Reintroducing Humanity: Thoughts

[Deek (DayZ) 1]

I'm brand new to DayZ and I'm loving it. Like so many have said, it's "the game I've been waiting for".

I've been busting my head, thinking of ways to lend more weight to the life and death choices a survivor makes while struggling to survive. Do they choose to uphold a moral code, attempting to scratch out a meager living alongside other like-minded souls? Or, do they abandon all pretense of civilization and murder their way to a relatively comfortable existence?

I got to thinking, upon removing the laws and restraints of civilized society, what remains to keep an individual in check? What is left to ensure that at least SOME people will struggle to uphold a semblance of morality in an atmosphere of lawless anarchy?

1. Someone will find out! Even in a reality where communication is reduced to camp fire tales (and global chat), an individual will pause and consider: "What happens if someone finds out what I've done?"

So how? I say add an ability called "Intuit" (or something). Once within a certain distance of another survivor, one can mouse over and select "Intuit", at which point they will be told whether the target is White, Gray or Black (humanity wise). The results speak for themselves. The catch? You can only do this once every X number of in-game hours. You do NOT have a free Intuit at the beginning of the game. You have to survive a certain length of time before you've gained the experience to settle your nerves and trust your gut, "I've got a bad feeling about this guy ..."

The vast majority of people will be gray (likely the largest numerical spread of potential humanity values), but on occasion you will find a white (innocent!) or a black (evil!), and react accordingly (and with due caution). It would take a long string of wholesale slaughter to drop someone to black. These would be the worst of the worst. Legendary boogeymen bandits. Nightmare griefers.

This will have the side effect of making people want to stick together. Two survivors who trust one another are capable of discerning the relative humanity of two strangers, assuming careful management of their respective Intuit abilities. "John, what do you think of this guy? I can't read him."

Barring that ...

2. The fear of Judgement (with a capital "J"). In the case of DayZ, why not commit to their being a higher power ...? One that doesn't care for assholes. So, how do we turn this into a game mechanic? For every person you kill, it adds X to your respawn timer, with X being any number of minutes, maybe even an hour or more, whatever. Let's call it KARMA. This number is cumulative. You kill one person? You're looking -1 karma and 1 real world hour in Purgatory before you can spawn back into the game.

So what if I shoot someone in self defense? You spawn in. Immediately, you are forced to shoot and kill a fellow survivor who opens fire as you move up the beach. You lose 1 karma. No good! But, if you then go a certain time frame without killing anyone, you gain +1 karma. This can put you back up to zero and beyond; +1, +2, +3, etc. Maybe new players could start with a positive karma value, just to give a slight cushion (+2, +3 maybe). Or, if you kill someone with "black" humanity, you simply do not lose karma. Hell. Maybe you even GAIN it. ;)

This number should be secret. The player should never know what their karma rating is, which would allow them to game the system and be only as evil as the math allows.

The good will enjoy a "murder cushion" to keep them out of Purgatory, still able to defend themselves. Unrepentant murderers, on the other hand, will find themselves in a deep hole. If and when they die, it will be some time before they are able to log back in. They will enjoy an easier time surviving thanks to their bloodthirsty ways, but death will be a much greater punishment.

Ultimately, I have no idea whether this is viable or even remotely feasible. I have no idea how Arma2 handles "accounts", or if it's based on profile alone (as any player can have numerous profiles). I'm sure there are a million potential pitfalls. Just thinking out loud. :)

[RagingJenni 2]

Interesting... 1 hour for spawn is a bit too much, but I like the idea!

[Deek (DayZ) 1]

Yeah, you're probably right. I'm just tossing an hour out as a random number, something nice and round to discuss.

Also consider that karma could, in lieu of locking evil players out of the game, instead directly inform the relative state of their "reincarnation". Karma, reincarnation. I sense a theme ...

A survivor with positive karma is killed. Maybe he respawns with better gear, more base blood, etc. On the other hand, an individual with negative karma? He respawns with less blood, infection and less and/or inferior gear (the worse your karma, the worse your condition when you respawn). You reap what you sow.

