or viceversa. It's a system to counter the pluses of being a bandit. Nothing else.

Again, I'm not coming here to go on a screaming spree to say the current system is flawed. Cause it's not. I just wanted to give my perspective on what I think would remedy this. Sadly I was not aware that this topic is taboo to even comment on.

Fanboy'ism is rampart on the forums. Any suggestion or even a thought that goes against what we have now will result in nerd rage. You just have to learn to ignore it. Once you learn, then teach me how

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

As for what I said as to fixing the banditry

Can you try and explain first why it's broken before you start talking about "fixing" it?

It's a system to counter the pluses of being a bandit.

We have that system. It's called guns and bullets. Get a gun and put bullets in it and go counter bandits. When you click on "What is Dayz" there are only 4 things it tells you to do and one of them is to shoot bandits. So if that's what you want to do' date=' why don't you go do it?

I just wanted to give my perspective on what I think would remedy this.

Remedy what? What are you trying to remedy?

You have to identify a problem before you suggest a solution. "PvP occurs in a PvP game" is not exactly a problem, is it?

Sadly I was not aware that this topic is taboo to even comment on.

It's not that you comment on it, it's that you do so with such ignorant presumption. You start from the flawed premise that banditry is a "problem" that needs a "solution" but that's simply not true. Banditry is a critical part of the game, and given the stats (15% of deaths by murder) it's not even that common.

[mike10019314@yahoo.ca 3]

The way to remedy this fairly' date=' without breaking the current system, is to inflict some sort of penalty on a bandit.

[/quote']

Uhh, how does that not break the current system?

You're new here so I'll let this one slide without making fun of you too much, but here's the deal: it's not happening. rocket has said from day one there will be no "punishments" for choosing one play style over another.

If YOU want to punish bandits get a gun and go do it. They're right out there waiting for their punishments. Go right now! Time is of the essence.

i have a question for you , how does one locate bandits to punish? as it is we all look alike and we cant even tell our friends apart let alone other players, right now the only way to puhish "bandits" is to run around and shoot everyone you see like a bandit,

to get beyone just shoot everyone we need to be able to id other players at med to short range 50 to 150m, and the ability to mark players as hostile(info shaired betwen a group maybe?)

[Sledgehammer (DayZ) 1]

its shoot on sight becuase everyone else shoots on sight, and if you don't shoot first than your just gonna die...

i try to be nice, but as of now becuase of the precedence that has been set for player interaction / roe its pretty much impossible to be nice.

[lzugl 0]

Its funny that people think if the world went to shit everyone would be all butterflies and rainbows.. The hard truth is if shit hit the fan you better bet your ass people are gonna look out for there own and defend what they have..

i have over 15 guns and thousands of rounds of ammo stored away because the way things are going today i wouldn't be surprised if dayz went irl soon..

[Sledgehammer (DayZ) 1]

Its funny that people think if the world went to shit everyone would be all butterflies and rainbows.. The hard truth is if shit hit the fan you better bet your ass people are gonna look out for there own and defend what they have..

i have over 15 guns and thousands of rounds of ammo stored away because the way things are going today i wouldn't be surprised if dayz went irl soon..

yes, but we are all social creatures, most people probably would not run around and kill everyone they ever see without ever having a single social interaction with another human. The hysteria makes sense yes, but to the point where you are basically forced to kill EVERYONE you see or die is beyond the hysteria and paranoia that would probably occur.

[DuncanM 0]

Its funny that people think if the world went to shit everyone would be all butterflies and rainbows.. The hard truth is if shit hit the fan you better bet your ass people are gonna look out for there own and defend what they have..

i have over 15 guns and thousands of rounds of ammo stored away because the way things are going today i wouldn't be surprised if dayz went irl soon..

yes' date=' but we are all social creatures, most people probably would not run around and kill everyone they ever see without ever having a single social interaction with another human. The hysteria makes sense yes, but to the point where you are basically forced to kill EVERYONE you see or die is beyond the hysteria and paranoia that would probably occur.

[/quote']

Ahh that brings up an idea...

Prolonged loneliness of a player's character would render him/her mentally "unstable".

This might be reflected through mild hallucinations of some harmful nature and can only be remedied by being in close proximity to another player.

This would keep PvP about the same but encourage more grouping between players which is something myself and some others desire.

This is kind of a lame-ass idea tbh, but a mechanic that encourages people to group with someone else would be welcomed.

I mainly play by myself and don't have a problem getting decent loot or PvPing. I have no reason to group, but i feel there should be some type of incentive.

[Sledgehammer (DayZ) 1]

Its funny that people think if the world went to shit everyone would be all butterflies and rainbows.. The hard truth is if shit hit the fan you better bet your ass people are gonna look out for there own and defend what they have..

i have over 15 guns and thousands of rounds of ammo stored away because the way things are going today i wouldn't be surprised if dayz went irl soon..

yes' date=' but we are all social creatures, most people probably would not run around and kill everyone they ever see without ever having a single social interaction with another human. The hysteria makes sense yes, but to the point where you are basically forced to kill EVERYONE you see or die is beyond the hysteria and paranoia that would probably occur.

[/quote']

Ahh that brings up an idea...

Prolonged loneliness of a player's character would render him/her mentally "unstable".

This might be reflected through mild hallucinations of some harmful nature and can only be remedied by being in close proximity to another player.

This would keep PvP about the same but encourage more grouping between players which is something myself and some others desire.

This is kind of a lame-ass idea tbh, but a mechanic that encourages people to group with someone else would be welcomed.

I mainly play by myself and don't have a problem getting decent loot or PvPing. I have no reason to group, but i feel there should be some type of incentive.

grouping up doesn't help you right now at the moment which is a serious problem. I don't think you should be punished for not grouping up, but rewarded FOR grouping up.

Yeah i feel ya though. I haven't ever grouped up before and have been playing for around a month now with around 100 hours played and really would like to see cooperation.

[Doogla 1]

I think that as the zombie portion of the game gets better and harder as development continues, player cooperation will improve as well. That way instead of hard coding an actual penalty to shooting everyone you see, you allow the player to kind of screw himself out of surviving. If the zombie portion of the game was hard enough that traveling solo is undesirable, then people will start to work together instead of shooting every single person they see.

So instead of this scenario:

Bill sees John running through the city and kills him and takes his stuff. Bill is punished with some kind of penalty that's coded into the game (bandit skin or some of the other penalties post on this thread.)

You have this scenario:

Bill sees John running through the city and kills him and takes his stuff. Bill then rounds a corner to a building and sees A TON of zombies in the street who immediately notice him and start chasing him, eventually killing him. Bill realizes that if John was alive, he could have helped him get away (whether he shot or Bill just used him as bait) and Bill decides next time he'll think before he just kills randomly.

The second way allows players to do whatever they want, and keeps the sandbox feeling that we love. tl;dr: less random killing comes with a harder zombie game.

LOVE the game, and I can't wait to see what's to come.

[GandalfTheFriendly 0]

It is very rare to find a friendly player in DayZ , that doesn't kills on sight. It is exactly like an infection. Let's say , that when DayZ started , everyone was friendly , and didn't kill on sight. But there's always a guy that kills on sight , that doesn't gives a f*ck for anything and kills everyone. The guy that was killed will at first , keep his atitude , he will keep asking before shooting. Then , the ignorant guy goes there , and kills him again. He will be like ''Fuck this , I keep losing my gear because of these guys , for now on , I don't give a f*ck , I will shoot on sight''. Soon , everyone will be ''infected'' and Dayz will turn into something like Call Of Duty or anything like that. That's my opinion.