Post apacolyptic greifing simulator for D-bags

[xximrtwoixx 104]

I actually kind of like your suggestion at the end there because I think it would also help a bit. The problem right now is that permadeath sucks far less for the bandits, which is why they're just sitting there randomly sniping people running around with no weapons and a flashlight. If the bandits were actually trying to survive instead of screwing around and putting themselves into the most dangerous situations possible, the game would be a far better place for survivors.

Survivors have the ability to amass gear and store it the same as "bandits" do, I think that people are down south killing people because 1) they know people will be there and 2), they have already mastered surviving, they are thriving, its first world problem for people that have been playing the game for an extended period of time.

1. What do you think about the blood bag mechanic? That forces people to play together too, right?

2. I don't understand why you think this mechanic is more gamey than the heat mechanic or the pain mechanic. Is it just because you've gotten used to the other ones?

3. Nobody would be forced to do anything. I added the alcohol mechanic for a reason. (Morphine and maybe certain plants could also help with this.) Solo players have an extra resource to worry about to balance out the danger grouping up with other players represents.

1. Blood/Food/Water/warmth all represent physical things that a player character requires just as you require these things IRL. A mechanic that represents some meta-phycological guage is pointless because the point of the game is to make the player feel those emotions. Being alone should make you feel loanly, and convey how difficult it is to survive alone. Being shot at should make you scarred because you know if your hit only once you could die. I'm not a huge fan of blood packs not because they force you to group but because they heal you instantly and anyone can administer them.

2. See above, it doesn't represent a tangible thing, its an emotion the game should already be conveying.

3. Grouping up with other players doesn't represent a danger being in a group is great and represents a safety and power. Random encounters represent danger or playing with inexperianced players, as there is no grouping mechanic in game players need to use meta game to group up. Random encounters should and always will be dangerous because an individual holds the tools to end your life within seconds.

The problem is that the worst and most irritating bandits are the ones using non-legit means to get their stuff. Removing the ability to server hop to get tons of free loot or escape pvp will force a lot of bandits to actually start trying to survive again, with a net effect of improving the game for everyone. I know these bugs will be fixed some day, but that doesn't mean we can't brainstorm stopgap measures in the meanwhile.

Working on stop gaps is a waste of time, anything that is not A)testing things for final release, B)Fixing things for final release, or C)Adding things for final release is a waste of time. That is development or any project management, you don't waste time on things that are not going to be in the finished project.

Tell me about another zombie game with a loneliness mechanic and maybe making a comment like this won't make you look stupid.

I wasn't specifically talking about your loneliness mechanic, but rather all of the mechanics that have been suggested that seek to change the core of DayZ.

MMO's or games with persistance do not contain perma death, they are not full open pvp, they don't have realistic damage (Most FPS games don't even have this), games rarley make you eat/drink/stay warm, they are not an open sandbox w/no rules or hand holding.

Games w/out persistance are not full open world, have no significance to death, and have nothing to do with survival.

Edited July 26, 2012 by xXI Mr Two IXx

[MrBrown (DayZ) 26]

Oh and another thing, a key factor in this game is realism. Thats how things would go down if this happened in real life, whether you believe or not.

Yeah... because in reality, normal people have no inhibition threshold to murder other people. And in reality, you can also die five times and learn that it's better to shoot on sight if you wanna survive after respawning. So it's totally realistic!

If anyone finds sarcasm, feel free to keep it.

[FalafelCopter 20]

Survivors have the ability to amass gear and store it the same as "bandits" do, I think that people are down south killing people because 1) they know people will be there and 2), they have already mastered surviving, they are thriving, its first world problem for people that have been playing the game for an extended period of time.

It's not that survivors have a harder time hoarding loot than bandits, it's that once you've hoarded all that loot, there's not much left to do besides become a bandit. The worst bandits are the ones who manipulated the game via server hopping and other cheesy mechanics so that they can get back faster to their cherno deathmatch. If you make it harder for them to do that, the random sniping will lessen.

1. Blood/Food/Water/warmth all represent physical things that a player character requires just as you require these things IRL. A mechanic that represents some meta-phycological guage is pointless because the point of the game is to make the player feel those emotions. Being alone should make you feel loanly, and convey how difficult it is to survive alone. Being shot at should make you scarred because you know if your hit only once you could die. I'm not a huge fan of blood packs not because they force you to group but because they heal you instantly and anyone can administer them.

If you think that loneliness isn't tangible, then you've never had to be by yourself for an extended period of time. If you want to get really technical, loneliness is as physical as being in pain is. (In fact, some of the same parts of the brain are involved.) A game is never going to be able to cause you to have emotions anything like what you would experience if you were in a situation like that, especially to the people who are just screwing around and playing call of duty cherno edition. A subtle mechanic could nudge them a little bit back into being immersed in the world.

3. Grouping up with other players doesn't represent a danger being in a group is great and represents a safety and power. Random encounters represent danger or playing with inexperianced players, as there is no grouping mechanic in game players need to use meta game to group up. Random encounters should and always will be dangerous because an individual holds the tools to end your life within seconds.

Grouping up with other players (NOT IN TEAMSPEAK) represents a danger because you never know when your new friend might decide to shoot you in the back. Shooting on sight or running away is far safer, always.

I wasn't specifically talking about your loneliness mechanic, but rather all of the mechanics that have been suggested that seek to change the core of DayZ.

MMO's or games with persistance do not contain perma death, they are not full open pvp, they don't have realistic damage (Most FPS games don't even have this), games rarley make you eat/drink/stay warm, they are not an open sandbox w/no rules or hand holding.

Games w/out persistance are not full open world, have no significance to death, and have nothing to do with survival.

Isn't stockpiling loot for your next life a form of persistence?

[xximrtwoixx 104]

It's not that survivors have a harder time hoarding loot than bandits, it's that once you've hoarded all that loot, there's not much left to do besides become a bandit. The worst bandits are the ones who manipulated the game via server hopping and other cheesy mechanics so that they can get back faster to their cherno deathmatch. If you make it harder for them to do that, the random sniping will lessen.

As I said before bugs and or crappy mechanics will be corrected over time. You don't fix bugs or crappy mechanics with new features or mechanics, you fix the problems. I would also argue that many players fighting the S coast bean wars don't go back to tents but instead server hop locations in the south coast, its true some groups return S for lulz but they are not the ones always there.

If you think that loneliness isn't tangible, then you've never had to be by yourself for an extended period of time. If you want to get really technical, loneliness is as physical as being in pain is. (In fact, some of the same parts of the brain are involved.) A game is never going to be able to cause you to have emotions anything like what you would experience if you were in a situation like that, especially to the people who are just screwing around and playing call of duty cherno edition. A subtle mechanic could nudge them a little bit back into being immersed in the world.