Would the villain then continue his treacherous ways, forced to kill to survive in his hobbled state, further reducing his karma and guaranteeing a horrible third, fourth and fifth life? Or, would he instead try to turn it around? Attempt to be a better person, to regain his lost karma?

Hmm.

[ulanthorn 0]

I think a pure ingame use for humanity woudl be better, something like beeign less prone to infections or something like that...simpyl because you often have to wait 1 hour anyway to get a slot ;)

[shemashko 2]

Your theory is that evil(people who constantly kill for the joy) have a better survival rate than those who don't kill people can vary. I do agree that there should be some sort of punishment for evil people as there are people who just spawn and start killing until they die just to cause some other person to lose valuable loot. This sort of play simply isn't survival, just mere "griefing" and this system will dissuade people to play like that. On the other hand you shouldn't make the punishment too high for those who kill within reason (Oh, I need beans and I prefer to kill than to loot). It'll need a lot of tinkering that is for sure.

Edit: Survivors who choose not to kill can live longer than evil characters, and that just because they don't kill and gain karma for that isn't fair. What I suggest is you can only gain karma by actually helping someone than just not killing. bandaging others and giving them food/water will increase your karma + humanity.

[deadbolt (DayZ) 10]

wow... i really wish rocket would post this on the front page or something, this way people wont have an excuse for not knowing what the game is really about

(04-30-2012 01:01 AM)rocket Wrote: DayZ was designed to be impossibly cruel, dark, and brutal. It was not designed as a game it was more of an experiment, I prefer the term "anti-game" - in other words the mechanics are not designed to be balanced, or offer a way out for different situations. These are things game designers normally take care with.

I discussed this with the our team members at great length of many arguments, the idea behind safe zones. The eventual consensus was that it went against the ethos of the project. This whole concept, and the reason it "works", is that there IS no safe zone (unless you make it). Your actions have real and brutal consequences. There are no game designed safety nets.

It is the kind of system/environment that will sometimes make you want to punch the computer screen. But with that kind of risk, comes great emotional reward when you carry something off. The sniper you describe - there are people like this in the world, and in the breakdown of order I can bet that there would be people who would sit on a roof and shoot people "just for the lulz".

The system makes no judgement on player actions, and this is one of the only real rules that was adopted for the development. While consequences may occur for a particular action (e.g. humanity loss), no judgement is implied or placed on that behavior. Beyond hacks, and misuse of exploits, regulating player behavior is not a scope of this project. If players, themselves, wish to group together and attempt to regulate the behavior. Well, that's entirely up to you.

This kind of activity is not for everyone. It really is more of a social experiment than a game. There is no intention to change that, if you dislike the PVP, then I would recommend playing Dynamic Zombie Sandbox or Celery's excellent Chernaus Apocalypse - there is no point in these being recreated through this mod.

Why make something that has already been done?

[LastShenanigan 8]

If Humanity is a dictation of how well you play with others maybe it could be used for unique abilities. Lots of -Humanity = can stab someone in the back. Lots of +Humanity = can heal another players wounds without using a bandage. These are just examples and neither of which am I sure would be very balanced or fit with the games "hardcore" style. Having unique interactions based upon your humanity would be interesting though. You damn neutrals could even get something.

[proxzor 3]

Its already a punishment if you have to respawn so even adding an hour on top of that is pretty insane. I like the thought if your Intuit feature though, that would work perfectly with the skin system.

[Deek (DayZ) 1]

@deadbolt

That's all well and good. I agree with the sentiment and respect what you're saying. But ... at the root of things, one must admit that in LIFE, there is always a reason NOT to do something cruel, barbaric and/or sadistic. Even if it is simply the often irrational fear for the well being of one's immortal soul (that said, please, let us not turn this into a "religious thing").

If this game is meant to represent an experiment, something meant to "see what happens" when humans are placed in this situation, then there must be SOME semblance of due consideration, a perceived consequence for one's actions. There's no law, no order. Likely no one around to see what you've done. Even so, the decisions you make must be counter-balanced by SOMETHING beyond "I choose not to kill because that's how I've decided to play today". Knowing that "no judgement will be placed upon the actions of players", that's enough to ensure that rocket's experiment will never realize it's full, glorious potential. There needs to be something. Anything. Regardless of how small. Humanity cannot be just a number or a skin. There needs to be a change, a threat, a consequence.

