Let me paint you a picture of DayZ game mechanics.

[Dankine 377]

If you think this game is as simple as chess, or a hex board game, then you're sadly mistaken. The reason is simply that this game caters to the possibility of taking real moral choices. You don't really have to kill other players to "win" this game. There are other ways to play it. Thus morality becomes a real issue, because what you're doing is essentially to topple over other people's card houses, or destroy their castles of sand.

moral choices are moral choices because they have moral repercussions in one way or another.

in game choices don't, at all.

[terex 322]

If you need something in game to tell you how to feel morally or to stimulate it then you really lack imagination and depth.

[SillySil 295]

If you think this game is as simple as chess, or a hex board game, then you're sadly mistaken. The reason is simply that this game caters to the possibility of taking real moral choices. You don't really have to kill other players to "win" this game. There are other ways to play it. Thus morality becomes a real issue, because what you're doing is essentially to topple over other people's card houses, or destroy their castles of sand.

Were this a game you could "win", that would be OK, and the sand-castle builder would be the loser. However, in a world where people build sand castles for their own enjoyment, or if they play a game of solitaire, and then you come along and mess everything up for them, then that makes you an asshole - morally speaking. You do not know if the other player aggreed to play a game of PvP with you. You just went ahead and assumed it. And as we all know, assumption is the mother of all fuckups.

This is not a simple hex board game. It's way more complex than that, and if you play the game in a way that other's don't like, prepare to be called an asshole. Probably you are one too, especially when you're too weak to admit that you did it to have fun on the expence of others. I mean, at least proper bandits admit that they do it to have fun on the expence of others, and don't hide behind moral bullshit like "this is just an advanced hex board game".

The game I've made up in OP sums up perfectly DayZ mechanics. And yeah I don't have to beat other people's pawns. But that's the safest thing to do and the most efficient one. So it's not just a matter of personal opinion. It's a choice between more and less advantageous position. And seriously? Morality in a board game. I'm not hurting you by beating you in a board game. Nor in a video game. You've voluntarily joined the game. You've agreed to the rules. I cannot possibly hurt you IRL. The most I can do (within the game rules) is to make you loose. But you took that risk when joining the game. Nothing immoral about it. And hell yeah I've assumed that people know what they're playing. And if they don't like the game they should leave. It's not my fault they don't like the game mechanic. And I'm not having fun at expense of others. Unless you consider beating someone in a board game having fun at expense of others. We're in a competition and you have something that can help me. I'm beating you to hurt you, I'm beating you because we're in a competition and taking your virtual things (that you've willingly put on the line when entering the game) is going to help me in game. It's nothing personal I don't even think in these categories.

Scripters have fun at expense of others not players who play within the rules. Because you've agreed to play the game within the rules.

The only thing you're right about is that in this game you're not punished for bad behaviour. Instead you're mostly rewarded for it, unless someone is smart enough to find a hatchet and bring it to some griefer's head on Sniper Hill. What could have been a great experience in finding new friends and starting a cooperative adventure, is reduced to dodging bullets from people who just enjoy spreading grief.

On the other hand, people who play this game, really can't complain about it either, as it truly is a sandbox, and having fun at the expence of others is part of this game. In a way it brings an added element of challenge to the game. Not only do you have to dodge infinite amounts of zeds, but you must also, for some reason, dodge snipers - because people are evil. :)

I'm all happy about it, of course, because I know that it means I now can go on a rampage an play Punisher on all those mindless griefers up there on Sniper Hill. It's part of the game, and it's all fun challenges to get over, if you ask me - just don't try to explain something stupid, like that this game is wihout or above or under - or whatever you call it - in relation to morals. Or morale, or whatever the hell it is you call it. As much as I like discussing this game, I much prefer playing it. And about that...

That's my other point. Both behaviors should be equally beneficial even if in different ways. The game favors killing. That's why I do it.

And beating your virtual pawns is not griefing or immoral.

[terex 322]

SillySil, you are just trying too damn hard. If you think the only goal is to kill people to get fast gear(your game favors killing point) then you really are missing out on a loooooooot.

[SillySil 295]

Some people really emerge into DayZ, role play etc. I am not saying I do but we aren't in any position to say how they play or take DayZ is wrong in any way or form.

[...]

I don't care how most people play but there is NO WRONG WAY to play. Humanity can give a small hint on someones preferred play style.

... Like I said before "I can appreciate role playing but thinking that it's IRL immoral to kill other people's virtual pawns is pretty insane to me." You seem to have problems reading.

You have your ego in which you can't understand how some people play and

[...]