1) I think its safe to say that people playing only to DM would continue to only DM even with another meter to fill.

2) I'm not saying the game will stir the same amount of emotion as being trapped on a desert island IRL, I'm only saying the game should and I think does convey through current play enough emotion/frustration to make players want to group up. I'm not saying this solves KOS/Bandits/DM at all only that it does somewhat suck to play by yourself already and theres no need to have an in game bar telling me this. I think most players do group up already, as I've said in other posts instead of complaining about getting killed in a million posts people should make posts in survivor/bandit forum. WTF group to play with M,w,F 9-12 CST Newb LTP, problem solved.

Grouping up with other players (NOT IN TEAMSPEAK) represents a danger because you never know when your new friend might decide to shoot you in the back. Shooting on sight or running away is far safer, always.

I think thats pretty much what I said, random encounters are always dangerous because someone can shoot and kill you in one shot, people realize this but still complain about forming groups. So people should group up via the forums and team speak and stop complaining.

Isn't stockpiling loot for your next life a form of persistence?

I don't see the relevance of your comment, i guess maybe its supposed to be a snarky remark that DayZ falls into the no persistence category?

Persistance is when you play the same character each time you log in to the game. Your gear, xp, location, etc, carries over. You persist in the game world. Non persistence games would mainly be FPS type games, racing, sports etc. Though most games now do some basic types of persistence it is not true persistence focused on your player character but rather rewards for your account. True persistence is mainly only found in MMO games. Of course this is refering to Multiplayer only.

So here is what I said again:

MMO's or games with persistance do not contain perma death, they are not full open pvp, they don't have realistic damage (Most FPS games don't even have this), games rarley make you eat/drink/stay warm, they are not an open sandbox w/no rules or hand holding.

Games w/out persistance are not full open world, have no significance to death, and have nothing to do with survival.

So DayZ 's features are persistence, giant open world, perma death, full open pvp, realistic damage, survival, sand box zero rules. As you can see niether non peristent or persistent games provide the same feature list, basically no game provides the same feature list. This is why I get frustrated by all of the bitching, whining, and complaining about features that make DayZ completely unique. DayZ is unique in these features because studios don't have the balls to make a game like this because communities/player bases are full of bitches that can't handle perma death by itself let alone a combination of it with PVP.

Edited July 27, 2012 by xXI Mr Two IXx

[Dasein808 12]

x

Edited March 28, 2019 by Dasein808

[mikerunk2011@gmail.com 6]

First things first this is not in Alpha, that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard. When a game is in Alpha it is going through internal and is not handed out to the public. It can't be alpha if every one and there grandmother can play it. If anything I would say it is in open beta. This means it's open to every one to test, which is exactly what Rocket is doing.

Second DayZ is a piss poor example of a sandbox game. I can't believe I'm about to say this because I dislike this game but Eve is a perfect example of a sandbox game. The game is controlled by the players them selves. When you jump in you have all these things you can do but the game doesn't tell you what you have to do to progress through the game, that is for you to decide. The reason Eve is perfect Sandbox game is because the driving force of the game is in it's economics. Everything revolves around the economics. Corps try to secure certain areas of space for the resources, which thus effects the economy. If you take out the economy you have basically a free for all.

DayZ will never be more then what it is as long as Rocket refuse to go get real funding to develop the game. It will take him years to complete DayZ because he doesn't have the capital nor the man power to work on it exclusively. Mean while the whole time he farts around with DayZ and letting the public have access to it other developers are taking his ideas and running with them and guess what they will reap the rewards for it. The Developers for War Z have all ready flat out admitted that they have taken ideas from DayZ and ran with them. They won't be the only ones either. I am sure company developing Class 3 has taken note of DayZ and pulled ideas from it as well. I'm not saying this to be mean I'm saying it cause it's true. Game developers are like vultures they take each others ideas and perfect upon them. Now normally its not big deal because those companys make money off the game they publish and the turn around and do the same thing. However Rocket isn't making any money off of it and he is handing it over to them for free.

Now to the original poster comments, while I laughed at the fact that he died from the door swing inward and hitting him, he is right about the problems with the game. You can say it's alpha but as I all ready pointed out it's not really alpha if every one is playing it, its open beta. It's not really a sandbox if the only two things driving the game is gathering supplies or grief other players. I'm sorry but WoW is more of a sandbox game then DayZ. While yea it leads you by the hand but there tons of options as to what you can do. DayZ not so much it's hunt for food, weapons, and medical supplies once geared up grief other players. There is nothing beyond that in DayZ. The game has absolutely no depth to it what so ever.

I give Rocket high fives for creating a very paranoid game but that alone is not enough to give it the depth that it needs to be a true sandbox game. Like said the game has lot of good ideas and things that work but I just don't see it going beyond it be what we see now unless he gets real funding and it becomes its own title and not Arma 2 little $$%.

One other thing, Rocket wants this to be simulation but here the thing players are never going to react the way they would in real life because it is just a game. If the game where real most of the players would be scared out of the living minds. You spend days weeks alone in world full of Zombies you're first action upon see another living person isn't to blow there brains out, in fact its going to be get information. Second while some people while turn to lawlessness not every one will and those that do won't survive long and I'll tell you why.

When Zombie outbreak occurs society will break down and there will be lot of discord. People will turn to killing and stealing to survive. However groups of people will begin pulling together and working with one another to survive. This will make it harder for lone bandits to kill and steal what they need, so they to will begin to pull together to survive. Ask you're self this if you were suddenly in zombie apocalypse do you right now have enough knowledge to go out hunt game, clean that game and make a meal. Do you have enough medical knowledge to fix you're self up if you're hurt or sick. Do you have the skills to make cloths or build shelter. Fact is most people in world lack at least a few if not all basic skills to survive long term, so there only chance of survival is to do one of two things, either work with others to survive that can make up for your lack of skills, this also provides protection from Zombies and raiders and bandits. The other is to be a bandit, but eventually as people begin to pull together killing stealing will be much risker then it would be to work with others. Also eventually you're weapons will no longer work because no one makes ammo any more and because of this you have no bullets for you're weapons. You might find it the cities but that is more then likely were all the friggen zombies will be and that means even greater risk then raiding small to larger community of people.

Dasein808 is right civility does fade when resource are scarce and people are afraid. However some people will pull together and use skills they have or at least work to help themselves and others survive. What Dasein808 is wrong about is that resources are all around use. You don't need to go to the store to buy food cause you can find food in nature, you just have to have the skills to get it. You can make cloths you just need to have the skills to know how to make them. The smart people will realize this and while there guard might be up there going to pull together to share resources and to take skills they posses to help themselves and others survive, and guess what that is how societies are started and built off of, many people pull skills and resources for the common good. The problem is most people lack the skills need for basic survival. I would say about 90% of the people here would not make it in a zombie apolcalypse not because of the Zombies but because the have no real skills to bank on in order to survive. So as I said that leaves you two choice work with others or kill and steal but that will only work for so long.

