evolution of shoot on sight?

[dallas 5195]

The problem is with the removal of the bandit skin, any skin soon became the bandit skin.

Even now when Direct Channel is pretty reliable, the kill on sight culture is so predominant that gunfire drowns out any attempts to communicate your friendly intentions. With the removal of side/global chat, everyone but the newest players rely on external voice programs with their firends/clans.

Back when we had the bandit skins, we all started out with 2500 huminity points, killing one player was usually enought for your humanity to drop below 0, which would transform a player into a bandit(German KSK Commando desert skin). In order to get rid of your bandit skin, you'd have to avoid killing other players for a couple of hours or give medical aid to other players. Even shooting another player in selfdefense, might turn you into a bandit. Becomming a bandit meant that anyone with a survivor skin, could shoot you without losing humanity points.

Alot of people thought it was unrealistic and disliked that they even in selfdefense would be labled as bandits/playerkillers, but the bandit skin gave players a reason to hessitate pulling the trigger, because of the consequences. This didn't mean people didn't kill eachother, some people still killed everyone in sight and wore their bandit skins with pride, other killed when tensions ran high or fighting over some valuable loot. Any friendly survivor, who accidentally turned bandit in selfdefense, was forced to make a choice: To avoid other survivors, to avoid situations where they'd get killed or lose even more humanity in new selfdefense situations and possibly becomming a bandit forever.

I really liked the bandit skin, because it basically forced you to weigh the consequences of your actions, before you pulled the trigger. I liked that friendly survivors, also risked becomming an outcast, even in selfdefense and that your reputation as a bandit, stayed with you when you changed servers.

Back then you made a decision whether or not you were a bandit or a survivor and new players quickly learned to make that choice too. Today the lesson is if you attempt to use direct chat for what it was intended for, you'll get shot anyways. That the only choice is to shoot first and never ask questions such as: Friendly?

People actually used to ask: Friendly? And would often get a reply, sometimes a friend, sometimes a bullet.

But people still asked back then, because the result was never given in advance. These days asking friendly is a flat out joke and the only way to meet friendlies is to meta-game with Teamspeak.

The KOS culture has been firmly cemented, some thinks it perfectly logical that in order for humans to survive a zombie apocalypse, man must kill every other man he comes across. Others find it absurd and hate that a pretty complex gameplay about survival, is nothing but a large scale shooter. No subtle gameplay changes will change this culture, rolling back the bandit skin, might even be too late.

I think Rocket will have to decide, whether he actually want to provide us with an alternative to killing everyone on sight or if this is as good as it gets.

Edited July 16, 2012 by Dallas

[dreman04 18]

Thank you for the bandit skin explanation there Dallas. I think I would have liked to have been around for that era of DayZ.

The KOS culture has been firmly cemented, some thinks it perfectly logical that in order for humans to survive a zombie apocalypse, man must kill every other man he comes across. Others find it absurd and hate that a pretty complex gameplay about survival, is nothing but a large scale shooter. No subtle gameplay changes will change this culture, rolling back the bandit skin, might even be too late.

I think Rocket will have to decide, whether he actually want to provide us with an alternative to killing everyone on sight or if this is as good as it gets.

The social side of surviving a zombie apocalypse is completely gone at the moment for me. It's something I hope is restored to the game at some point. I agree with you that it is definitely something Rocket will have to decide, and it'll probably be the make it or break it moment in this game for me.

[dallas 5195]

I think Rocket actually got the essence right.

The essence being not only to survive, but how you survive.

I hope humanity will become an important aspect of DayZ again.

[dreman04 18]

I think Rocket actually got the essence right.

The essence being not only to survive, but how you survive.

I hope humanity will become an important aspect of DayZ again.

I would like to play a DayZ where it was as well.

Besides the bandit skin, did the humanity points affect anything else?

[garglemouth64@yahoo.com 11]

Gathering from what the forum has to say this is an accurate diagram. I wasn't there to experience it, so I am just using the information from the forum.

[dallas 5195]

Yes and no.

It only affected whether or not you had the bandit skin.

But because of it, not everyone shot instantly and you could find yourself looting a supermarket with a stranger, knowing that there were more than enough supplies for both of you and no need to kill eachother. When you were done looting, you'd exchange a few words, group up for a while or wish eachother good luck.

[dreman04 18]

Gathering from what the forum has to say this is an accurate diagram. I wasn't there to experience it, so I am just using the information from the forum.

hahaha I enjoyed that diagram. Thanks

Yes and no.

