The problem lies in the player, not the game.

[ivan2294 0]

This game will not fix itself. Every strategy, mentality, and pattern that happens in-game is a result of player experience.

If you want to stop the shoot on sight mentality, then don't adopt it yourself. Offer to help others, make friends, try to actively oppose this type of behavior.

I see many people who simply go "I'm just going to avoid other players", or worse, "Fuck it, I'm shooting on sight too". You are not helping, you are contributing to the problem. The only thing you can do is fight against it, if a player shoots you anyways, then tough break.

Try again.

You are taking a risk by adopting this mentality, but if you do not take that risk, then you are simply making the situation worse (for yourself).

If you want to PvP, then fine that's what you wanna do. This game is what you make of it. I'm not criticizing bandits, I'm criticizing hypocrites.

[MrEpicGoat 0]

I agree with this (having done the same as well).

The problem is passing survivors who start shooting you for no reason; the goal of the mod is to survive, and the only way to survive is by killing them. By killing survivors, you turn into a bandit. Becoming a survivor again is nearly impossible unless you go stealthy (which doesn't always work in towns).

Imho, if the humanity system was restored, and balanced to make it far easier to gain back humanity, i'm sure many players who are bandits out of self defense would play as survivors again.

[instagoat 13]

To a degree, this is metagaming. If the in-world can´t figure it out, the out-world shouldn´t "cheat" it´s way to a better state of affairs, unless by intervention of the hand of god so to speak.

There needs to be some sort of mechanic in-game to facilitate this kind of discourse. Some sort of faction system or something. There are a couple of natural factions existing in-lore, which could be used as bases. Players could volountarily align with those, and found sub-factions (which would actually need the boss-players of that sub-faction to agree with someone joining them.).

A clan system. Then it would make sense to have some sort of actual diplomacy. Make the metagame actually part of the game. Sort of what goes on with Eve-online.

[Suicide Mouse 50]

I'll have to stop killing because everyone is doing it. Now I need to inspire humane actions and consciousness so I can be part of a game-changing motion that makes everyone play it right, and once everyone stops acting as apes then I can go back to kill.

[davidcastle 19]

Whats wrong with shoot on sight? i have 8 friends that play this game. I don't need to team with people I am not sure I can trust.

[old school 2]

i support this.

it will breed more easy targets for me. i am the bad guy, you want to stop me... stop me. you have rules, i dont; your already at a disadvantage.

GL

p.s. i have never played COD in my life.

[Suicide Mouse 50]

There's nothing wrong. You should be able to fear engaging in a gunfight, seeing how both are armed and it's easy to die. But... Virtual life means no consequences, so go on, shoot everyone, if you die you run to Cherno and get a winchester and keep the cycle and feeds the machine.

When we get the technology to kill people in real life along with the game, then I'll be the happiest asshole in the land.

[septuscap 42]

You know, that's true, but that doesn't change the fact that humans work together with strangers b/c it's IN THEIR BENEFIT TO DO SO. Look at what countries (ie. groups in Day Z) do to each other when it's not. They fucking kill each other.

Day Z is just a world with NO implementation for cooperation with randoms. Why do I need more than my 3-5 buddies? Not only is it not beneficial, it's RISKY. You'll probably shoot us in the back. As a larger group we'll be seen and sniped. Etc.

If I were optimistic I would ask for objectives that required more than 3-5 people to do. Where each group could possibly have something the other wanted. Where each held/controlled building required the other (ie. power plant + gas station). But as it stands now a group would more likely switch to another server than cooperate with randoms.

Just b/c this is an "anti-game" does not mean there are no systems at work, or that they can't be broken. There are obvious broken systems that prevent any interaction besides deathmatch in Day Z, that's just a given.

Even if rocket implemented holstering weapons and a player vied to make a safe city for trade, enforcing holstered weapons, how many "guards" would it take to actually ensure the city's safety? Probably the entire server capacity :rolleyes: Could be interesting to hop over to "SAFE SERVER 2" to find some one to trade with, but let's be honest, it'd be easier to trade by setting up the wtb/wts on a forum and trading via escrow with a trusted 3rd party like a Day Z mod or something. It's not going to change the meta of the actual game.

Anything besides deathmatch seems to involve single server + higher player capacity at the end of the day, maybe some one has a better idea.

[-AoXo- 24]

If you want to stop the shoot on sight mentality' date=' then don't adopt it yourself. Offer to help others, make friends, try to actively oppose this type of behavior.

[/quote']

Tell that to all the people who have been shot in the back, front, side, face, head, dick and anywhere else for trusting other players.

"Shoot on sight" is not a cause, it's an effect.

[BlackAlpha 12]

This game will not fix itself. Every strategy' date=' mentality, and pattern that happens in-game is a result of player experience.

If you want to stop the shoot on sight mentality, then don't adopt it yourself. Offer to help others, make friends, try to actively oppose this type of behavior.

I see many people who simply go "I'm just going to avoid other players", or worse, "Fuck it, I'm shooting on sight too". You are not helping, you are contributing to the problem. The only thing you can do is fight against it, if a player shoots you anyways, then tough break.

Try again.

You are taking a risk by adopting this mentality, but if you do not take that risk, then you are simply making the situation worse (for yourself).

If you want to PvP, then fine that's what you wanna do. This game is what you make of it. I'm not criticizing bandits, I'm criticizing hypocrites.

[/quote']

We can all pretend to be naive survivors, but it won't stop the fact that every couple of players you come across, one of them will try to backstab you.

So, by acting friendly to everyone, we do not stop that problem. By acting friendly to everyone, you doom yourself to die at a completely random point and time.

That's why, acting friendly, just for the hell of it, is not the solution. It would only be a solution, if the game mechanics would give you some sort of advantage for it.

[Suicide Mouse 50]

You shouldn't be friendly to everyone, and you shouldn't turn your back to anyone.

KILLERS ARE ESSENTIAL.

But this doesn't mean that everyone should feel safe to kill everyone, that is all. That's the flaw right here, that's it, no one is against PVP;

[dallas 5195]

I don't have a problem with players avoiding other players, just becuase you play as a peaceful survivor, doesn't mean you have to become a sitting duck.

It says nowhere you have to confront every situation with the trigger pressed halfway back to begin with. Rather than being ready to kill on sight, always have cover nearby, have an escape route planned and attemt not to escalate situations, where emotions run high and mistrust is predominant.