Running with my "reincarnation" idea, killing someone in THIS life will not impact THIS life (unless it is combined with my intuit suggestion), but it will impact your NEXT life and how it begins. And everybody dies in DayZ. Even the most cunning and heartless bandit with the best equipment and more food, water and ammo than anyone would ever need ... that guy is going to die someday. That's the only guarantee, really.

It would be interesting to see someone murder their way to relative comfort and security, and only then attempt to survive long enough (and do enough good) to regain his lost karma. Sort of an "Unforgiven", Clint Eastwood, William Munny character. :)

[deadbolt (DayZ) 10]

@deadbolt

That's all well and good' date=' and I agree with the sentiment. But, at the root of things, one must admit that in LIFE, there is always a reason NOT to do something cruel, barbaric and/or sadistic. Even if it is simply the often irrational fear for the well being of one's immortal soul (that said, please, let us not turn this into a "religious thing"). [/quote']

many of those reasons dont apply in an apocalyptic world

If this game is meant to represent an experiment' date=' something meant to "see what happens" when humans are placed in this situation, then there must be SOME semblance of due consideration, a perceived consequence for one's actions. The decisions one makes must be counter-balanced by SOMETHING beyond "I choose not to kill because that's how I've decided to play today". [/quote']

why? what would there be in a real apocalypse?

Running with my "reincarnation" idea' date=' killing someone in THIS life will not impact THIS life. But it will impact your NEXT life and how it begins. And everybody dies in DayZ. Even the most cunning and heartless bandit with the best equipment and more food, water and ammo than anyone would ever need ... that guy is going to die someday. That's the only guarantee, really.[/quote']

i disagree completely with the idea of punishing the way someone plays (except if they are exploiting or hacking)

[DaPessimist 1]

The problem with murders in this game is they don't accurately reflect human behavior. Murdering someone in a game is nothing like murdering someone in real life. And thus, you have far more people murdering others than you would in a real Apocalypse. If the game is meant to be a simulator, it fails miserably in this aspect. This is why you have to find a way to classify and punish murderers, in order to more accurately reflect human behavior. Having a title like "Bandit" is one method. I would also like to see a "Stress" meter, which would increase the loss of blood, water, food, and temperature levels slightly more for people who choose to murder others.

[deadbolt (DayZ) 10]

The problem with murders in this game is they don't accurately reflect human behavior. Murdering someone in a game is nothing like murdering someone in real life. And thus' date=' you have far more people murdering others than you would in a real Apocalypse. If the game is meant to be a simulator, it fails miserably in this aspect. This is why you have to find a way to classify and punish murderers, in order to more accurately reflect human behavior. Having a title like "Bandit" is one method. I would also like to see a "Stress" meter, which would increase the loss of blood, water, food, and temperature levels [i']slightly more for people who choose to murder others.

disagree... in a real apocalypse there would be a lot more murders

[DaPessimist 1]

The problem with murders in this game is they don't accurately reflect human behavior. Murdering someone in a game is nothing like murdering someone in real life. And thus' date=' you have far more people murdering others than you would in a real Apocalypse. If the game is meant to be a simulator, it fails miserably in this aspect. This is why you have to find a way to classify and punish murderers, in order to more accurately reflect human behavior. Having a title like "Bandit" is one method. I would also like to see a "Stress" meter, which would increase the loss of blood, water, food, and temperature levels [i']slightly more for people who choose to murder others.

disagree... in a real apocalypse there would be a lot more murders

More murders than current society, yes. Not even close to as many murders that exist in this game. Not only are most people not sociopathic enough to murder multiple people, but a person in real life would weigh risk/reward much differently, and wouldn't go around shooting every person who has little or nothing of value.