So Rocket should think about that a bit when working on DayZ. That is just my opinion any way.

[FalafelCopter 20]

As I said before bugs and or crappy mechanics will be corrected over time. You don't fix bugs or crappy mechanics with new features or mechanics, you fix the problems. I would also argue that many players fighting the S coast bean wars don't go back to tents but instead server hop locations in the south coast, its true some groups return S for lulz but they are not the ones always there.

Fixing the bugs is a suggestion for how to solve the problem. Period. I don't see what you're confused about here?

1) I think its safe to say that people playing only to DM would continue to only DM even with another meter to fill.

Some of them would, and it's fine that they would. Any change that completely stops people from doing this would be far too strict a change.

2) I'm not saying the game will stir the same amount of emotion as being trapped on a desert island IRL, I'm only saying the game should and I think does convey through current play enough emotion/frustration to make players want to group up. I'm not saying this solves KOS/Bandits/DM at all only that it does somewhat suck to play by yourself already and theres no need to have an in game bar telling me this. I think most players do group up already, as I've said in other posts instead of complaining about getting killed in a million posts people should make posts in survivor/bandit forum. WTF group to play with M,w,F 9-12 CST Newb LTP, problem solved.

The problem is that the game currently doesn't support grouping up with players you meet in the game. You have your players that you met up with in the forums and teamspeak, and everyone else in the game is an enemy that needs to be shot on sight. It all reinforces the idea that anyone you meet in the game that you don't know outside of the game needs to either be killed or escaped with out even the smallest urge to try to communicate with them. Things should not be that black and white. For a mod that tries to be realistic, it veers incredibly far away from realism in some of the places where it matters the most.

I don't see the relevance of your comment, i guess maybe its supposed to be a snarky remark that DayZ falls into the no persistence category?

Persistance is when you play the same character each time you log in to the game. Your gear, xp, location, etc, carries over. You persist in the game world. Non persistence games would mainly be FPS type games, racing, sports etc. Though most games now do some basic types of persistence it is not true persistence focused on your player character but rather rewards for your account. True persistence is mainly only found in MMO games. Of course this is refering to Multiplayer only.

So here is what I said again:

MMO's or games with persistance do not contain perma death, they are not full open pvp, they don't have realistic damage (Most FPS games don't even have this), games rarley make you eat/drink/stay warm, they are not an open sandbox w/no rules or hand holding.

Games w/out persistance are not full open world, have no significance to death, and have nothing to do with survival.

So DayZ 's features are persistence, giant open world, perma death, full open pvp, realistic damage, survival, sand box zero rules. As you can see niether non peristent or persistent games provide the same feature list, basically no game provides the same feature list. This is why I get frustrated by all of the bitching, whining, and complaining about features that make DayZ completely unique. DayZ is unique in these features because studios don't have the balls to make a game like this because communities/player bases are full of bitches that can't handle perma death by itself let alone a combination of it with PVP.

First of all, quit it with the misogynist slurs, seriously. Yeah, all the people who disagree with you are whiny bitches, right? Game developers who don't make games you like lack balls? Grow up and quit with the aggressive language and discuss the topics at hand.

Second, yes, I get it, this game is unique for now. If it's successful enough it'll spawn an entire genre and everyone will probably get what they want. I understand that you'd be frustrated with people providing suggestions that make it slightly less your baby, since there aren't any other games for you to go to if this one starts to go in a direction you don't like. However, nobody in this topic want to remove any of the features you list. (Except, "no rules" is incredibly vague. Combat logging is against the rules, and racism is grounds for serve bans, so there's plenty of rules, but now I'm definitely nitpicking.)

Third, I thought for a second you were trying to say that this game didn't have persistence. I see now that you are, but I don't really know if the way you're using it is the way it's generally used in games. The games that have the most persistence as you describe it (having a single character that persists after logging out) are MMOs, which are almost never described using that word. It generally only refers to games where you normally wouldn't keep your progress after a "match", where you don't lose all of that progress. Generally what that means is that you can start with better stuff next time you play. In other words, I would be more likely to describe getting items from your stash after respawning as persistence than simply logging back in to the same character. In a sense, that just means your "match" hasn't ended yet. Anyway, sorry for the misunderstanding there.

Fourth: Is the ability to gather loot from your stash after dying counter to the idea of a hardcore permadeath game? Shouldn't death mean having to start over with a flashlight from the coast? Doesn't knowing that you can just wander over and grab yourself a full set of gear again dull the fear and caution you should be having? Isn't that a step away from the hardcore realism that people seem to want out of this game? Or do people only want hardcore realism when it suits them?

[MrBrown (DayZ) 26]

People have such faith in civilization and civilized behavior, but they really should not.

I've witnessed otherwise civilized people (fatherly-types) break into fist fights at a gas station during a hurricane evacuation. It's both surprising and depressing.

When resources are scarce and people are afraid, the gloss of civility fades quite fast.

I still consider the amount of shooting on sight very unrealistic. IMHO a fist fight during a evacuation cannot be compared to that. I can imagine long queues at the gas station causing stress because there are so many people at the same spot, too many people, too few resources - but that's a totally different situation. People in DayZ don't shoot each other because somebody cut the line at a crowded supermarket. I guess some survivors in a real DayZ scenario wouldn't have talked to other human beings for days or even weeks. Imagine someone visiting Tom Hanks on his island in Castaway just to get stabbed in the face by him.

The problem is that the game currently doesn't support grouping up with players you meet in the game. You have your players that you met up with in the forums and teamspeak, and everyone else in the game is an enemy that needs to be shot on sight. It all reinforces the idea that anyone you meet in the game that you don't know outside of the game needs to either be killed or escaped with out even the smallest urge to try to communicate with them. Things should not be that black and white. For a mod that tries to be realistic, it veers incredibly far away from realism in some of the places where it matters the most.

Quoted for truth

Fourth: Is the ability to gather loot from your stash after dying counter to the idea of a hardcore permadeath game? Shouldn't death mean having to start over with a flashlight from the coast? Doesn't knowing that you can just wander over and grab yourself a full set of gear again dull the fear and caution you should be having? Isn't that a step away from the hardcore realism that people seem to want out of this game? Or do people only want hardcore realism when it suits them?

