Playing with friends = good for the community?

[Electrolyte 4]

In the wide world of online video games, DayZ is about as unfriendly to team building as it can get short of removing chat completely and forcing you to use a blind matchmaking system. The primary play-style of people who post on the forum is anti-social to say the least. What's your goal here?

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

My goal was to see if anyone shared my views towards outside groups being able to easily bring their group into the DayZ world.

It's ironic that people are telling me to find friends and don't be such a lone wolf. That's kind of what I'm pushing for here, to make DayZ a place where people want to make friends and group up, not becasue they know the people IRL, but becasue that's the "only" way it can happen.

Edited July 12, 2012 by bad_mojo

[Dingus (DayZ) 429]

That's kind of what I'm pushing for here, to make DayZ a place where people want to make friends and group up, not becasue they know the people IRL, but becasue that's the "only" way it can happen.

It's a commendable pursuit, but people will get defensive over the potential inability to play with folks who they have played games with for years. I want to see more team building in Day Z as well, but I don't believe it would be far to somehow handicap me because I have relationships outside of Day Z.

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

It's a commendable pursuit, but people will get defensive over the potential inability to play with folks who they have played games with for years. I want to see more team building in Day Z as well, but I don't believe it would be far to somehow handicap me because I have relationships outside of Day Z.

That's exactly the problem I feared and touched on in my original post. People have been grouping up already, so their view of what DayZ is or is supposed to be, has been corrupted by what they've already been doing. To force those people to change their game up, would be considered unfair by many. Grouping up with real life friends is DayZ to some people.

[Electrolyte 4]

I play as lone wolf and sometimes with a friend. I've tagged along with several random people I met, sometimes for 10 minutes sometimes for 2 hours. I don't think what you are hoping to achieve is very possible in the DayZ environment, but do feel that it would make the game more organic and create more unique situations if it could be done.

[hker 7]

I hear you

Im in a clan with 20ups members, and we have our own server, but Im just hanging with them sometimes

I like soloing more or with 1 real life friend as partner, go stealthily and fear is a part of the main game.

[Dr. Toros 8]

That's exactly the problem I feared and touched on in my original post. People have been grouping up already, so their view of what DayZ is or is supposed to be, has been corrupted by what they've already been doing. To force those people to change their game up, would be considered unfair by many. Grouping up with real life friends is DayZ to some people.

The issue isn't that grouping up outside of day Z is too easy and rewarding, it's that grouping up INSIDE day z is too difficult and punishing.

Killing on sight is the most rewarding, and often the easiest tactic. Snipers are everywhere, everyone looks the same.

[rolfwar 5]

bad_Mojo,i think i have understood what you are trying to say.

You think that people who have no in-game friends are somehow disadvantaged and that people who join the community with an out-game group somehow have a DIFFERENT game experience than the first ones.Am i right?

What you are trying to say is that playing solo,and suddenly finding somebody who earns your trust is an important part of the gameplay,correct me if i am wrong.

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

I guess I'm saying that socializing should be a part of the game that gets forced on everyone equally. Similar to everyone starting with no weapon even if you have many weapons in real life. People should start with no friends in-game, even if they have lots in real life.

And Dr. Toros made a great point that it's harder to group up in-game than it is out of game. That is the reason out-of-game groups are so popular right now. In-game team building tool are needed before we could ever think about doing something as drastic as preventing out-of-game groups.

[Dr. Toros 8]

I guess I'm saying that socializing should be a part of the game that gets forced on everyone equally. Similar to everyone starting with no weapon even if you have many weapons in real life. People should start with no friends in-game, even if they have lots in real life.

And Dr. Toros made a great point that it's harder to group up in-game than it is out of game. That is the reason out-of-game groups are so popular right now. In-game team building tool are needed before we could ever think about doing something as drastic as preventing out-of-game groups.

Yeah, there are many many issues with in-game grouping.

1) Inability to send tells. Silly to restrict this when you have so many people on external voice chat. You basically have to use external programs to coordinate.

2) Inability to customize your appearance. If you aren't using external programs, you're at a very high risk of accidentially shooting an ally. This is a huge, artificial difficulty.