---

Also, there is a huge mental stress/burden placed on people who murder, or witness death. Soldiers who come back from Iraq/Afghanistan etc. spend years in counseling to cope with what they've seen/done. I have a friend who was a field medic in Iraq, and he will never be the same again.

Only a very small % of humans, in ANY circumstance, are capable of murdering people without care. They are called sociopaths.

[deadbolt (DayZ) 10]

The problem with murders in this game is they don't accurately reflect human behavior. Murdering someone in a game is nothing like murdering someone in real life. And thus' date=' you have far more people murdering others than you would in a real Apocalypse. If the game is meant to be a simulator, it fails miserably in this aspect. This is why you have to find a way to classify and punish murderers, in order to more accurately reflect human behavior. Having a title like "Bandit" is one method. I would also like to see a "Stress" meter, which would increase the loss of blood, water, food, and temperature levels [i']slightly more for people who choose to murder others.

disagree... in a real apocalypse there would be a lot more murders

More murders than current society, yes. Not even close to as many murders that exist in this game. Not only are most people not sociopathic enough to murder multiple people, but a person in real life would weigh risk/reward much differently, and wouldn't go around shooting every person who has little or nothing of value.

the point im trying to make is that really we have no clue how people would react

i disagree you need to be a sociopath to kill multiple people... think wars..

---

Also' date=' there is a huge mental stress/burden placed on people who murder, or witness death. Soldiers who come back from Iraq/Afghanistan etc. spend years in counseling to cope with what they've seen/done. I have a friend who was a field medic in Iraq, and he will never be the same again.

Only a very small % of humans, in ANY circumstance, are capable of murdering people without care. They are called sociopaths.

[/quote']

what % of people that come back from a war have a "huge mental stress"?

[Deek (DayZ) 1]

Even in a post apocalyptic world with no society, no rules, no law and no justice beyond revenge, there will always be SOMETHING in the human consciousness that will stop the average person from straight up murdering everyone they meet. It is human nature to band together. To form groups, collectives, towns and cities. What is it? And how do we reproduce it in game? I honestly believe that it cannot exist in an atmosphere where "the system makes no judgement on player actions." Simply knowing that gives a player free reign to shed all humanity, removing any and all shackles, allowing them to act on their base instincts with no second thought. Add anonymity to the mix and it becomes a total wash. It IS just a game after all.

Am I saying these people would not exist in a post apocalyptic world? Of course not. There are always maniacs and followers to elevate them, to idolize and emulate them. People praying for society to crumble, allowing them to be the monster they truly are. But I sincerely believe that the majority of survivors would do what normal people do. Band together to survive. Trust against trust. In a digital approximation of the world, one where death is temporary and your actions will never be known to your friends, loved ones, to those you trust and admire - in a place where you will never answer to whatever you call God - there is no hope for TRUE human interaction.

Not every person is a homicidal sociopath. Why? Surely not ONLY because there are police on every corner, a justice system to punish the wrong doers, the fear of seeing your face on America's Most Wanted? There is more to it than that. Something chemical. Something innate. Something lacking in the game.

Regardless. It's clear that we disagree. I appreciate your input, I'm happy to leave it at that.

[DaPessimist 1]

The problem with murders in this game is they don't accurately reflect human behavior. Murdering someone in a game is nothing like murdering someone in real life. And thus' date=' you have far more people murdering others than you would in a real Apocalypse. If the game is meant to be a simulator, it fails miserably in this aspect. This is why you have to find a way to classify and punish murderers, in order to more accurately reflect human behavior. Having a title like "Bandit" is one method. I would also like to see a "Stress" meter, which would increase the loss of blood, water, food, and temperature levels [i']slightly more for people who choose to murder others.

disagree... in a real apocalypse there would be a lot more murders

More murders than current society, yes. Not even close to as many murders that exist in this game. Not only are most people not sociopathic enough to murder multiple people, but a person in real life would weigh risk/reward much differently, and wouldn't go around shooting every person who has little or nothing of value.

the point im trying to make is that really we have no clue how people would react

i disagree you need to be a sociopath to kill multiple people... think wars..