That's pretty much the point I wanted to make. The player still knows where the tent is which his last character placed. The player still knows that his last character got shot in the face on sight. And this influences the game in an unrealistic way. IMHO some mechanisms to counter that should be implemented, even if they are unrealistic too then. I don't know how it was when you got a bandit skin for murdering people, I'm pretty new to the game. If that idea was scrapped because it just didn't improve anything, I can accept that. If the idea was scrapped because it was considered "unrealistic", I'd find that a pretty stupid decision.

[xximrtwoixx 104]

The problem is that the game currently doesn't support grouping up with players you meet in the game. You have your players that you met up with in the forums and teamspeak, and everyone else in the game is an enemy that needs to be shot on sight. It all reinforces the idea that anyone you meet in the game that you don't know outside of the game needs to either be killed or escaped with out even the smallest urge to try to communicate with them. Things should not be that black and white. For a mod that tries to be realistic, it veers incredibly far away from realism in some of the places where it matters the most.

I guess we have a fundemental disagreement on this, I do believe this is "realisitic". Part of this stems from available actions in game, there is no point to a group much larger than 10 in the game. After that its diminishing returns for all of the members. Also when looking at primitive societies or going back in history social groups are much smaller for pretty much the same reasons as above if your hand to mouth and greater works are beyond your abilities/knowledge a large group becomes a detriment to everyone's survival. These groups are in conflict over resources just as they are in DayZ, so violence between them is a given. This stems from a concept called "zero sum", ie everything is finite. In this type of scenario someone elses success is comes at the cost of your own success, this is why no mercy is shown. Each encounter is a war of attrition with other players or groups, its why you destroy someone's camp/vehcile if you aren't able to take it youself. If the less success they have mean the more success you will be able to have.In confict scenarios things do become black and white especially when the time to asses the situation is greatly reduced. When you meet a random one player either has initiative, ie they are unaware of you, the greatest advantage in combat or they both see each other at the same time. So a player chooses to throw away their advantage or their time to choose shoot or don't is litterally 1-3 seconds maybe less. There is no time for shades of gray. The difference between players is that some do not look to take advantage of initiative, ie stalk and shoot, and some do.

Fourth: Is the ability to gather loot from your stash after dying counter to the idea of a hardcore permadeath game? Shouldn't death mean having to start over with a flashlight from the coast? Doesn't knowing that you can just wander over and grab yourself a full set of gear again dull the fear and caution you should be having? Isn't that a step away from the hardcore realism that people seem to want out of this game? Or do people only want hardcore realism when it suits them?

I agree that having items you stored in the game world persist after your death does lessen your fear of death, I'm not sure if I believe it is outside the scope of "hardcore" realism though. If everything you were able to store away disappeared that would be rather imersion breaking as other people in your group may be depending on the items inside your tent. I also think this is balanced out by the fact that nothing is safe in game everything is accessable by other players. I also don't think a mechanic could be implemented to disallow a player from aquiring the gear they've stored in some way, it could be stored in someone elses tent, they could go into your tent etc.I also view this as a benefit from being successful in game, if you are able to beat the risks associated with amassing alot of gear then it is there to reward you, its like after your first character your second was a "prepper" before shtf. I also think the arguement against gear storage is a red hearing in terms of KOS, DM, Bandits, etc. Everyone has the same oppertunity to store gear, players that want to dm will dm with a mack if thats all they have the gear doesn't matter, and the gear advantage is really a false argument to me because gear isn't balanced in the traditional sense. An AKM, Winchester, Lee enfield, CZ, or handgun is just as deadly as an M4 CCO, M14 AIM, MP5SD, DMR, AS50 etc. Player skill is far more important than the gun you have. It's true some weapon systems have capabilities greater than others (range, optics), but a skilled player can easily overcome this through planning and awareness. I have killed plenty of well geared players with a whiny, 870, and even a mack. If I respawn and see an alice pack I'm going to try to kill you for it period.

I still consider the amount of shooting on sight very unrealistic. IMHO a fist fight during a evacuation cannot be compared to that. I can imagine long queues at the gas station causing stress because there are so many people at the same spot, too many people, too few resources - but that's a totally different situation. People in DayZ don't shoot each other because somebody cut the line at a crowded supermarket. I guess some survivors in a real DayZ scenario wouldn't have talked to other human beings for days or even weeks. Imagine someone visiting Tom Hanks on his island in Castaway just to get stabbed in the face by him.

They don't shoot each other for cutting in line they shoot each other because they went to the grocery store. If I'm going to the grocery store and your going to the grocery store more items don't magically appear there. If you get a compass, food and handgun I don't get those things. This is compiled by the fact that if you already went to the firehouse and school I get all of that stuff if I shoot you too, and avoid the risks you took going to those places. My caloric/risk coefficient just went through the roof. The mentality in game isn't the shock just after shtf where people are still holding on to society, its the brutal state of nature, much more like 3 days past katrina whre people killed each other for food....If someone showed up on Tom's island and stole his gear/food shit on wilson then left, then this happend again 7 times, I'm sure by the 8th he would have been eating that guy.Also if your walking around chern with a painted volleyball because no one will play with you I strongly advise joining the ts channel on the server or making a need group post in the forum.

That's pretty much the point I wanted to make. The player still knows where the tent is which his last character placed. The player still knows that his last character got shot in the face on sight. And this influences the game in an unrealistic way. IMHO some mechanisms to counter that should be implemented, even if they are unrealistic too then. I don't know how it was when you got a bandit skin for murdering people, I'm pretty new to the game. If that idea was scrapped because it just didn't improve anything, I can accept that. If the idea was scrapped because it was considered "unrealistic", I'd find that a pretty stupid decision.

See above for how tents/gear is a red hearing.The bandit skin was scrapped because eventually everyone would have a bandit skin as you need to defend yourself in this game. Thats how counters work, they count each thing, and you can't arbitrarly count a dynamic action. If they count on your account everyone becomes a bandit over lives, if they count on your character people become bandits because they shoot bandits that are not yet bandits on that character. Edited July 27, 2012 by xXI Mr Two IXx

[Mojo Jojo 6]

Or do people only want hardcore realism when it suits them?

LOL, you really need to ask? Everyone on this board who harps about hardcore realism has a tent city located 5 miles off the map packed with gear and coordinates with teammates in-game using a 3rd party utility. Realism is for the chumps they mercilessly slaughter.

[MrBrown (DayZ) 26]

This stems from a concept called "zero sum", ie everything is finite. In this type of scenario someone elses success is comes at the cost of your own success, this is why no mercy is shown.

If most of the kills would be a product of that mindset, I wouldn't complain. But that's NOT the reason why most bandits kill in DayZ, and it's really obvious. Many people gear up on empty servers, and then hide somewhere around Elektro and join a full server to snipe people, like "Aaah, finally I got my standard shooter equipment, fuck that survival shit. And how easy it is to annoy all those people here now, TROLOLO so funny!"