3) lack of reason to group up. Everyone has the same skills and abilities, and there is no interdependence.

These three things have been solved by the game Ultima Online, which was created in the 90's. It's embarassing that rocket hasn't solved these already.

[Valec 55]

Hear me out.

DayZ is set in a zombie apocalypse. In a place where you've washed up on shore, with basically nothing, no civilization, no safe zone, no link to the outside world(if there is one left), and no communication besides yelling. The game attempts to put you in the worst possible scenario.

Yet, we can all just alt-tab and arrange a meeting with friends. Not even that, most people circumvent the in-game voice chat, by using their own 3rd party voice software. Not only does this make them silent in-game, but they can now communicate across distances.

Another thing to consider is that groups of friends with ties outside the game have already established a "team". People not part of their "team" will have a harder time gaining their trust. I'm sure a good number of groups will just kill anyone not on their chat server.

Of course there are positive aspects of playing with friends. Obviously it's more fun to share the experience with people you've bonded with in the past. You will value their lives more than someone you just met. It's obviously easier when you can lean on stronger players for support. Yet, in my mind these positives are actually negatives when it comes to the community.

Playing with friends from early on will warp your image of the DayZ world. The game isn't supposed to be coop fun time with friends. When that "coop fun time" happens and people have a lot of fun doing it. but then, DayZ creeps in and for example, a zombie breaks your legs and you die and have to walk for an hour to meet up with your group. People rage about zombies breaking their legs. They want this "coop funtime" and not DayZ. They want to run around the DayZ world, without experiencing the apocalypse part. They want to bring their friends and family along to the end of the world.

So, I'm wondering if I'm a minority here. Does anyone else think that the game would benefit from a mechanic that made it very difficult to group up with other people that you know from outside the game?

(Please don't just reply with "it would be boring" because nobody can honestly say how it would be, because that community doesn't exist.)

As a player who does in fact play with real life friends, I can pretty much confirm what you've said. We don't need to play like everybody else. I know they aren't going to shoot me in the back at any point, and I don't need to make friends with other survivors, because I already have enough friends.

However, I don't see any possible way to prevent this. Also, if it could be prevented, I'd probably not play much DayZ since as it is, I only play alone when I have no gear.

Yeah, there are many many issues with in-game grouping.

1) Inability to send tells. Silly to restrict this when you have so many people on external voice chat. You basically have to use external programs to coordinate.

2) Inability to customize your appearance. If you aren't using external programs, you're at a very high risk of accidentially shooting an ally. This is a huge, artificial difficulty.

3) lack of reason to group up. Everyone has the same skills and abilities, and there is no interdependence.

These three things have been solved by the game Ultima Online, which was created in the 90's. It's embarassing that rocket hasn't solved these already.

Actually, it's embarrassing that you just compared a FPS to a MMORPG.

Really, really embarrassing. Next you'll be asking for levels, a class system, and boss mobs.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Valec

[wartzilla 182]

Even if this was a good idea, which it abso-fucking-lutely isn't, it's impossible to implement.

I mean, your idle fantasies are cute and all, but why post about something which is literally impossible to do?

This reminds me of the guy who wanted to 'ban' external voice comms.

[santiagoaquino6@hotmail.com 37]

They want this "coop funtime" and not DayZ.

That's probably because DayZ as it is now is a boring, buggy, frustrating experience.

(Please don't just reply with "it would be boring" because nobody can honestly say how it would be, because that community doesn't exist.)

I've played solo DayZ. It's boring.

[Andrej Dudev 50]

Rocket said that Metaplay is allowed.

[gizm0 96]

Actually, it's embarrassing that you just compared a FPS to a MMORPG.

Really, really embarrassing. Next you'll be asking for levels, a class system, and boss mobs.

which point is bad? I mean custom appearances would be good, send tells, maybe in correlation with radios people can use voice over radio but players +5m won't hear you unless on the same radio freq? skills per life would want people to stay alive and group up.

[jetao2008@hotmail.com 175]

This is a SANDBOX game, right?

I like to role-play when i'm in the game with my friends, we pretend we are X-Men and our power is to communicate with each other over long distances.