It only affected whether or not you had the bandit skin.

But because of it, not everyone shot instantly and you could find yourself looting a supermarket with a stranger, knowing that there were more than enough supplies for both of you and no need to kill eachother. When you were done looting, you'd exchange a few words, group up for a while or wish eachother good luck.

That actually sounds pretty awesome. Interesting to think that there was that much of an outcry against global chat and bandit skins. Wish I had jumped on this bandwagon sooner so I knew what that time was like and had a solid opinion on it.

[Stridsbulten 9]

Removal of side / global chat isn't the issue. If it was, we wouldn't have the problem in situations where encounters occur within Direct Comms distance, but we do.

The problem is that loot is worth more than human life and a lot of people play the MOD as a regular death match game rather than a coop survival game (and no, I don't mean all players should coop as one group but right now very few coop at all).

This happens because there are only mechanics to support open PvP and no mechanics to support long term community / relationship building. Everyone is anonymous, life has no value, there is no long term goal to work towards and the game is far to easy to abuse (hacks, combat DC, server hopping to flank enemies etc).

[dreman04 18]

Removal of side / global chat isn't the issue. If it was, we wouldn't have the problem in situations where encounters occur within Direct Comms distance, but we do.

The problem is that loot is worth more than human life and a lot of people play the MOD as a regular death match game rather than a coop survival game (and no, I don't mean all players should coop as one group but right now very few coop at all).

This happens because there are only mechanics to support open PvP and no mechanics to support long term community / relationship building. Everyone is anonymous, life has no value, there is no long term goal to work towards and the game is far to easy to abuse (hacks, combat DC, server hopping to flank enemies etc).

I remember watching an interview with Rocket where he mentioned underground player communities. I think that would be awesome and definitely a step in the right direction for getting players to call a server their "home." Getting people invested more into the environment and actually shaping the world I think is where long term play-ability will come from. I love games like shadowbane with user created content. I can't wait to see how this game develops.

[Albatros (DayZ) 40]

it became more prominent after global chat was disabled. you cant really say "that guy in that building shot me!" or "hey anyone wanna meet up at x location?"

ANZ 1 still has side chat enabled, and it barely helps. The only thing it helps with is "gunshots in cherno", "who is shooting in cherno", "anyone in cherno want to team up", "how do I turn my flashlight on".

And then you get cunts who YELL ON THE FUCKING MIC ON SIDE CHAT. Just oh my god. Shut the fuck up. So glad admins ban anyone who talks on side.

[SinicalDev 0]

I play and a server WITH global enabled and find a lot more people are friendly and don't SOS. GC seems to be a huge factor.

[dreman04 18]

ANZ 1 still has side chat enabled, and it barely helps. The only thing it helps with is "gunshots in cherno", "who is shooting in cherno", "anyone in cherno want to team up", "how do I turn my flashlight on".

And then you get cunts who YELL ON THE FUCKING MIC ON SIDE CHAT. Just oh my god. Shut the fuck up. So glad admins ban anyone who talks on side.

I play and a server WITH global enabled and find a lot more people are friendly and don't SOS. GC seems to be a huge factor.

Isn't global channel supposed to be off as per the server rules set by the DayZ devs? I thought all servers that didn't obey their no password, at least 40 player slots, no global chat, etc. rule-set will be blacklisted. But I will definitely give it a try though. Thanks! It might make the game feel more alive and full of players.

[santiagoaquino6@hotmail.com 37]

The main problem is that, as you said, he finds you to be both more rewarding and more of a threat than six zeds chasing him. It all boils down to that every player can achieve "lone wolf" status quickly and without much effort, as there are no classes or anything that forces teamwork, and that zombies are incredibly weak, their only difficult point being an error in the AI that makes it go evasive maneuvers and magical teleporting on your arse and the ability to punch you in the chest and break your legs.

All the game really needs is some sort of system that restricts your ability to handle situations based on the gear you carry, forcing you to pair up with someone if you want to live, and an overhaul on zombie behavior.

[dreman04 18]

The main problem is that, as you said, he finds you to be both more rewarding and more of a threat than six zeds chasing him. It all boils down to that every player can achieve "lone wolf" status quickly and without much effort, as there are no classes or anything that forces teamwork, and that zombies are incredibly weak, their only difficult point being an error in the AI that makes it go evasive maneuvers and magical teleporting on your arse and the ability to punch you in the chest and break your legs.