So simple minded, can't accept the fact not everyone plays like you.

... Like I said before "I can understand the fact perfectly. I just think it's pretty crazy to feel compassion towards pawns in a game and to think that beating someone else's pawns is immoral."

You can't be ignoring what I've already replied to you and repeating yourself. You seem to just put your fingers in your ears and go "lalala" while repeating something that I've already replied to.

think it's all "kill on sight", "murdering is the easiest fastest way for gear".. Okay well, not everyone is playing for fast and easy gear.

Agreed. Still, it's good to have a weapon, food and medical supplies. No? Fastest way of getting them is getting them off someone who's already collected them. The game favors doing it.

If you need something in game to tell you how to feel morally or to stimulate it then you really lack imagination and depth.

I know how to roleplay I just don't. Because it would put me at a disadvantage. And yeah, I don't feel compassion towards your virtual pawns so it must be something else than morality that gives me a reason not to beat your virtual pawns.

Kebman is right, this game is a sandbox game. A game design which in essence is nothing more than a continuing series of choices that the player must make.

And like I said in OP. People will choose the most profitable thing. Which is KoS in the current state of the game.

If I had Rocket over for dinner, I would ask him to make it optional for bandits to have to wear the towel wrap. And to make grouping easier for players, both good and bad. With the ability to construct better fortifications. And leave the rest up to the players to decide. If we start getting penalized or rewarded for our behavior with bonuses to speed, or a forced bandit skin, I think that we start steering towards Call of Duty mechanics, which I think the vast majority of players on here are not fond of.

But you already are penalized or rewarded for your playstyle. If you're friendly you make sure that that guy over there isn't friendly before shooting him. Which puts you at a disadvantage compared to just shooting him. The point is to make both playstyles equally good.

SillySil, you are just trying too damn hard. If you think the only goal is to kill people to get fast gear(your game favors killing point) then you really are missing out on a loooooooot.

Sigh you are so short sighted.

I think the game's goal is to survive without making the game too boring (by for instance living in a forest next to a pond avoiding any danger for 30 days). Now having that you'll stumble upon people and zombies. You need food and medical supplies, also something to defend yourself with. Now there is a high chance that people will just shoot you on sight. So you don't give them a chance. Killing isn't the objective. It's the means to achieve the objective. Which is not letting yourself killed.

Edited September 9, 2012 by SillySil

[terex 322]

For a lot of people the most effective, fast, easiest way doesn't mean anything. It's about playing with the people you like or enjoying whatever goal you set for yourself. If I need something I usually know where to get it. If I see someone along the way to kill? Great, maybe they will have something I can use. Killing everyone can have its benefits sure, but not everyone is playing to "be #1 top survivalist", they are playing for enjoyment and not everyone enjoys the same things.

[SillySil 295]

For a lot of people the most effective, fast, easiest way doesn't mean anything. It's about playing with the people you like or enjoying whatever goal you set for yourself. If I need something I usually know where to get it. If I see someone along the way to kill? Great, maybe they will have something I can use. Killing everyone can have its benefits sure, but not everyone is playing to "be #1 top survivalist", they are playing for enjoyment and not everyone enjoys the same things.

I get all that. And I know about roleplaying and I respect it. But thinking it's actually immoral to beat someone else's pawns is not roleplaying. It's outside the game. And it's not healthy.

And I'm already playing with 3 friends and our goal is not to die while going to dangerous places. And I understand that not everyone wants to be #1 top survivalist, however rules of the game are set to favor people with good equipment. And since getting that and not dieing is achieved most efficiently by killing on sight. Killing on sight is the favored playstyle of DayZ.

Don't you think that the gameplay would only gain if both survivors and bandits would have equally hard time surviving? Because right now survivors are in deep.

[terex 322]

I get all that. And I know about roleplaying and I respect it. But thinking it's actually immoral to beat someone else's pawns is not roleplaying. It's outside the game. And it's not healthy.

And I'm already playing with 3 friends and our goal is not to die while going to dangerous places. And I understand that not everyone wants to be #1 top survivalist, however rules of the game are set to favor people with good equipment. And since getting that and not dieing is achieved most efficiently by killing on sight. Killing on sight is the favored playstyle of DayZ.

Don't you think that the gameplay would only gain if both survivors and bandits would have equally hard time surviving? Because right now survivors are in deep.