So, i guess this is allowed right? We simulate this power by using TeamSpeak/Skype, and it works very well!

/Sarcasm.

God, please, threads like this make me sick. <_<

Edited July 13, 2012 by Fenrig

[MalleusX 9]

Is this post for real? Are you new to PC gaming or something?

I have my own 50 slot Mumble server with a group of 20 friends and we have been playing all sorts of games together for nearly 4 years now. We all join the same server and have a blast.

Solo PC players like yourself will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage playing ANY game against premade groups (clans), especially open world sandbox games like DayZ and EVE. That is why you make friends...search for gaming communities to join...anything, but if you want to be a anti social "sole survivor" hermit you will always get the short end of the stick.

For all you RPers that is how it works in reality. Tight knit groups and large numbers are what usually prevail and have control :)

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

Even if this was a good idea, which it abso-fucking-lutely isn't, it's impossible to implement.

I mean, your idle fantasies are cute and all, but why post about something which is literally impossible to do?

This reminds me of the guy who wanted to 'ban' external voice comms.

Nothing is impossible.

This thread wasn't about it being possible, or possible ways to implement it, rather it's about weather or not a situation where people can't easily meet their real life friends in-game would benefit the community. Never the less, I still outlined a simple method of implementing this, to humor the doubters like you. I'm not going to repeat myself, the people who actually read the entire thread don't want to read it all again. But, it's up there if you look hard enough.

Thanks for the feedback anyways. Try not to be so insulting and narrow minded, it'll make you look more intelligent.

[NFK 102]

I think the OP's idea would be a fascinating experiment. What form of co-op would emerge in a randomized server eco-system that prevented people from grouping up despite their external voice comms? Having to organize with people you DON'T know should be exactly what happens in a simulation of the zombie apocalypse. We already have to start out weaponless and alone, the OP's suggestion would also remove the social safety net of gaming clans, just as a zombie apocalypse would remove our real-world social safety nets. I think this idea is in the anti-game spirit of Day Z.

Randomizing players' server selection sounds daunting, though. I imagine the game would have to be run on centralized servers, or else the existing server owners would have to cooperate in the randomization scheme. I can't really speak to the technical side of that, but it sounds unlikely that either of those options will ever happen with this game given the heavy involvement of out-of-game communities in the current model. They would desert Day Z en masse if it took away their organizational power.

[Agrocr0c 23]

I've never disagreed with a notion more than I disagree with this one. I understand your point but completely disagree because, albeit a zombie apocalypse, the most lethal aspect of the game is the enemy player. The threat of an enemy player far outweighs any zombie threat and this is the priority of the game if I understood Rocket correctly at Rezzed. The zombies are kind of a background inconvenience and embellish the player-centric struggles.

The game is moving more and more towards supporting groups of friends that play this game together, with certain features geared towards 'bases of operations', underground strongholds, and more. Groups of players offer more threat, more ingenuity and possibilities, and more fun, and more intrigue for better or worse.

Surviving alone is a last straw option for any would-be survivor. Befriending someone in real life and getting them to play Dayz with you on the same server doesn't worsen the community, it only amplifies it and populates it and makes it trickier to play and that is what we want - unpredictability and inspiration from others' ideas.

Being alone is scarier in some ways but only because you feel more vulnerable, something a friend can alleviate. Wanting to be more scared is commendable for the adrenaline junkie, but won't lengthen your lifespan one bit, and it will also make you unable to deal effectively with the aforementioned groups of friends that will be out there covering each other, whilst you check your own six and shit your pants motionless under a pine tree waiting for the action to pass. That in turn, leads to calls to enfeeble groups of friends because they overpower individuals in every aspect but for stealthy low signature.

Finally, justifying the context of arriving alone to survive is difficult when players are expecting and anticipating interaction with other players to provide the maximum challenge.