All the game really needs is some sort of system that restricts your ability to handle situations based on the gear you carry, forcing you to pair up with someone if you want to live, and an overhaul on zombie behavior.

I don't think a class system or FORCING cooperation is the answer for this game. There just needs to be something that promotes it more or at the very least promotes communication more. I would not like to have something as limiting as classes or completely removing the "lone wolf" play-style.

[NFK 102]

It sounds like Day Z started out as a small single community with common goals and social rules, but as it grew larger the community fragmented. Now it's a collection of warring tribes who do not trust anyone outside their VOIP and scattered, unaffiliated solo players who live on the margins.

[derailed000 20]

First of all, I apologize for the long post. Hopefully it can start up an interesting discussion though. Also, I just want to be perfectly clear that this isn't a "turn FF off" or "add safe zones" thread. I'm not here to complain about the PvP in the game in any way. I am here to ask a question or two. I'm hoping a veteran of the game could explain a few things to me.

To me, the community of a game is just as important as the game itself. I am extremely curious if at the beginning of time (when DayZ opened its doors and only a few hundred people or so played), if shoot-on-sight was the unwritten rule as it is now? I think it’s interesting to take a step back and ask how or why the community decided on that ONE AND ONLY RULE. Is it based on the size (and probably different gaming backgrounds) of the community? Or perhaps because very few players stick to 1 server (server hopping, alt+f4)? Or maybe because no one uses in-game voice/text (seems like I'm only one)?

I’m older now and take video games for what they are…. games. I don’t rage when 1) a survivor who is being chased by 6 zombies decides to shoot me as he runs by instead of dealing with his zombie problem first or 2) when someone gives away their position to both every player around us as well as zombies trying to shoot me as I'm the one running from 6 zombies. I find it interesting that in both cases, the player considered me more of an immediate threat to him than anything else going on around him. I understand he has the right to play however he wants to – just as I do. That randomness and free will makes this game exciting! In both cases, both the other player and I ended up dying because of their actions, and in both cases I laughed. I truly did. I have a handful of similar stories to that too, so that isn't a one-time occurrence. Personally, other players killing me isn't my biggest complaint, but for others it is. But it all comes back to the question of WHY did those players think to come after me first? Why are human players so afraid of other human players in this community?

I understand that end-game roaming around just for food and drink is boring, and so it’s more exciting to face off with a human being instead of a twitchy AI. I get it. In fact, I think the PvP elements are required for long-term re-playability of this game. Easy games get old fast. A tough as balls game has you coming back for more.

In the current state of things, the kind of gameplay I think would be amazing cannot exist I don’t think because of alt+f4, serving hopping, and EXTREME lack of player communication. This thread isn't aimed to "fix" those issues as those are purely on the player. A developer can't force a play-style onto a player. That's up to the community to decide. Whatever happens, happens. And so my next question is, does anyone know of a server where some light roleplaying takes place in? One where maybe people would actually try to communicate instead of going rambo on the zombie apocalypse and players with flashlights/hatchets?

I guess my bottom line tl;dr is, has the shoot-on-sight policy always existed or is that something that evolved due to some reason or another?

Also, is there a roleplaying server out there that's perhaps not always shoot-on-sight where me and my friend would be welcomed in? Sometimes cooperation is nice, sometimes it's not. I just wish people would give me a chance to explain myself :)

I belive that this mod have a large group of players that used to play ARMA before the mod was released and i dont need to explain further what ARMA is all about. That mentality have been taken into this mod for many players, not all but i guess for some of the players. About the example you are telling about i guess that is more of a younger generation of gamers rather then gamers that has been around for awhile. The big diffrence today is the lack of respect and helping new players to get going (im not saying that sort of gaming is all lost, but it was more common a coupple of years ago). But i agree with you and probably have a similar gamingstyle...good luck out there :)

[GodOfGrain 191]

After playing lone wolf the first couple of weeks I looked for some company. I joined a guy's TS and we met in game after an hour. Was one of my most memorable experiences because of the risk involved in trusting an unknown person. Since then we've played together and have invited more people (from forum / RL) to join us. There is no incentive for us at all to communicate ingame anymore - although I liked that experience. Global side wouldn't help here.

Beside the fact that there is too much "shooting & killing" than there would be in reality, this dynamic is not completly absurd. Probably people would remain relativlely social and trustfull in the beginning, but once they established a stable group they would regard everyone else as a possible threat.