If the game would really give me the feeling that my death enabled somebody else to survive longer (in the "zero sum" sense, not in the "I need to shoot first to not get shot" sense), it would be a different story. But that's simply not the case in DayZ currently. Theoretically, if food and equipment only respawned on a server reset and servers wouldn't get reset every few hours, and you couldn't just take your stuff from one server to another - THEN we could start talking about "zero sum". But currently? Not so much!

If someone showed up on Tom's island and stole his gear/food shit on wilson then left, then this happend again 7 times, I'm sure by the 8th he would have been eating that guy.

I was talking about shooting the first person you see in a long time in the face without talking a single word before. Not about constant human interaction which goes wrong until you're finally fed up with the people.

Thats how counters work, they count each thing, and you can't arbitrarly count a dynamic action. If they count on your account everyone becomes a bandit over lives, if they count on your character people become bandits because they shoot bandits that are not yet bandits on that character.

Just because the problem is hard to solve, doesn't mean it's not worth to try. Perhaps not bandit skins. Perhaps some more stuff like blood transfusions, where you need a friendly person to survive. Whatever.

LOL, you really need to ask? Everyone on this board who harps about hardcore realism has a tent city located 5 miles off the map packed with gear and coordinates with teammates in-game using a 3rd party utility. Realism is for the chumps they mercilessly slaughter.

Quoted for truth

Edited July 27, 2012 by MrBrown

[xximrtwoixx 104]

If most of the kills would be a product of that mindset, I wouldn't complain. But that's NOT the reason why most bandits kill in DayZ, and it's really obvious. Many people gear up on empty servers, and then hide somewhere around Elektro and join a full server to snipe people, like "Aaah, finally I got my standard shooter equipment, fuck that survival shit. And how easy it is to annoy all those people here now, TROLOLO so funny!"

If the game would really give me the feeling that my death enabled somebody else to survive longer (in the "zero sum" sense, not in the "I need to shoot first to not get shot" sense), it would be a different story. But that's simply not the case in DayZ currently. Theoretically, if food and equipment only respawned on a server reset and servers wouldn't get reset every few hours, and you couldn't just take your stuff from one server to another - THEN we could start talking about "zero sum". But currently? Not so much!

I agree that server hopping allows people trolling the coast an easy way to aquire gear, but I think that will be worked out its a bad mechanic that really effects "playing the game" but has little effect on "testing" the game.

Loot is zero sum because everyone judges it at the same rate, Time. Yes you can go find anything given enough time and the associated risk, but if you shoot someone and take it you not only steal their gear but all of the time they spent aquiring it, thats why even though there is an infinite supply loot is still judged as finite because everyone only has a finite amount of time to play the game.

The "I need to Shoot first to not get shot" sense is your death enabling somebody else to survive from their POV.

Look at the Bandit to survivor numbers, the everyone is a mass murdering d bag argument just doesn't add up. A much higher percentage of players would be listed as bandits and not survivors if this was the case. I have 10 murders and only 2 bandit kills currently, and most of them have come via group v group combat, this experiance accompanied by the numbers makes me believe that the horrible bandit clans with epic gear stored in giant tent cities that only troll cherno/electro are a complete falicy. They spend most of their time at NW.

I also believe that your humanity/heartbeat carries over after your death because after my last respawn my crew told me I still had a crazy heart beat but I only had one murder. This would infer that players remain listed as bandits even after they respawn, so I think the numbers posted are accurate.

Also whenever anyone in our group dies they conduct a mandatory hospital loot run in Cherno or Electro, this way we don't risk all of our stuff going back there. When these occur there will be random griefers trying to snipe sometimes but most of the kills we get or times we are killed occur in close quarter stumble into encounters. You hear/see someone coming to the building your in or want to go in or you bump into them inside/exiting a building. Either an ambush occurs or gun fire is exchanged and someone's dead. I think these can easily be considered conflicts over loot as most people going to these locations are going there to get stuff and gtfo. In my experiance I get many more murders than bandit kills when this occurs.

When i get killed I also like to check the standard sniper spots to see if I can get an easy kill on a sniper looking down range, and most of the time the trolls sitting there have rather low end gear standard packs with enfields or AKs. Its gotten be a waste of time as the players never have anything good, to find the good loot on players you still have to go N to stary or NW.

I was talking about shooting the first person you see in a long time in the face without talking a single word before. Not about constant human interaction which goes wrong until you're finally fed up with the people.

I was trying to make the point that becaues players respawn an interaction is the sum of all their previously experianced interactions in game. Before we had so many in our group I talked to people, now I don't as they serve no purpose to me, I think this is a common mindset.

LOL, you really need to ask? Everyone on this board who harps about hardcore realism has a tent city located 5 miles off the map packed with gear and coordinates with teammates in-game using a 3rd party utility. Realism is for the chumps they mercilessly slaughter.

This is because the subset of players that are most concerned with realism and keeping DayZ hardcore are the same players that played Arma for an extended period of time before DayZ. They are much more experianced with all of the clunky mechanics, ladder/door bugs, shooting with realisitic balistics, and most importantly spotting other players. They are members of Arma based gaming communities or have friends that also play, and are usually PC gaming vets that only use third party chat clients as their group owns a server. Basically they are better than the chumps they are slaughtering IG...

Edited July 27, 2012 by xXI Mr Two IXx

[Deadmeat8222 1]

TEXT FEST

if you read this well done.

Let me start this out, as a fairly new player, by saying that the PvP in this game is one of the main reasons i was drawn to it however i was also drawn to the level of player interaction and the tension of not knowing when to trust them. At first i liked the nailbiting tension when meeting another survivor and not knowing whether they were a bandit or not (joined after the bandit skins were removed) calling out over direct "friendly?"

However after the 4th death to the hands of my fellow "survivors" even when i was a fresh spawn just looking for tips from veteran players, I started to follow the same mentality as the people i met which is just, Oh look a survivor, he has a gun, Kill him or go into another Firefight....

The way the players have acted to me and to each other is slowly killing what i still even now think is an amazing game, however this KoS mentality is slowly pushing me away from any player interaction as i simply cannot trust anyone enough to even lend a hand when i see them being chased by zombies or in dire situations.