It's hard to be a survivor, that's okay. This game doesn't have an easy setting. Gear will only go so far then it's up to the players ability to survive. Countless times I have come up more then on top, out numbered, out geared, not everyone needs good equipment or the best to survive. My makarov will headshot you before you get to look at me with your AS50 and L85. One major mechanic in this game is that EVERYONE has the same skill set from starting point and it is up to them how they use it. Everyone can go bandit, kill each other if they want to.. Or get enjoyment from helping and healing others. I've had my parts in both and both are fun and rewarding.

[Yliparoni 7]

I agree with you completely. Without bandits there would be none of those awesome moments when you learn to trust a random person, adventure with them and actually feel sad when they die. If there would be no PvP adventuring with a person you dont know would not be a big thing. When you know that they could kill you at any moment, and you'd lose all your progress - thats when this game gets interesting.

I think the kind of bandits that people have a problem with are the "I dont care if I die, I can always run back to my tent and dupe all my equipment back"-types.

Going back to your boardgame analogy, they would be the ones that play with no risk and no reward, other than the weird pleasure they get from disrupting someone elses game. Kind of like a random guy who spills juice on your nintendo, then goes and plays with his own.

[SillySil 295]

It's hard to be a survivor, that's okay. This game doesn't have an easy setting. Gear will only go so far then it's up to the players ability to survive. Countless times I have come up more then on top, out numbered, out geared, not everyone needs good equipment or the best to survive. My makarov will headshot you before you get to look at me with your AS50 and L85. One major mechanic in this game is that EVERYONE has the same skill set from starting point and it is up to them how they use it. Everyone can go bandit, kill each other if they want to.. Or get enjoyment from helping and healing others. I've had my parts in both and both are fun and rewarding.

But if you favor killing on sight you change the gamemode to FFA DM. If you want sandbox then choice to kill or not to kill should be equally beneficial. There needs to be a trade off.

Otherwise you end up in an FFA DM with some people doing their best not to play it but being punished for it.

[natex690 0]

Eh, board games have a winner and an end to the game, this does not. Once you have end game 'power-ups' what else is there to do that you need? Short answer, nothing. At the point is when people turn DM type of play, since at that point there is nothing to do.

[kebman 213]

This game is heavily about morality. It is in fact all about it.

Yes, players did agree to play DayZ. They may not have aggreed to the rules, though, especially yours. And if you break their perceived rules, especially when you know it will ruin their chance of enjoying their way of playing the game, then you're being immoral. Spreading grief is... immoral. In fact, it goes to the core of the term. If you want proof, search it up on Wikipedia. It's simply not nice to destroy someones sand castle. If you do, then you're being immoral.

However, this game lets you be immoral in a safe setting. You can purposefully explore your darker sides in this game, and see where it brings you. However, I do not think the game is an accurate description of what it means to be immoral in real life, for instance it's way too few social reprecussions for it compared to real life, but at least it gives you a taste.

The sad thing is that some people get stuck in a loop of only being immoral. They never see any reason for trying out being moral. No wonder, with so few rewards for it, I guess, but that's how it is.

[Hetstaine 10852]

I get the whole analogy, i mean thats the basics-Board game, play to win. 3d pretty pixel game = same.

Overall - Morals in a game..give a fuck

Play to win.

Any board game i am playing to win, i go in with a different mindset. Win is the game, no feeling. It is what they are about..no middle line. sure you can show off a superior skill to an opponent for a while , dance around them a bit but that is neither here nor there. You are in to win.

This game i play as if it is me, what i would do. Fuck, i dont even pick up pepsi, because i hate the shit :) We dont lay and snipe because it is not what we would do, its just not our style. I dont drill someone a new forehead crease because he has a shiny DMR and i have a Winnie. I watch and avoid, maybe call out and try and hook up. I dont need his shit, i can find my own. Sure it may be easier, but its too fucking easy. And once again..it is more than likely not what i would do unless the guy was an immediate threat to us or i saw him taking down other people for no reason except for bang bang dead...did he really need my coke and bandage that bad ?

I dont consider it running around a chessboard knocking of pawns and knights. Thats too basic a mindset and what people have fallen into over years of shooters. Hey i played cod and ua and bf back in the day and shot the fuck out of everyone and we were proud of our number1/2 spot on the leaderboard for months. That was all that was required in that game. Just like a board game..Bang bang win. This isn't bang bang win for some :)

Some people play with their own set of rules others just shoot the instant they see someone and dont give it a second thought. So what if some people do care about their actions and the way it affects other players? We have had a lot of talks while running around in game about what we are doing, what our playstyle is. We have hung at the lighthouse of the coast of Elektro and not shot at players because we have not been able to identify if they are a bandit or not, so we have not taken the shot.

