Let me paint you a picture of DayZ game mechanics.

[SillySil 295]

I've been talking with people on this forum about PvP and banditry a lot and to me some people seem like they're playing a different game. Or not even a game, they're talking about morality. Have you ever considered someone a bad person because they've beat you in a board game?

I'll try to show you guys what game mechanics this game has and why people kill each other.

Imagine a big board with hexagon tiles, maybe something like that. Now every player will have their own figure. And that figure will be representing the player. There can be up to 60 players playing at the same time. Every player's figure has health, attack damage and attack range, maybe some special moves. You can upgrade your figure by collecting powerups that are scattered on the map. Powerups are guarded by very weak monsters. Players can attack each other and if one player beats another player's figure he can take all his powerups if they are higher level than what he already has. If you beat someones figure that doesn't have any powerups or all powerups are lower level then you don't gain or loose anything. If your figure is beaten you start over. There is no points or time limit. The game never ends and players can join and leave at will.

How would you imagine that would look like? People would just beat other people's figures for their powerups. Some people would bunch up for sure but everyone would be just trying to take other people's powerups if given chance. Nobody would fucking say that a player who beats other people's figures is a bad person. Or that it's a dick move or immoral. Or that they should never own a gun.

Now lets digitalize the game and change the style a bit. Change the board to a 3d map without tiles. Everyone can move at the same time. Change figures into human models. Change powerups into weapons and other equipment. Everything else stays the same. Suddenly it's immoral to beat other people's pawns. Suddenly you get all those people saying that we shouldn't be playing against each other. That it's harassment and griefing if you do. Suddenly you have people threating it as something completely different than a game. Like an extension of reality. (And by that I don't mean role-playing.)

What happened? It's still just a game. The movement and visuals are just bit different but it's all the same. Don't blame people for playing by the rules and mechanics. Blame the design. People will always do the most profitable thing. Especially if there are no downsides to it.

Edited September 10, 2012 by SillySil

[st3reo 12]

lol, well said

[magrathea 11]

I agree

[Muncywolverine 236]

I suppose the counter-point to this would be that most player killers don't even loot the other player's "powerups". They just do it for fun, and that's what people find immoral and aggravating.

Not my view, but that's the other side of the arguement.

[SillySil 295]

I suppose the counter-point to this would be that most player killers don't even loot the other player's "powerups". They just do it for fun, and that's what people find immoral and aggravating.

Not my view, but that's the other side of the arguement.

What would you do in the board game once you've got max level on all powerups?

[Muskito87 0]

There shouldn't be a downside, but maybe people should be rewarded for being heroes. If you'll kill some1 in a zombie apocalypse, if poeple don't know you'll be fine.

DayZ's mechanics are to be as real as things get if a zombie apocalypse would be possible, and it does simulate a zombie apocalypse. No pubishment, no judjement...

But then again... I'd rather heroes won't be rewarded. Terms should be equal, no matter what. DayZ isn't a board game, get over it.

Edited September 9, 2012 by Muskito87

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello there

I understand your point, but the analogy doesn't work.

This game is far more sandboxy that say chess, plus there is a third antagonist ie the zeds.

Some people just want to coop and fight them.

One could possibly say the health/food survival mechanic is another antagonist but zeds are the main danger of the two.

Now if the Zeds were removed then the game would be a far more based PVP thing, but then folks would split into the solo or group mentality.

When games are open people will find a way to play which suits them.

as the survivors have done and as the bandits have done.

Each to their own I say, whilst the mechanics can handle it. What appeals to one person may seem odd or dull to others and vice versa.

rgds

LoK

[Muncywolverine 236]

What would you do in the board game once you've got max level on all powerups?

In a board game? I'd probably quit and go play DayZ.

[SillySil 295]

DayZ's mechanics are to be as real as things get if a zombie apocalypse would be possible, and it does simulate a zombie apocalypse. No pubishment, no judjement...

You're wrong. The game doesn't have one thing that would be very important in real life. Morality. In real life you'd be punished by your own conscience. Here we're not. I don't feel bad about beating people in a board game or a video game. It's a voluntary contest.

There shouldn't be a downside, but maybe people should be rewarded for being heroes. If you'll kill some1 in a zombie apocalypse, if poeple don't know you'll be fine.

But then again... I'd rather heroes won't be rewarded. Terms should be equal, no matter what.