So that is why i think some sort of identification system should be in place, not because i am butthurt, just because the amount of greifing and KoS is killing the human interaction in the game short of getting people you know in RL and using teamspeak

After reading this thread i came upon some great suggestions, aside from the ones such as lowering the spawn rates/ ammo spawns of military weapons to make them rarer which i have seen in other threads, one such idea i saw, that i liked, was of your character having some sort of sanity level which drops the more you kill, therefore adding subtle but slightly detrimental effects, such as shaky hands, faster breathing for a while after the murder Ect,ect, also as mentioned before in this thread you would be able to use alcohol/drugs to offset against the effects but you would suffer the effects again when the Booze/pill wear off, and the effects of the murder could also would also wear off in time so it isnt a permenant thing incase it was just self defence or you want to go straight. I think this would be a good idea to elaborate upon and would reccomend making a thread in suggestions as i think it would add a level of humanity and try to balance out the Survivor Vs Bandit Dilemma without adding any Major Nerfs and not gearing it especially twords one side

However the first thing must be to fix the item duping, alt F4'ing and server hopping, this would at least even the playing ground out a bit more having people know if they die it isnt just a quick run to their tent to get another DmR and more rounds they would lose everything the same as the people they kill do.

And i know people will just tell me to play a different game, but the game i was drawn to is vastly different to the DM fest that i got.

TL;DR

Add sanity level, goes back to normal after time, too much KoS, Game feels too much like DM.

[libertine 351]

Oh and another thing, a key factor in this game is realism. Thats how things would go down if this happened in real life, whether you believe or not.

Im so sick of ignorant comment like this. I've thought long and hard about what it would be like in your typical apocalypse. Comments like this simply show what your like in real life btw, don't count on others sharing your views. What your saying is that you'd be a idiot wandering killer while the majority got together, did the tough work, following a clear and OBVIOUS path they know has room for peace and they would rebuild or help each other as much as they could. You'd be the adventurer, out to get his endorphins flowing, killing peoples husbands and fathers, eventually realizing you were just a fucking murdering dumbshit with a ignorant, selfish child's dream about being a justified lone wolf in the apocalypse.

[FalafelCopter 20]

I think people should take a look at the walking dead graphic novels. They have the most well thought out and psychological approach to life during a zombie apocalypse that I've seen so far. Yes, there's a lot of banditry there, but almost never on first sight.

[{NZA} DELTA 9]

i think pvp is part of the game. (the only thing that pisses me off, are hackers.) i think who you have the real problem with is yourself and where you fit with this game.

Cause it wouldnt be happening if people didnt want it to happen right?

But you should just go with the flow. i think getting good with the small stuff will keep you alive longer rather than seeking the big stuff . and WHEN you get owned, you wont be too pissed off.

[Dasein808 12]

x

Edited March 28, 2019 by Dasein808

[SmokeytheBear 8]

Each encounter is a war of attrition with other players or groups, its why you destroy someone's camp/vehcile if you aren't able to take it youself.

I may be taking this way out of context, but there's an old parable about this. A ship goes down and 3 guys survive the initial sinking and manage to get a life raft off the side. The problem is, there's only room for at the very most 2 people. The first kind of person jumps in right away and says he'll kill anybody who says he can't be one of the survivors. The second guy pushes off the side of the raft and says "That's ok, I'll be the one who makes the sacrifice." Before he can say this and drown himself though, the third man sees him grasp onto the side of the raft and thinking he's going to say what the first guy did, he grabs a sharp piece of debris from the wreckage of the ship and pops the raft. "If I can't survive. Then no one will."

All 3 men die.

Regarding your "zero sum" statement, by your description even an item respawning in .0001 seconds would still be considered temporally finite, so where do you draw the line? Or is literally everything zero sum in a video game? Just curious.

In regards to small groups are how primal societies formed and operated, I think you're pretty wrong. Starting from the dawn of time: Mesopotamians, Babylonians, Hebrews, Phoenicians, Greeks, Persians, Romans, Arabs, Turks, Chinese, Japanese, British, French, American... Most of those are more than 10 people I think. No matter what technological age you're in, massive amounts of (able-bodied) people working together will always bring greater benefits to the society (within huge limits at least) because they can do things that aren't possible in this game. Farming, construction, infrastructure, production, invention, whatever. The only thing you can do in this game is forage and defend. The first one is counterproductive with even adding a partner and the second gets cumbersome with like you said, about 10 people.

That's why we're asking for things like this.

We want to be able to do something, anything really, besides forage and shoot everything that moves. This isn't the same problem as having no interface (friends list, in-game whispers, even a functional direct chat, etc.) to interact with other people, but it does explain why many have turned to being a griefer, and consequently why the people they've killed have turned into paranoid KoSers that ruins any semblance of a group aspect in a survival game.

You are right, a fist fight does not compare, but it's all that I personally witnessed. The amount of shooting is unrealistic because it's a game with little repercussion for death other than lost time, but I can assure you that in times of crisis the morons often get itchy trigger fingers.

Some people were killed by gunfire in similar gas station disputes during that evacuation, but I didn't witness them. The accounts exist and some people died as a result.

We're animals, but some of us revert to a reptillian mindset quicker then others. There's typically a correlation between how educated the person in question may be and how long they can maintain their civility.

I can say that I've personally murdered a person along the coast for a bandage because I didn't have time to bargain. It's not something I'd do ordinarily, but under the circumstances it was kill or bleed out while negotiating.

Many people behave atypically in times of crisis, but some also utilize the same circumstances to advance their usual day to day antisocial power starved agenda in ways that they may not be able to in times of civilized calm.

If we're just animals when we don't have excess and luxury, how did we ever get to that point of excess and luxury? I hear that phrase a lot and I've never understood how people can say that man is a senseless beast when we've accomplished so much from the day the first two humans spoke. Did you say it was two fathers that got into a fight? Did they do it because they're amoral beasts? Or were they actually the opposite, doing what they could to selflessly look out for the welfare of their family in an uncertain situation with a violent stranger?

...I bet Rocket jacks off while reading everybody debating the nature of human existence on a forum for a video game.

Edited July 28, 2012 by SmokeytheBear

[JKflipflop 40]

Yeah, I was playing this morning trying to herd up all the new people just joining the game and I realized that I'm pretty much bored of DayZ. It really is just a ARMA deathmatch with all the good weapons taken away. If I wanted to play PvP, there's a million games out there that do it better than this one.

[siiz 0]

I'm trying to play this game without being a "bandit" but it's quite hard. However, I think what makes it hard is that I've been shot at seemingly just for the hell of it. I now just don't want to see another survivor and I'll actually hide from them...

I did meet one person who helped me out I think his name was Jji or Jjii. I was on top of a hopsital and I heard someone call out friendly and I hadn't played this game in awhile so I forgot the bind key for VOIP and he shot me. I then remembered it was CAPS and immediately said something about how I forgot my bind key and I really didn't have gear anyways so it didn't matter that he shot me. He then apologized and gave me a blood transfusion and we pillaged the hospital together and I stuck with him. We came across multiple dead players and he let me take an AK-74 off of one the dead bodies that were there before we arrived. As we crossed the street we got shot at and we knew the bandit was going to come around and try to flank us. The bandit went around the walled building we were hiding out at and both him and the bandit shot at each other but the bandit killed him which surprised me because it looked like we got the drop on him and he'd shot before the bandit could respond. I then unloaded half a mag into the bandit and killed him. It was a lot of gunfire and I started getting really nervous after the initial adrenaline rush of the skirmish. I thought about waiting for him to respawn but I felt I couldn't stay there any longer since there were about 50 rounds fired in about 6 seconds so I looted both the dead bodies and ran out of Elektrozavodsk.