You have to be a sociopath for it not to effect you. The large majority of soldiers who kill others in war suffer from mental conditions the rest of their lives.

---

The problem with murders in this game is they don't accurately reflect human behavior. Murdering someone in a game is nothing like murdering someone in real life. And thus' date=' you have far more people murdering others than you would in a real Apocalypse. If the game is meant to be a simulator, it fails miserably in this aspect. This is why you have to find a way to classify and punish murderers, in order to more accurately reflect human behavior. Having a title like "Bandit" is one method. I would also like to see a "Stress" meter, which would increase the loss of blood, water, food, and temperature levels [i']slightly more for people who choose to murder others.

disagree... in a real apocalypse there would be a lot more murders

More murders than current society, yes. Not even close to as many murders that exist in this game. Not only are most people not sociopathic enough to murder multiple people, but a person in real life would weigh risk/reward much differently, and wouldn't go around shooting every person who has little or nothing of value.

the point im trying to make is that really we have no clue how people would react

i disagree you need to be a sociopath to kill multiple people... think wars..

---

Also' date=' there is a huge mental stress/burden placed on people who murder, or witness death. Soldiers who come back from Iraq/Afghanistan etc. spend years in counseling to cope with what they've seen/done. I have a friend who was a field medic in Iraq, and he will never be the same again.

Only a very small % of humans, in ANY circumstance, are capable of murdering people without care. They are called sociopaths.

[/quote']

what % of people that come back from a war have a "huge mental stress"?

Soldiers who kill people face to face? I'd say around 95%.

[deadbolt (DayZ) 10]

Soldiers who kill people face to face? I'd say around 95%.

so whats the end result.. we know people can kill people face to face and still survive fine.. they dont turn into crazy monsters... and its not just sociopaths that do it

unless every soldier in ancient history was a sociopath

---

Even in a post apocalyptic world with no society' date=' no rules, no law and no justice beyond revenge, there will always be SOMETHING in the human consciousness that will stop the average person from straight up murdering everyone they meet. It is human nature to band together. To form groups, collectives, towns and cities. What is it? And how do we reproduce it in game? I honestly believe that it cannot exist in an atmosphere where "the system makes no judgement on player actions." Simply knowing that gives a player free reign to shed all humanity, removing any and all shackles, allowing them to act on their base instincts with no second thought. Add anonymity to the mix and it becomes a total wash. It IS just a game after all.

Am I saying these people would not exist in a post apocalyptic world? Of course not. There are always maniacs and followers to elevate them, to idolize and emulate them. People praying for society to crumble, allowing them to be the monster they truly are. But I sincerely believe that the majority of survivors would do what normal people do. Band together to survive. Trust against trust. In a digital approximation of the world, one where death is temporary and your actions will never be known to your friends, loved ones, to those you trust and admire - in a place where you will never answer to whatever you call God - there is no hope for TRUE human interaction.

Not every person is a homicidal sociopath. Why? Surely not ONLY because there are police on every corner, a justice system to punish the wrong doers, the fear of seeing your face on America's Most Wanted? There is more to it than that. Something chemical. Something innate. Something lacking in the game.

Regardless. It's clear that we disagree. I appreciate your input, I'm happy to leave it at that.

[/quote']

so can i ask.. what is your problem exactly with the way it is now? are there too many bandits (too dangerous)? is it too hard to group up with people? or is it both?

[DaPessimist 1]

Soldiers who kill people face to face? I'd say around 95%.

so whats the end result.. we know people can kill people face to face and still survive fine.. they dont turn into crazy monsters... and its not just sociopaths that do it

unless every soldier in ancient history was a sociopath

I didn't say it turned them into monsters. I said it had negative mental effects, some more than others. This isn't reflected in a video game environment, where shooting someone's avatar is a lot different then killing another human face to face. That's why there should be game mechanics in place to simulate the mental stress that a real human would feel.