Well that's the problem. Without any downside to banditry it's not equal. Killing people on sight is the safest choice once you stumble upon someone. Not only that but you get to take what he has. Maybe saving yourself from going to hotspots. It's not equal. KoS is favored.

Hello there

I understand your point, but the analogy doesn't work.

This game is far more sandboxy that say chess, plus there is a third antagonist ie the zeds.

Some people just want to coop and fight them.

One could possibly say the health/food survival mechanic is another antagonist but zeds are the main danger of the two.

Now if the Zeds were removed then the game would be a far more based PVP thing, but then folks would split into the solo or group mentality.

When games are open people will find a way to play which suits them.

as the survivors have done and as the bandits have done.

Each to their own I say, whilst the mechanics can handle it. What appeals to one person may seem odd or dull to others and vice versa.

I assume you've read "board game" and didn't read anything else? The game I've made up is a pure no-end-no-objective sandbox. And I did include zombies. And I don't know how long you've been playing but zeds are pest. They are less of an obstacle than doors in this game.

In a board game? I'd probably quit and go play DayZ.

Wow way to miss the point. Lets assume that you like the board game for a minute.

Edited September 9, 2012 by SillySil

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello there

Lack of consequence and taking the shortest route to safety (KOS) is a major factor.

Nevertheless, there are many who play differently to this and they often suffer because of it.

Consequences of real value would be great in game, but it would take a vast amount of thought to get it right.

rgds

LoK

[dallas 5195]

The design allows players trying to survive with their humanity intact or without it.

No matter if you're the friendliest hero or the best geared bandit, the bottom line is:

In DayZ everyone dies.

Edited September 9, 2012 by Dallas

[Colonel Shade. 19]

Well said SillySil

.. too bad that 70% of the players don't understand it :P

I mean i am a survivor i help people when i have pleanty of loot.

But if i'm low on medical supplies, or low on ammo. then i shoot "lone wolfs" even some "packs" just to restock my supply.

There is always a balance in my humanity, I never drop below 10k and i never get past 30k.

I don't expect to be rewarded for my good deeds and I don't care if I get punished for my bad deeds.

Out there in the wasteland there is only one rule.

And that is survive.

If i am down to my last STANAG mag, and i see another player carrying a weapon that uses STANAG mags, that would mean he got some ammo. 4 fast bullets to the head and it is mine.

[Rybur 2]

People will always kill others just for fun. This is a game not real life. In real life you would team up and of course there would be killers. But this is DayZ. Most of the players don't fear death just becuase they will respawn and start a new "life". If you wanted a game where everybody would help each other you would have to get a story made. And that goes against all that DayZ represents.

[sturmwaffles 38]

I like having friends :-)

[SillySil 295]

Lack of consequence and taking the shortest route to safety (KOS) is a major factor.

Nevertheless, there are many who play differently to this and they often suffer because of it.

That's the thing. If both playstyles would be even, with tradeoffs, meaning KoS wouldn't be favored, then I'd understand people not liking bandits. Because in that case it would be strictly personal choice. Now it's a choice between being at an advantage and disadvantage.

Consequences of real value would be great in game, but it would take a vast amount of thought to get it right.

All you have to do is to add a downside to killing people. To make it a trade off. Right now there isn't any. And don't even say bandit skin. If you KoS you assume that everyone is a threat anyway. The bandit skin doesn't change anything for people who KoS.

[minttoothpick 10]

I'm not quite sure if I agree with you, but a couple thoughts...

You're wrong. The game doesn't have one thing that would be very important in real life. Morality. In real life you'd be punished by your own conscience. Here we're not. I don't feel bad about beating people in a board game or a video game. It's a voluntary contest.

Isn't that what the 'Humanity' meter is for?

Well that's the problem. Without any downside to banditry it's not equal. Killing people on sight is the safest choice once you stumble upon someone. Not only that but you get to take what he has. Maybe saving yourself from going to hotspots. It's not equal. KoS is favored.

KoS is the most equal it can ever get. With a complete collapse of society and an absolute infestation of zombies, many 'normal' people will turn into murderers. In fact, it favors heroes right now because they can run faster, and bandits are marked with the Shemagh. In truer form, the morality of a person is indistinguishable without really knowing that person.

-

That said I agree with your signature, except I don't know what you mean by "...even out 'KoS' and 'friendly' playstyles..."