However it seems like this is a outlier; an exception. Most people just shoot on sight. I've been sniped and shot in Elektrozavodsk multiple times and had one weird incident while trying to loot Stary Sabor someone was hiding among the dead bodies prone and tried to shoot me with an AKM. He missed and I immediately booked it for one of the tents and asked why the hell he's shooting at me. He replied by saying just to kill him and I watched him from the tent crawl towards my tent. I said I could help him, I had morphine and blood but he just kept saying, "KILL ME..", so I obliged because I didn't know if he was trying to confuse me. The only other time I've shot someone was because he startled me as I was looting the apartments, he kept crawling towards my apartment building and I had to make a split decision whether or not to shoot him or not and I ended up shooting him.

...it would be nice if when you saw a survivor you were more thrilled to see another living person as opposed to be scared out of your mind.

Edited July 28, 2012 by Sii

[Dasein808 12]

x

Edited March 28, 2019 by Dasein808

[xximrtwoixx 104]

Second DayZ is a piss poor example of a sandbox game. I can't believe I'm about to say this because I dislike this game but Eve is a perfect example of a sandbox game. The game is controlled by the players them selves. When you jump in you have all these things you can do but the game doesn't tell you what you have to do to progress through the game, that is for you to decide. The reason Eve is perfect Sandbox game is because the driving force of the game is in it's economics. Everything revolves around the economics. Corps try to secure certain areas of space for the resources, which thus effects the economy. If you take out the economy you have basically a free for all.

Day Z's economy at this point is gear and vehicles, all conflict centers around these objects or where players aquire these objects. I don't think this is that far off from EVE, its just that DayZ's currency is bullets. Also there are no safe zones in DayZ as there are in eve so the player base is more violent, because there is no option to be peacefull.

Now to the original poster comments, while I laughed at the fact that he died from the door swing inward and hitting him, he is right about the problems with the game. You can say it's alpha but as I all ready pointed out it's not really alpha if every one is playing it, its open beta. It's not really a sandbox if the only two things driving the game is gathering supplies or grief other players. I'm sorry but WoW is more of a sandbox game then DayZ. While yea it leads you by the hand but there tons of options as to what you can do. DayZ not so much it's hunt for food, weapons, and medical supplies once geared up grief other players. There is nothing beyond that in DayZ. The game has absolutely no depth to it what so ever.

I don't think you understand or maybe don't appreciate what a sandbox is. In Day Z you can do whatever you want and other players can do whatever they want to help, oppose, or just shit on your experiance. Example: A group of players decides they want to become bandit overlords so they occupy all major cities and military locations. Anyone who tries to enter these locations is killed so as to keep the rest of the populace under equiped and starving. The bandits then send out groups to disburse food and notify players they can be fed at location x, now players amass at location x. The bandits now tell them they will do xyz or they won't be fed and instead will be killed. Now the bandits have a slave army.

Another example would be free side trading company, they are an in game merchant organiztion the emergent gameplay they generate can be complimented by other players trading or bandits trying to steal from them.

This is what a sandbox is about, allowing players to do what they want. Some player would rather know that they can do x here or y there and get z as a reward ie WOW than generate their own experiances in game.

Alot of emergent game play is effected by current exploits or mechanics or lack there of. These things will be cleared up as the mod gets older or in standalone, they are a bigger problem with game play than testing so they are not a huge priority at this point.

As far as the status of the mod, the fact that you say its beta doesn't make your point more valid than another person who says its alpha. Really the *mod* is a poc (proof of concept) that was not designed to be alpha or beta, but an example that could convince studios that this type of game could be successful. I could make a mod and throw it on an ftp and have it be complete crap this doesn't mean its alpha nor does the fact that you can download it make it beta.

One other thing, Rocket wants this to be simulation but here the thing players are never going to react the way they would in real life because it is just a game. If the game where real most of the players would be scared out of the living minds. You spend days weeks alone in world full of Zombies you're first action upon see another living person isn't to blow there brains out, in fact its going to be get information. Second while some people while turn to lawlessness not every one will and those that do won't survive long and I'll tell you why.

When Zombie outbreak occurs society will break down and there will be lot of discord. People will turn to killing and stealing to survive. However groups of people will begin pulling together and working with one another to survive. This will make it harder for lone bandits to kill and steal what they need, so they to will begin to pull together to survive. Ask you're self this if you were suddenly in zombie apocalypse do you right now have enough knowledge to go out hunt game, clean that game and make a meal. Do you have enough medical knowledge to fix you're self up if you're hurt or sick. Do you have the skills to make cloths or build shelter. Fact is most people in world lack at least a few if not all basic skills to survive long term, so there only chance of survival is to do one of two things, either work with others to survive that can make up for your lack of skills, this also provides protection from Zombies and raiders and bandits. The other is to be a bandit, but eventually as people begin to pull together killing stealing will be much risker then it would be to work with others. Also eventually you're weapons will no longer work because no one makes ammo any more and because of this you have no bullets for you're weapons. You might find it the cities but that is more then likely were all the friggen zombies will be and that means even greater risk then raiding small to larger community of people.

Dasein808 is right civility does fade when resource are scarce and people are afraid. However some people will pull together and use skills they have or at least work to help themselves and others survive. What Dasein808 is wrong about is that resources are all around use. You don't need to go to the store to buy food cause you can find food in nature, you just have to have the skills to get it. You can make cloths you just need to have the skills to know how to make them. The smart people will realize this and while there guard might be up there going to pull together to share resources and to take skills they posses to help themselves and others survive, and guess what that is how societies are started and built off of, many people pull skills and resources for the common good. The problem is most people lack the skills need for basic survival. I would say about 90% of the people here would not make it in a zombie apolcalypse not because of the Zombies but because the have no real skills to bank on in order to survive. So as I said that leaves you two choice work with others or kill and steal but that will only work for so long.

Societies are formed when people are willing to trade in an amount of their personal freedom for security. As we can all attest life in Dayz is violent, when players are willing to trade in their own freedom in game, ie your being told what to do and your actually doing it, then societies will form in game. This has already occured with many small groups and some rather large groups, (See FreeSide) Most early societys are ruled by the beast you know, ie a group or individual thats nastier than all the other nasties and thus can protect people who are to weak to deal with the other nasties.