Edited July 14, 2012 by Agrocr0c

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

I think the OP's idea would be a fascinating experiment. What form of co-op would emerge in a randomized server eco-system that prevented people from grouping up despite their external voice comms? Having to organize with people you DON'T know should be exactly what happens in a simulation of the zombie apocalypse. We already have to start out weaponless and alone, the OP's suggestion would also remove the social safety net of gaming clans, just as a zombie apocalypse would remove our real-world social safety nets. I think this idea is in the anti-game spirit of Day Z.

Randomizing players' server selection sounds daunting, though. I imagine the game would have to be run on centralized servers, or else the existing server owners would have to cooperate in the randomization scheme. I can't really speak to the technical side of that, but it sounds unlikely that either of those options will ever happen with this game given the heavy involvement of out-of-game communities in the current model. They would desert Day Z en masse if it took away their organizational power.

Thanks for the post, you seem to understand exactly what I'm talking about. As far as the random server technical stuff, I agree, it would be daunting in the current setup, to say the least. That idea was just a "proof of concept" for people saying it's impossible to prevent outside groups. I imagine it would only work well in a standalone retail version of DayZ, where they can build the game with this in mind.

I've never disagreed with a notion more than I disagree with this one. I understand your point but completely disagree because, albeit a zombie apocalypse, the most lethal aspect of the game is the enemy player. The threat of an enemy player far outweighs any zombie threat and this is the priority of the game if I understood Rocket correctly at Rezzed. The zombies are kind of a background inconvenience and embellish the player-centric struggles.

The game is moving more and more towards supporting groups of friends that play this game together, with certain features geared towards 'bases of operations', underground strongholds, and more. Groups of players offer more threat, more ingenuity and possibilities, and more fun, and more intrigue for better or worse.

Surviving alone is a last straw option for any would-be survivor. Befriending someone in real life and getting them to play Dayz with you on the same server doesn't worsen the community, it only amplifies it and populates it and makes it trickier to play and that is what we want - unpredictability and inspiration from others' ideas.

Being alone is scarier in some ways but only because you feel more vulnerable, something a friend can alleviate. Wanting to be more scared is commendable for the adrenaline junkie, but won't lengthen your lifespan one bit, and it will also make you unable to deal effectively with the aforementioned groups of friends that will be out there covering each other, whilst you check your own six and shit your pants motionless under a pine tree waiting for the action to pass. That in turn, leads to calls to enfeeble groups of friends because they overpower individuals in every aspect but for stealthy low signature.

Finally, justifying the context of arriving alone to survive is difficult when players are expecting and anticipating interaction with other players to provide the maximum challenge.

Your post (in my mind) just reinforces why something like this would really help the apocalypic experience. In your post, you constantly stressed how powerful & dangerous groups of people are. You talked about how boring it'll be for people to play alone. Mentioning how the game is moving towards supporting groups.

I'm not saying "Let's make it impossible for outside groups to meet up in DayZ, because I don't have an outside group"

I'm saying "Let's make it impossible for outside groups to meet up in DayZ, because it's a more authentic apocalypse"

-

I'm not saying "Let's make it impossible for outside groups to meet up in DayZ, because they're too powerful"

I'm saying "Let's make it impossible for outside groups to meet up in DayZ, because it takes no amount of playing dayz to become powerful"

If something like this was added, people would seek out large groups within the game world. There could be mechanics for "teaming" up. You'd be able to keep that connection, but only AFTER you met someone in the game.

......might even go as far as wipe their friends list on every death.

[eightiesmullet 0]

Bad_mojo - well done for sticking to your point in the face of some dickheadery on this thread.

I agree that it's difficult to even see most of the map without being part of an already organised team with their own teamspeak set up.

The game could end up a huge clan war, which is great for those clans who are in it but not so much for others who aren't.

[Aeia 2]

What needs to be added, before any of these silly 'extras' is the BIGGEST problems with the game. That thing right now? OMG NIGHT TIME /switchserver. Hell, some servers are even locked to daytime only.