EDITED: Ok, I re-read a bit and totally get your point - but how to factor in what happens to a person as they kill more and more humans? Some people totally get off on it, some would come to enjoy it, some wouldn't care, some would feel bad about it, others would be absolutely torn up inside over it. For the stage of this in-alpha mod, the Humanity total is about as good as you're gonna get. Sure it's flawed. But I'm the team is doing exactly what's stated in your signature (maybe not reducing military spawns), if not for the mod then certainly for the standalone.

Edited September 9, 2012 by pale.rider

[SillySil 295]

Isn't that what the 'Humanity' meter is for?

And how is a number going to make people stop killing on sight? It has no influence on you. You need a downside for low morality. Bandit skin is not a reason for not killing people either. It doesn't change anything for people who already KoS.

KoS is the most equal it can ever get. With a complete collapse of society and an absolute infestation of zombies, many 'normal' people will turn into murderers. In fact, it favors heroes right now because they can run faster, and bandits are marked with the Shemagh. In truer form, the morality of a person is indistinguishable without really knowing that person.

It's not equal. If you KoS not only you get rid of threats asap but you also get to take their things. Saving yourself from scavenging or going to hostpots. Friendlies can't do that. Friendlies are at a disadvantage compared to those who kill on sight. All that for faster running? I'd rather not die (on many occasions) than run faster. There needs to be a disadvantage to killing.

That said I agree with your signature, except I don't know what you mean by "...even out 'KoS' and 'friendly' playstyles..."

The thing that we're talking about right now. It means that neither playstyle should be at an advantage. Both playstyles should be equally beneficial. Have trade offs. With no downsides to KoS there is choosing between more profitable option and less profitable option. If both playstyles would be equally good at surviving then the choice would be purely a matter of personal opinion. And I think it should be like that.

EDITED: Ok, I re-read a bit and totally get your point - but how to factor in what happens to a person as they kill more and more humans? Some people totally get off on it, some would come to enjoy it, some wouldn't care, some would feel bad about it, others would be absolutely torn up inside over it. For the stage of this in-alpha mod, the Humanity total is about as good as you're gonna get. Sure it's flawed. But I'm the team is doing exactly what's stated in your signature (maybe not reducing military spawns), if not for the mod then certainly for the standalone.

Yeah that's something you can't really put in a video game. You'd have to threat everyone equally with the moral consequences. But, there would be people more and less concerned about those consequences so I think it would be just fine. Plus you'd still have all those "killing people in a video game is immoral" people.

Edited September 9, 2012 by SillySil

[minttoothpick 10]

Ok. I see where you're at. If only there were a way to imitate that deep feeling you get in your gut when you lie, badly cut someone off in traffic when you're late, etc.

Perhaps periodic changes in vision, maybe the more humans you kill, the more prone to sickness you are, and the harder it is to keep your heat/thirst/blood/hunger in the green. Maybe you run slower, or can't hear quite as well. Maybe a combination of these things. Maybe sometimes you hear things like footsteps that aren't really there, since you have a 'guilty conscious'.

It's a tough issue. If they make it too disadvantageous to kill, then they are defining morality, giving the game too many rules. I think it's better for the community to do that. Maybe one day it will be a bit like the Wild West, with people on wanted posters, rewards, dead or alive, bounties, posses etc. In fact I bet that's what the community eventually builds it to. Maybe if you've seen a 'Wanted Poster', and you either get close enough to that person or see them in a scope, it gives you a nameplate.

At the same time, I think it is intentional that KoS is by nature more advantageous. That's the whole scenario. It kind of sucks, I agree, but it's the way it is. It is the apocalypse, after all! Haha. I enjoy the challenge of surviving by not murdering. However, if I need to kill someone in self-defense and my Humanity goes down, that will certainly aggravate me, since I'm one blood transfusion away from being a 'Hero' - which I think will be pretty cool. B)

Edited September 9, 2012 by pale.rider

[mikewalker11 2]

all my wubs are yours.

[SillySil 295]

Ok. I see where you're at. If only there were a way to imitate that deep feeling you get in your gut when you lie, badly cut someone off in traffic when you're late, etc.

Perhaps periodic changes in vision, maybe the more humans you kill, the more prone to sickness you are, and the harder it is to keep your heat/thirst/blood/hunger in the green. Maybe you run slower, or can't hear quite as well. Maybe a combination of these things. Maybe sometimes you hear things like footsteps that aren't really there, since you have a 'guilty conscious'.