I agree that this is and should be a simulation, that doesn't mean its reality. The goal is to generate authentic interactions and emotions from players, when this occurs players behave in an authentic way that is fairly standardized as each player has basically the same experiance in the simulation. Like it or not the behaviour that *is* authentic is kill every other SOB out there so they don't kill you and if you get there stuff its a bonus. As I said once players are willing to trade in their own freedoms in game then this will change, this could be through mechanics or gamification (This would suck) or it would be because players form societies. I think most players will quit before this point and another majority will refuse to realize that they are not the cream of the gentic crop in game (they suck) and will simply continue on their current path. Also group or society size will be limited to the number of players that are usefull. If your freeside you need alot of people if you want to make a sweet tent city with uber loot you only need 4 or 5. Because its a true sandbox players are also left with the choice of how ambitious they want to be.

I do agree that specialization needs to be added to the game, Rocket has talked about adding this through a skill system so I'm sure its in the works. For not being alpha there is alot of testing of how to mold a concept into a game...

TEXT FEST

if you read this well done.

Read it, everything you said was said by someone else earlier in the thread. You should read it....

Im so sick of ignorant comment like this. I've thought long and hard about what it would be like in your typical apocalypse. Comments like this simply show what your like in real life btw, don't count on others sharing your views. What your saying is that you'd be a idiot wandering killer while the majority got together, did the tough work, following a clear and OBVIOUS path they know has room for peace and they would rebuild or help each other as much as they could. You'd be the adventurer, out to get his endorphins flowing, killing peoples husbands and fathers, eventually realizing you were just a fucking murdering dumbshit with a ignorant, selfish child's dream about being a justified lone wolf in the apocalypse.

Since you thought long and hard about it I guess I'll take your word for it? I also think you should follow your own advice, "Don't count on others sharing your views".

No one can say how a scenario would work IRL if it never happend, you can only look at the examples or scenarios that mostly resemble it. Throwing pop culture out the window and looking at historical examples of modern society collapsing or at examples prior to society existing should give us clues.

How did people live prior to society- ----------Small family/tribal groups --------------- Pretty close to DayZ

How did people act prior to society------------- Groups fought over territory and resources -------- Again pretty close to Day Z

How violent/shitty were people to each other before society- -----Pretty shitty thats why they gave up their freedom to form societies -----We're there people just aren't ready to give shit up yet...

How did people live when society collapsed- -------Small family/friend groups (Some sheep still do what the government says (See super dome)) -----Again pretty close

How did people act when society collapsed- ------People were so afraid and desperate they killed each other just 24 hours after Katrina---- Sounds like DayZ

How violent/shitty were people to each other after society collapsed-------- Look at the superdome, rape and murder with tons of bystanders. Look at the Horn of Africa now, we can be pretty nasty to each other.----Just like DayZ

[xximrtwoixx 104]

I may be taking this way out of context, but there's an old parable about this. A ship goes down and 3 guys survive the initial sinking and manage to get a life raft off the side. The problem is, there's only room for at the very most 2 people. The first kind of person jumps in right away and says he'll kill anybody who says he can't be one of the survivors. The second guy pushes off the side of the raft and says "That's ok, I'll be the one who makes the sacrifice." Before he can say this and drown himself though, the third man sees him grasp onto the side of the raft and thinking he's going to say what the first guy did, he grabs a sharp piece of debris from the wreckage of the ship and pops the raft. "If I can't survive. Then no one will."

All 3 men die.

Sailors dilemma, prisoners dilemma, Thief’s dilemma there are a lot of these. I think its true that any decision can be judged as fitting into one of the three categories, selfish, selfless, or Troll.

Regarding your "zero sum" statement, by your description even an item respawning in .0001 seconds would still be considered temporally finite, so where do you draw the line? Or is literally everything zero sum in a video game? Just curious.

I'm of the opinion that everything is zero sum in everything. I think most people play games with a healthy sense of rational self-interest and will almost always act to maximize their own interests. This is why people that want an action fix will always shoot at you even if they know it will mean their death, they are valuing their entertainment more than their characters life. Also who would want anything that respawns in .0001 seconds?

In regards to small groups are how primal societies formed and operated, I think you're pretty wrong. Starting from the dawn of time: Mesopotamians, Babylonians, Hebrews, Phoenicians, Greeks, Persians, Romans, Arabs, Turks, Chinese, Japanese, British, French, American... Most of those are more than 10 people I think. No matter what technological age you're in, massive amounts of (able-bodied) people working together will always bring greater benefits to the society (within huge limits at least) because they can do things that aren't possible in this game. Farming, construction, infrastructure, production, invention, whatever. The only thing you can do in this game is forage and defend. The first one is counterproductive with even adding a partner and the second gets cumbersome with like you said, about 10 people.

I think your looking to far into societies development, a better comparison would be stone age tribes they existed in the same type of environment, forage and defend. I do understand what you mean though, without additional features/content that give a reason for large groups they won't form. I think that is the answer not gamification or nerfs that would lessen the authenticity of the game world. Also for your prolonged success you are much better off foraging in a group as defense can never be separated from an action when there is no safety.

That's why we're asking for things like this.

We want to be able to do something, anything really, besides forage and shoot everything that moves. This isn't the same problem as having no interface (friends list, in-game whispers, even a functional direct chat, etc.) to interact with other people, but it does explain why many have turned to being a griefer, and consequently why the people they've killed have turned into paranoid KoSers that ruins any semblance of a group aspect in a survival game.

Forage and defend are the basis of existence and I think the right place to start when adding features, as the mod grows so will the scope of what people or groups can accomplish and you will get what you want. I just don't want to see the environment or experience cheapened in the process. Creating the kind of content that will allow players to build back society against not only zombies but a community that has grown used to living in the state of nature is a great challenge and will take some time. All I can say is be a cave man for a while, find a tribe, post your ideas for rebuilding society or making places safer. This would be much more inline with the spirit of the mod than requesting nerfs or additional content to fix problems that need to be fixed at a much deeper level.

...I bet Rocket jacks off while reading everybody debating the nature of human existence on a forum for a video game.

Sounds like a bad bet to me...

But I do think the discussions that occur show that the mod is successful as it generates this much thought/emotion in players.

Edited July 28, 2012 by xXI Mr Two IXx

[Max Planck 7174]

I am absolutely amazed that a hundred and fifteen people so far thought that the shower of whining and insults in the OP was worthy of their beans.

"Oh look, this guy is calling all of us twats - I think I'll press the 'like' button".

It boggles the mind.

[CriticalNerd 20]

Every time I see the thread title flying around in "new content", it cracks me up.

+Beans for a creative title/and short description of gameplay