[deadbolt (DayZ) 10]

Soldiers who kill people face to face? I'd say around 95%.

so whats the end result.. we know people can kill people face to face and still survive fine.. they dont turn into crazy monsters... and its not just sociopaths that do it

unless every soldier in ancient history was a sociopath

I didn't say it turned them into monsters. I said it had negative mental effects' date=' some more than others. This isn't reflected in a video game environment, where shooting someone's avatar is a lot different then killing another human face to face. That's why there should be game mechanics in place to simulate the mental stress that a real human would feel.

[/quote']

what type of effects do you have in mind? and would this also occur from seeing/killing zombies? as im sure the sight of an undead person ripping someone apart would have in real life

[DaPessimist 1]

Soldiers who kill people face to face? I'd say around 95%.

so whats the end result.. we know people can kill people face to face and still survive fine.. they dont turn into crazy monsters... and its not just sociopaths that do it

unless every soldier in ancient history was a sociopath

I didn't say it turned them into monsters. I said it had negative mental effects' date=' some more than others. This isn't reflected in a video game environment, where shooting someone's avatar is a lot different then killing another human face to face. That's why there should be game mechanics in place to simulate the mental stress that a real human would feel.

[/quote']

what type of effects do you have in mind? and would this also occur from seeing/killing zombies? as im sure the sight of an undead person ripping someone apart would have in real life

I already mentioned I would like to see a "Stress" meter, that would slightly increase the loss of food, water, temperature, and blood (when hurt) as the "Stress" levels increased. Of course, that "Stress" level would be increased by murdering other players.

[Deek (DayZ) 1]

so can i ask.. what is your problem exactly with the way it is now? are there too many bandits (too dangerous)? is it too hard to group up with people? or is it both?

I love the danger. There's nothing I enjoy more than a brutal challenge. I love that the survivors are more dangerous than the zombies (the central trope of all successful and ultimately classic zombie fiction).

To be honest, at the moment, there is no reason NOT to be a merciless bandit. To be a squeaky clean paragon of virtue for no reason other than self-aggrandizement, which certainly won't impress the bandit who shoots you for your beans ... choosing NOT to cap everyone you meet is simply not optimal. There's no reason not to, UNLESS you are a person who superimposes his own moral framework on the digital realm. These people do exist, and they tend to have a blast playing the game (at least from the stories I've read and the videos I've watched). They are immediately invested, and I envy them.

This is from a pure game play standpoint, of course. I love RP as much as the next guy, but for those who don't, there is no clear motivation to be a "good" person.

It's not so much about making the "evil" players think twice about killing the innocent. Bandits are rewarded immediately, and the benefits are tangible. It's more about making the "good" players feel that their decision to maintain and safeguard their humanity is somehow beneficial (which it currently is NOT).

[deadbolt (DayZ) 10]

I already mentioned I would like to see a "Stress" meter' date=' that would [i']slightly increase the loss of food, water, temperature, and blood (when hurt) as the "Stress" levels increased. Of course, that "Stress" level would be increased by murdering other players.

why not for witnessing someone's death and proximity to zombies as well

clearly these are all things that would cause stress

[Deek (DayZ) 1]

I suppose what I'm trying to say is:

Fair enough, don't punish those with low humanity.

HOWEVER:

Reward those with high humanity. Somehow.

[differlot 0]

What about some kind of bounty board. Like if you have enough player kills posters will appear in towns and give some kind of minor reward, and of course you get their gear too. The poster could give a rough estimate on their location, so people would hunt for them.

Or maybe just make a player made bounty board. They attach stuff to board that appears around towns and the only way to loot board is getting like the finger or somehing form the target. And other people could loot the finger from the original assassin or something.

Just spit balling ideas

[DaPessimist 1]

I already mentioned I would like to see a "Stress" meter' date=' that would [i']slightly increase the loss of food, water, temperature, and blood (when hurt) as the "Stress" levels increased. Of course, that "Stress" level would be increased by murdering other players.

why not for witnessing someone's death and proximity to zombies as well

clearly these are all things that would cause stress

Because the point of the game mechanic is to provide a penalty for PKers. This game is supposed to be an Apocalypse Survivor Simulator, not a Call of Duty death-match clone. With no penalties for player killers, it's essentially a really slow version of Call of Duty... with some zombies thrown in.