Many many times we have watched people looting and what not and let them on their way. Never had a need to kill them, there is nothing that they have that we cannot find ourselves or already have. Why make the poor fucker walk back up from Kamenka when we are at Novy or somewhere. He was not a threat at that time and if he becomes later and even if he takes us all out, unlucky for us then. He is playing how he plays. From the months of playing i would say more than less (players) are knee jerk reaction bang bang kill types. Not for gear, not to survive, thats just how they play..or how they say they have been forced to play. which is bs, We have been killed plenty and have not been forced to anything.

I would say as a group we bring a bit of our morality into the game. We talk and make choices, we know what we are about. We don't madly kill the other pixel dude as we think about how long they have been cruising around for, they might be halfway through getting a set of wheels working and if we don't need to take that ( time /effort ) away from them then we don't. We always hope to meet people that play the same way, and sure as shit every now and again we do.

Basic wrap is that , the game may not have morals but some people bring their morals into the game via their playstyle.

Pretty easy concept :)

Does not mean anyone has to like that , approach the game like that or think someone is a whackjob because they have applied some rl morals to their pixel time.

[daedrick 90]

Very good post OP, indeed. You should check out my latest thread, Im would love an intelligent answer to my questions.

[daze23 549]

I make a similar argument when people try to say a certain video-game is "violent". is chess "violent"? what do you think is going on when you 'take' someone's piece in chess?

it's just a game. in real life I consider myself a pacifist. in DayZ I'll shoot you for your bandage

[jonahcutter 51]

They likely won't be able to build a morality system into the game that actually functions well. The current system is really just a faction system. Grind points in a faction and get a skin as reward.

Now, if they create a advantage/need for players to not kill each other that is as strong as the current advantage/need for player to kill each other, this mod might actually become as innovative as it thinks it is.

Right now there is no significant threat to players except other players, so there is no need for strangers to not kill each other immediately.

Survival needs in this "post-apocalyptic" game are practically non-existent, outside of needing superior weaponry to fight other players. When/if the gameplay becomes about basic survival against all the forces of the apocalypse, instead of just "gearing up" so you enjoy a weaponry advantage over other players, then players will have motivation to not kill each other on sight.

DAyZ mimics a sandbox, but is truly just a very slow-paced deathmatch. The immense size of the map slows down the deathmatch gameplay significantly, masking the reality that we're all just basically running from weapon spawn to weapon spawn looking for the most advantageous weapon to kill other players with. It has almost nothing to do with any actual post-apocalyptic survival gameplay. The mechanics in the game that are about basic survival (anything from hunger to the zeds themselves) are inconsequential window-dressing.

Edited September 10, 2012 by jonahcutter

[SillySil 295]

This game is heavily about morality. It is in fact all about it.

Yes, players did agree to play DayZ. They may not have aggreed to the rules, though, especially yours. And if you break their perceived rules, especially when you know it will ruin their chance of enjoying their way of playing the game, then you're being immoral. Spreading grief is... immoral. In fact, it goes to the core of the term. If you want proof, search it up on Wikipedia. It's simply not nice to destroy someones sand castle. If you do, then you're being immoral.

What? Refer to the board game. Lets say that there are players who bunched up and try to avoid contact with other player's figures and then they all get beaten by someone. Did that person grief them? No it's part of the game that they have voluntarily entered. I can't hurt you by beating you in a game. Because once you join a game, you agree to it's rules. And everyone follows the game rules (unless they are cheating). If they don't like the rules, then they don't like the game either. You can have your own way of playing a game (ie made up set of rules for yourself) but you're still in the same game. You are still included by the game rules and mechanics. It doesn't matter if you like them or not or if you think they are good or not, you're still included.

However, this game lets you be immoral in a safe setting. You can purposefully explore your darker sides in this game, and see where it brings you. However, I do not think the game is an accurate description of what it means to be immoral in real life, for instance it's way too few social reprecussions for it compared to real life, but at least it gives you a taste.

The sad thing is that some people get stuck in a loop of only being immoral. They never see any reason for trying out being moral. No wonder, with so few rewards for it, I guess, but that's how it is.

I don't consider it "exploring your dark side" simply because I don't believe I'm hurting you in any shape or form therefore it's not immoral.

Basic wrap is that , the game may not have morals but some people bring their morals into the game via their playstyle.

Pretty easy concept :)

Does not mean anyone has to like that , approach the game like that or think someone is a whackjob because they have applied some rl morals to their pixel time.