I don't think it's fair that people can't play with their friends outside the game, as it stands now, it's impossible to trust anyone in game. Anyone I meet who sees me first and doesn't shoot me, I just shoot them in the head when they reveal themselves to me. You just simply CAN NOT trust anyone, especially with bandit skins gone (why?). If I want to play with my friends and that is my way of playing DayZ, just let me, I won't interrupt your attempt to make friends in game either. Don't play the 'but it's harder' card - this is a sandbox zombie survival game, sandbox meaning free to do whatever you want, however you want. They don't need to change anything with how you make friends in game, if you want to work with someone then it's your choice - but sure as hell don't expect them to not shoot you right between the eyes, going back to the how they want to play the game and all, where one person wants to work together, another, wants to kill everyone on sight.

This is what makes DayZ so great, please don't alienate the game by putting your single-minded perspective across - let the game run how it is, nothing is broken, hell, it's more rewarding when you kill a group of people playing together. Let them fix the biggest problems with the game, then you can put your ideas across at a later stage.

[s.taylor.75@gmail.com 23]

Been like this since creation of online gaming really. When I was on Atlantic in UO we used ICQ to talk and arrange stuff. Friends are good. At the same time it's realistic to expect most people will mean you harm in a survival game. It's what happens in real life when anarchy takes over in 3rd world countries etc. Most people kill each other and act like fools in general. Sure you will have people that group together to help each other but they will be extremely wary of strangers in their midst.

[HooDoo (DayZ) 0]

Hear me out.

DayZ is set in a zombie apocalypse. In a place where you've washed up on shore, with basically nothing, no civilization, no safe zone, no link to the outside world(if there is one left), and no communication besides yelling. The game attempts to put you in the worst possible scenario.

Yet, we can all just alt-tab and arrange a meeting with friends. Not even that, most people circumvent the in-game voice chat, by using their own 3rd party voice software. Not only does this make them silent in-game, but they can now communicate across distances.

Another thing to consider is that groups of friends with ties outside the game have already established a "team". People not part of their "team" will have a harder time gaining their trust. I'm sure a good number of groups will just kill anyone not on their chat server.

Of course there are positive aspects of playing with friends. Obviously it's more fun to share the experience with people you've bonded with in the past. You will value their lives more than someone you just met. It's obviously easier when you can lean on stronger players for support. Yet, in my mind these positives are actually negatives when it comes to the community.

Playing with friends from early on will warp your image of the DayZ world. The game isn't supposed to be coop fun time with friends. When that "coop fun time" happens and people have a lot of fun doing it. but then, DayZ creeps in and for example, a zombie breaks your legs and you die and have to walk for an hour to meet up with your group. People rage about zombies breaking their legs. They want this "coop funtime" and not DayZ. They want to run around the DayZ world, without experiencing the apocalypse part. They want to bring their friends and family along to the end of the world.

So, I'm wondering if I'm a minority here. Does anyone else think that the game would benefit from a mechanic that made it very difficult to group up with other people that you know from outside the game?

(Please don't just reply with "it would be boring" because nobody can honestly say how it would be, because that community doesn't exist.)

The game already has a mechanic making it difficult to group with other people I know out of game. EVERYONE spawns in at a different spot. We all have to get together somewhere before we start our group activities. Even if we use out of game comunication, there is no way that can be an advantage over any other single player. Your own example above is another such mechanic already in place.. "When that "coop fun time" happens and people have a lot of fun doing it. but then, DayZ creeps in and for example, a zombie breaks your legs and you die and have to walk for an hour to meet up with your group."

As far as third party comms go, that really isn't much of an advantage when the group is separated over distances. Sure you can say "Oh, I spawned in Electro" "Cool, head for Stary and we'll meet you there." That's an advantage? The player still has to make his way across a distance to get back to his group. Besides any group that forms a "team", in real life or in a video game, has some form of communication be it some form comms, phones, or hand signals. Either way they will be silent.

You also stated.. "Another thing to consider is that groups of friends with ties outside the game have already established a "team". People not part of their "team" will have a harder time gaining their trust. I'm sure a good number of groups will just kill anyone not on their chat server."

Your probably right but then again if you make it even harder for out of game friends to get together to group up through yet another game mechanic, can you blame them? This is supposed to be about survival. Trust is not supposed to be given out freely.

In short, No, I do not think there should be yet more mechanics to make it difficult to group up with people I know from outside of game. To me, thats just rediculous.