It's a tough issue. If they make it too disadvantageous to kill, then they are defining morality, giving the game too many rules. I think it's better for the community to do that. Maybe one day it will be a bit like the Wild West, with people on wanted posters, rewards, dead or alive, bounties, posses etc. In fact I bet that's what the community eventually builds it to. Maybe if you've seen a 'Wanted Poster', and you either get close enough to that person or see them in a scope, it gives you a nameplate.

At the same time, I think it is intentional that KoS is by nature more advantageous. That's the whole scenario. It kind of sucks, I agree, but it's the way it is. It is the apocalypse, after all! Haha. I enjoy the challenge of surviving by not murdering. However, if I need to kill someone in self-defense and my Humanity goes down, that will certainly aggravate me, since I'm one blood transfusion away from being a 'Hero' - which I think will be pretty cool. B)

The point isn't to penalize killing. The point is to make both playstyles just as good but different.

I'd love to see addictions for murderers. The more you kill the more booze/smokes you need. If not, your hands shake, hear things and who knows what. Just make the system balanced. Not too harsh but not too easy.

[terex 322]

The point isn't to penalize killing. The point is to make both playstyles just as good but different.

I'd love to see addictions for murderers. The more you kill the more booze/smokes you need. If not, your hands shake, hear things and who knows what. Just make the system balanced. Not too harsh but not too easy.

So everyone that kills requires booze and has to smoke? What the hell????

[Dankine 377]

So everyone that kills requires booze and has to smoke? What the hell????

People that kill others (who are not psychotic) generally suffer ill effects and turn to some form of relief.

[Faceman Peck 93]

I've been talking with people on this forum about PvP and banditry a lot and to me some people seem like they're playing a different game. Or not even a game, they're talking about morality. Have you ever considered someone a bad person because they've beat you in a board game?

I'll try to show you guys what game mechanics this game has and why people kill each other.

Imagine a big board with hexagon tiles, maybe something like that.Now every player will have their own figure. And that figure will be representing the player. There can be up to 60 players playing at the same time. Every player's figure has health, attack damage and attack range, maybe some special moves. You can upgrade your figure by collecting powerups that are scattered on the map. Powerups are guarded by very weak monsters. Players can attack each other and if one player beats another player's figure he can take all his powerups if they are higher level than what he already has. If you beat someones figure that doesn't have any powerups or all powerups are lower level then you don't gain or loose anything. If your figure is beaten you start over. There is no points or time limit. The game never ends and players can join and leave at will.

How would you imagine that would look like? People would just beat other people's figures for their powerups. Some people would bunch up for sure but everyone would be just trying to take other people's powerups if given chance. Nobody would fucking say that a player who beats other people's figures is a bad person. Or that it's a dick move or immoral. Or that they should never own a gun.

Now lets digitalize the game and change the style a bit. Change the board to a 3d map without tiles. Everyone can move at the same time. Change figures into human models. Change powerups into weapons and other equipment. Everything else stays the same. Suddenly it's immoral to beat other people's pawns. Suddenly you get all those people saying that we shouldn't be playing against each other. That it's harassment and griefing if you do. Suddenly you have people threating it as something completely different than a game. Like an extension of reality. (And by that I don't mean role-playing.)

What happened? It's still just a game. The movement and visuals are just bit different but it's all the same. Don't blame people for playing by the rules and mechanics. Blame the design. People will always do the most profitable thing. Especially if there are no downsides to it.

well said...and I have said it before...dont hate the player, hate the game- but in essence blame is a much better way to put it

you have my beans

[SillySil 295]

People that kill others (who are not psychotic) generally suffer ill effects and turn to some form of relief.

Exactly. Now not only you have a reason not to kill "do I really wanna kill that guy? I'm running out of booze" you also have bandits being more prone to killing other bandits.

Edited September 9, 2012 by SillySil

[terex 322]

People that kill others (who are not psychotic) generally suffer ill effects and turn to some form of relief.

Better add all the drugs in then, porn and whatever other retarded shit you can think of.

Exactly. Now not only you have a reason not to kill "do I really wanna kill that guy? I'm running out of booze" you also have bandits being more prone to killing other bandits.

I bet EVERYONE thinks that before they kill someone. I need to go kill a family, better stock up on some 40's... Gtfo.

Edited September 9, 2012 by terrex