On the other hand the social aspect of meta-gaming is interesting as well. OK - if we play with people from RL the thing should be set. But we have a number of guys which joined us from a German DayZ forum. Personally ( I might be a bit paranoid in this regard ) consider every new entrance as a threat.

Can't help myself here. For the first days I keep observing their behavior, ensure that the squad is not in a complete vulnerable position at any time, etc.

Kind regards

[dreman04 18]

It sounds like Day Z started out as a small single community with common goals and social rules, but as it grew larger the community fragmented. Now it's a collection of warring tribes who do not trust anyone outside their VOIP and scattered, unaffiliated solo players who live on the margins.

Yeah, I think I agree in that it feels very much like small groups of people hunting other small groups of people with zombies in the background as hurdles. That's how me and my buddies started playing and we're doing magnitudes better.

I belive that this mod have a large group of players that used to play ARMA before the mod was released and i dont need to explain further what ARMA is all about. That mentality have been taken into this mod for many players, not all but i guess for some of the players. About the example you are telling about i guess that is more of a younger generation of gamers rather then gamers that has been around for awhile. The big diffrence today is the lack of respect and helping new players to get going (im not saying that sort of gaming is all lost, but it was more common a coupple of years ago). But i agree with you and probably have a similar gamingstyle...good luck out there :)

I heard from a previous post in this thread that ArmA was in fact very team based. It's interesting because every other zombie game I can think of extremely promotes co-op play by any number of game mechanics or features. This chaotic PvP sandbox we have going on now is probably what makes this game so different and addicting. I just wonder how long I'll play for, given I feel 0 empathy or emotion for anyone out there outside my 3 man group. If all 3 of us aren't playing, none of us are playing because it's too hard to meet up afterwards. Long-term play-ability for this game is low for me I think. Once the "new game smell" fades away, I'll be playing something else if nothing changes. I have high hopes and heard things that suggest they will though, so I am excited to see those develop.

After playing lone wolf the first couple of weeks I looked for some company. I joined a guy's TS and we met in game after an hour. Was one of my most memorable experiences because of the risk involved in trusting an unknown person. Since then we've played together and have invited more people (from forum / RL) to join us. There is no incentive for us at all to communicate ingame anymore - although I liked that experience. Global side wouldn't help here.

Beside the fact that there is too much "shooting & killing" than there would be in reality, this dynamic is not completly absurd. Probably people would remain relativlely social and trustfull in the beginning, but once they established a stable group they would regard everyone else as a possible threat.

On the other hand the social aspect of meta-gaming is interesting as well. OK - if we play with people from RL the thing should be set. But we have a number of guys which joined us from a German DayZ forum. Personally ( I might be a bit paranoid in this regard ) consider every new entrance as a threat.

Can't help myself here. For the first days I keep observing their behavior, ensure that the squad is not in a complete vulnerable position at any time, etc.

Kind regards

When I first started playing, I also played lone-wolf style simply because I didn't know how to find my friends. Truthfully, the biggest part of the learning curve for me were the god awful controls of this game. I have never played a game with such convoluted control schemes. This is not counting any bugs with the bags or inventory (I forgive those on the count of this being alpha after all). Accidentally deleting your rifle or a full jerry can is frustrating and absolutely game breaking if this were a "real" game as Rocket puts it. Those two items could quite literally be difference between life and death.

But anyways, like I was saying, I didn't know where I was or how to get things. Watching some youtube videos and googling some maps not only told me where everything is found, but did so in excruciating detail. The in-game map is essentially useless at this point as online ones give you tons more information. It's unfortunate that VOIP and online maps are a necessity for meeting up with your friends when you spawn. That is one of my bigger complaints. Right from the get go it's impossible to meet up if you spawn in Kamenka and your buddy spawns in Three Valleys. Might as well have one of you commit suicide. In fact, that's what we do and hope that we get Electro and Three Valleys or something like that.

Edit: Revisiting the pains of re-spawning. I think players should spawn INSIDE houses. Like you just woke up and BAM zombies. The event of me spawning just to be immediately aggro'd without even having a chance to move is all too often if you spawn too close to a city.

Edited July 16, 2012 by dreman04

[trauma.au 14]

Could you explain what the bandit model experiment is/was? I just started playing 2 weeks ago, so I'm not familiar with that.