I get that. However if being friendly puts you at a disadvantage then the choice between being friendly and KoS is not a simple matter of personal preference. It's a choice between more and less advantageous position. Many people threat it as a game and play to win... or should I say not to loose. They'll obviously choose the safest route. If both playstyles would be equally hard those people would have a reason not to shoot people. And I think it's wrong to favor a certain playstyle in a sandbox game.

[m0n3y 2]

I support the banditry OP explained, I also kill other players for "powerups" :D

But what I really hate is people killing others just to kill. Even if they are unarmed.

As I said, I also kill others, but NEVER unarmed players.

What I also look down on is...snipers. Snipers who just kill and don't loot their victim's body. *cough sniper hill cough*

The point of this game is to or find regular loot and work together, or kill others for their stuff. Then why kill others just for the sake of it?

I really hate those kind of players, I really really do.

[Hetstaine 10852]

I get that. However if being friendly puts you at a disadvantage then the choice between being friendly and KoS is not a simple matter of personal preference. It's a choice between more and less advantageous position. Many people threat it as a game and play to win... or should I say not to loose. They'll obviously choose the safest route. If both playstyles would be equally hard those people would have a reason not to shoot people. And I think it's wrong to favor a certain playstyle in a sandbox game.

Totally. We have had to change our game style a little bit as the game has changed but we have stuck to our own basic style of play if you get what i mean. Basically we are 'goodies'. Try and help where we can, which can be pretty damn hard owing to the general kos mindset, dont kill anyone unless shot at or we see them shooting new spawns, my mate is our overwatch where as we are the raiders/ helpers sort of deal.

I think being friendly is easily the bad side of the coin in this game as it stands at the moment, so we just take a bit more time before we dive in to a hotspot, make sure we have our game face on, but still we always prepared to try and talk when we see someone, give them the benefit of the doubt first. Sometimes we can all die in a session and enjoy the respawn fun, but still, the main deal of your topic is morality yeah? and we bring that into our game as well.

If the people we meet don't ...well no biggie, it is only a game.

[hawc 63]

I support the banditry OP explained, I also kill other players for "powerups" :D

But what I really hate is people killing others just to kill. Even if they are unarmed.

As I said, I also kill others, but NEVER unarmed players.

What I also look down on is...snipers. Snipers who just kill and don't loot their victim's body. *cough sniper hill cough*

The point of this game is to or find regular loot and work together, or kill others for their stuff. Then why kill others just for the sake of it?

I really hate those kind of players, I really really do.

Well i can give you some reasons why i would:

-You wanted to loot that town, so you kill him before he enters

-You are protecting your team, who are looting the town

-He is heading the same way you are, can't take chances

Seriously, who are you to dictate how others can play? As long as it's not breaking rules people can do whatever the hell they want.

[Xao 9]

I'd quite like to see mental illness like schizophrenia in the game. Anyone can get it just the lower the humanity and the less human interaction you have with others the more likely you are to go mental. In game possibilities could be seeing player ghosts in shadows and hearing noises that are not really there. Would also love to see a full on breakdown where you lose the ability to use any weapon bar an axe and enter a berserker rage where you get a speed and damage buff with the ability to shrug of minor flesh wounds. But in all honesty the second option is a bit more doom 3 to be considered, would just love to see pschopaths running about towns axe in hand trying to sate their bloodlust.

[m0n3y 2]

Well i can give you some reasons why i would:

-You wanted to loot that town, so you kill him before he enters

-You are protecting your team, who are looting the town

-He is heading the same way you are, can't take chances

Seriously, who are you to dictate how others can play? As long as it's not breaking rules people can do whatever the hell they want.

In those 3 cases it's self-defence as there might be weapons in the town/city. I was refering to shooting newspawns on the coast who are of absolutely no threat to you and snipers just shooting every f*cking thing that moves.

I'm not dictating others, I just can't stand those kind of players. You can do whatever you want to whoever you want, even if it comes to enjoy shooting unarmed players. You're just a bad, bad person if you do so.

[manseedcannon 5]

i kill people for fun. its the only thing in the game thats even remotely challenging. running around for hours trying to find gear loses its appeal after a while. now i just try to grab whatever rifle i can find, then see how many people i can kill with it before i die.

[manseedcannon 5]

I'm not dictating others, I just can't stand those kind of players. You can do whatever you want to whoever you want, even if it comes to enjoy shooting unarmed players. You're just a bad, bad person if you do so.

FFS its a video game

[Jex =TE= (DayZ) 218]

You forgot the part where it takes hours for everyone to gather said "powerups" and also the fact that you can share your powerups with other players, dumbass.