Moral management and KOS

[indominator 95]

TL;DR in the end.

Well, if you get too bored to read, don't, just know that i am talking about penalty but putting it in here to people know and relate it to moral. No punishment just a management place in a game like this that will always allow people to KOS strangers.

So, to start. For us to enjoy violence in video games or other entertainment we do something specialists call Moral Management. Its important that we use this so we can enjoy any random act of violence without the feeling of guilt, endeavoring completely in the imersion and pleasure of the act.

Bandura states some ways to escape guilt:(followed by some examples and maybe an explanation)

Dehumanization - Infected roam the streets, they used to be human but now they are not anymore. By saying that certain players are below a full being, newbees.

Euphemisic Labeling - Clean the town out of zombies, a word substitutes killing, hunt animals or survivors.

Advantageous Comparison - By saying that the subject's behaviour is justified by comparing it with more condemnable actions of others, in here we can see implemented into the so called Hero that hunts the "amoral" Bandits

Displacemente of responsibilty - The guilt is placed in the hand of a superior or a system. My base comander ordered me to track down some low humanity bandits and eliminate them. A bandit can here say that he kills another player because its the law of the nature, a system that imposes the law into each individual arbitrarily.

Disregard of consequences - The Bandit KOS by the fact that theres no police or system to punish him.

Atribution of Blame - By saying that the target deserves nothing but violence. It was self defence, he started shooting first. He was a bandit and he always KOS surivors, is a phrase spoken by a Hero.

These are the most used mechanisms, but the most important one is the fact of being able to kill, in a video game. Just by having the ability to do so, and by saying that you will not be penalized because its a controled environment were nothing real happens and no one is really hurt.

I am not saying, we need punishment, its just worth saying that any person or group may have any varied moral, the mafia has one, the police has one, yakuza has another, an indigenous tribe has another, each group in the world sees the use of violence in different ways. Since antrophology started studying other civilizations or societies we have discovered that the other is not inferior and our system superior, but that we are all different.

sumarizing: Its a plural world, even in dayz, with an infinite number of ethics, moral, needs and desires. So think it through before applying a penalization system.

So? you may ask what I am suggesting? I suggest that no penalization is incorporated, but just a group system and team kill be the only one penalized.

[Zoop 343]

So you wrote that entire post just for it all to come down to 'implement a group system and punish team kills.'

What a waste of time.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Zoop

[indominator 95]

Team kill be penalized? How is the game going to track who is in your team and who isn't?

Arma 2 already has a squad system, just implement it with some visual cues, but I get your idea, the players would automatically penalize it, like kicking from the group, I get the feeling theres almost no need for a group system.

[indominator 95]

So you wrote that entire post just for it all to come down to 'implement a group system and punish team kills.'

What a waste of time.

No, i wrote it to teach people why not to penalize "bandicktry"

[Male3Dante 6]

This is a very sound argument and I agree. Though I do not think a group system and TK punishment is necessary or intended. I believe that when I am traveling with a group, and one of them has a different allegiance, whether to himself, or to that group ahead whose ambush he's leading my group into, we are both just playing the wasteland. He has his game or solidarity and self gain, or espionage and treachery, just as I have mine. The roles could be reversed. I'm only putting myself in this role because I haven't found the skill or desire necessary to make enemies of everyone around me. That would make for a rather difficult game, no? The punishment comes when the 'Bandit' or Teamkiller is found out, either through conversation or when he opens fire on us, and we kill or oust him or, if he is successful, write a qq thread on the forums telling people to avoid him, or find out which group he's with and go after them in game. In a game with no laws... There are no laws. Playing the wasteland. Just a thought.

BTW I might have to adopt your word "Bandicktry"

:D

Edited August 9, 2012 by Male3Dante

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

I have absolutely no idea what the entire content of that post had to do with the final sentence.

Basically, I can summarize your post like so: "Morality is subjective and varied, except when I arbitrarily determine that it should be absolute."

Why is team killing the only kind of morality that should be forbidden? It's everywhere in reality - in all the places you listed. The mafia, the police, political parties, armies, tribal communities, coworkers, friends, etc. Anywhere human relationships exist, people throughout history have turned and betrayed those relationships. So why should the game prevent this?

Your post and your conclusion are in absolute contradiction, in other words. Your suggestion is both senseless and baseless.

[spammy@live.de 19]

sumarizing: Its a plural world, even in dayz, with an infinite number of ethics, moral, needs and desires. So think it through before applying a penalization system.

Games have their own logic.

Sticking to "realism" all the time doesn't actually result in a realistic game - ironically, it's quite the opposite.

Some people will do all sorts of stuff in a game they would never do in real life, specifically because it's "just a game". If you stubbornly stick to naive, idealistic ideas of "realism" and "freedom", you'll have tons of people just messing around, metagaming, and trying to fuck the game up. introducing "artifical" rules to enforce realistic behaviour ultimately make a game feel more authentic.

Imo authentic simulations and "anything goes"-sandboxes are mutually exclusive. I'm not saying one is better than the other - I'm just saying you can't have both.

Edited August 9, 2012 by SamSpam

[Petri (DayZ) 14]

Only cure for KoS is more dangerous zombies, if you would have to really think, if pulling the trigger is wise.

[bazbake 456]

This is a realistic zombie simulator! Hold on, BRB, let me check my GameFAQs walkthrough for the nearest deerblind and put a post on the dayzforums requesting a medic to take care of this broken leg.

Oh shit, that guy I shot at and saw me run away is coming. Let me change my name and skin so he won't recognize me.

Oh, whoops, I bled out. But at least I still have those assault rifles in my tent.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

If you stubbornly stick to naive, idealistic ideas of "realism" and "freedom", you'll have tons of people just messing around, metagaming, and trying to fuck the game up.

Perfect. Sounds like fun. Where do I sign up?

Oh, wait. I already did.

Now if only rocket sticks to his guns and doesn't let ideas like this fuck the whole thing up we might get somewhere.

Edited August 9, 2012 by ZedsDeadBaby

[SalamanderAnder (DayZ) 1747]

Except for the fact that sometimes friendly fire happens by accident, and if you deliberately kill a teammate in this game, they will undoubtedly punish you in their own way. So it's still pointless. There should be no punishment at all. Period. It's a sandbox game and you can do as you please.