There was a system that changed the player model of your character to a bandit (german KSK was used). This happened when your humanity dropped below 100 from memory and you of course lost humanity when you murdered people. So you could always tell who was a bandit, hence shoot on sight became a norm. The system had a lot of bugs and eventually Rocket pulled it, the underlying humanity system is still active though.

Once it was removed it was going to go one of two ways, either people would consider it a clean slate and be (somewhat) trusting of others or they were going to be paranoid of everyone because they don't know if the player they have come across used to be a bandit or not. It was the latter.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Trauma

[alcatraz968 100]

There's no "End Game" as of right now, and as players get better and better, the end game currently is shooting other players.

[Fryseboks 30]

Paranoia, at least for me. I recently joined so I was not part of global chat, but it would've definately not made me shoot people that I deem a threat (pretty much everyone heading remotely where I am heading and having a gun).

After getting fucked over by two people when trading (I had an M16, they had one hatchet inbetwen them. They asked for food, I told them I'd trade them for soda. I traded with the unarmed guy. This was on top of the fire station building on the airstrip near cherno. After the trade I continued down the stairs. Near the entrance where the stairs begin and you can hide under the first stair, the guy with the hatchet was waiting for me and cleaved me down. I can see attraction to that, considering I had decent items and they had nothing. However since we brokered the trade on microphone and he sounded trustworthy, I did not think it would happen) I got extremely lucky on my new spawn. Found a dead guy in elektro with an alice pack full of all supplies needed, an enfield with 5 mags, m1911 with 5 mags, as well as every tool you need to hunt and cook food and navigate, and then proceed to run like hell into the forest. Now that I can sustain myself I avoid people and cities and try to scavenge remote barns/deer stands. However earlier today when trying to fill my canteen in the pond above elektro I saw a guy running with 2 zombies chasing him. He had a gun. Out of range from direct communication (what is the range anyway? 100m?), I proceed to shoot after him with my enfield out of pure paranoia (missed all shots anyway) and then run like hell in the opposite direction.

Earlier before finding said body I also killed an unarmed person out of paranoia. Heard someone moving in the upper floor of the building and down towards the stairs where I waited behind the corner, shot him before I saw he was unnarmed. Felt a little bad about it later (He didn't die at first either, only knocked out from a point blank enfield round. Took 10 seconds before I realized, and even while in possession of an epi-pen I decided to shoot him again in stead), but what if he had been armed? That second of me hesitating and seeing if he was armed could've meant death if he was.

With global communication both those incidents could've probably have been avoided. In short, I've realized that with the current situation it's nerve-wrecking to be a lone wolf once you get decent equipment. Should probably find some people to play regularly with, and not trust anyone else :P

Edited July 18, 2012 by Fryseboks

[lev 39]

I personally haven't seen the game change significantly with respect to shoot on sight in the ~5 months I have been playing.

Not sure how you could have played for 5 months since the mod is barely 4 months old.

[Batuhan87 24]

I killed a guy in elektro supermarket the other day.

Was on a nighttime server looking for an Alice Pack. He was out the front, me in the back. I saw him and crept to a dark corner.

When he came out the back, he had his back to me.

I ran through scenarios in my head, if I helped him and traded he probably would have shot me in the back so I made the decision to shoot him first. Felt bad afterwards :(

I liked it better when global chat was available. I don't care on how realistic the game is. I play games for the social aspect and community.

Disabling the multiplayer aspect of the game is just plain retarded.Period.If you want THAT MUCH realism.Go out.

[nuclearaddict 15]

it became more prominent after global chat was disabled. you cant really say "that guy in that building shot me!" or "hey anyone wanna meet up at x location?"

I noticed the opposite. Global chat was always just a flame war, anyway. And some servers still have global chat.

Edited July 18, 2012 by nuclearaddict

[dreman04 18]

Disabling the multiplayer aspect of the game is just plain retarded.Period.If you want THAT MUCH realism.Go out.

I'm not sure what you mean at all. SupaFly1983 was talking about global chat, not "disabling the multiplayer." Unless you mean that turning global chat on somehow turns off PvP or something. Explain yourself good sir.

I noticed the opposite. Global chat was always just a flame war, anyway. And some servers still have global chat.

Yeah that's what some other people said too earlier in the thread. That's why I like the suggestion a few people have made in a radio item. Those that want it could use it, those that don't can simply turn it off. It would also add a new level to the Bandit v Survivor situation in that one could infiltrate the other. I personally think radios are the way to go.