NPCs Non-Player Characters


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, vancopower said:

I really hope that they'll hire you to make the story you sure know how to paint a scene. I've started a story way up at this topic, about three people that should be like permanent NPC's in the game maybe you can use your talent to develop it further :) 

I hope that they wont. Events like one in game tend to have drastic effects on man psyche. All that "civilized" crap just goes out the window. Its nice to speculate about how noble and politically correct one would be when you havent even been actually hungry, not to mention in life-or-death situations. Lack of hope or certainty is a horrible thing that will bend and twist you and then do it all over again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't know where people get this idea that they need to kill everyone else to survive or that everyone else is trying to kill them. It's such a typical and overused element in both television and ga

It appears the warning posted didn't serve its full purpose, as I've removed no fewer than half a dozen posts in its wake. This thread is now locked. Attempts to reignite the arguments being carried i

Well to be honest death is so common in gaming nowadays that it's lost any sort of meaning, so now games are adding stats to see how many kills you can get, and provide creative methods for killing, b

4 hours ago, Dirmagnos said:

I hope that they wont. Events like one in game tend to have drastic effects on man psyche. All that "civilized" crap just goes out the window. Its nice to speculate about how noble and politically correct one would be when you havent even been actually hungry, not to mention in life-or-death situations. Lack of hope or certainty is a horrible thing that will bend and twist you and then do it all over again.

I think you got it all wrong friend hardships in life bring people together not apart, sure your life will come first but most of the people I know are emphatic creatures and are glad to help even if they could not. What I mean is not everyone is egotistic maniac, and only hostility that can occur is from fear. Here is real example: I live near the border about 70-80 Km and at the moment there are 10.000 war refugees in camps there. They have no passport they have no food, they are desperate. However they don't go on a killing frenzy, and if they did that there is little the police could do to stop them except killing them all which European union will not allow such use of force. They sit quietly praying, hoping that help will come. Also there are many people from my country helping them, although it is expensive for them they still do it. I was having the same thoughts myself, I  should bring them some dry clothes since it has been raining for 3 days now. I believe that humanity always prevails over fear.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, vancopower said:

I think you got it all wrong friend hardships in life bring people together not apart, sure your life will come first but most of the people I know are emphatic creatures and are glad to help even if they could not. What I mean is not everyone is egotistic maniac, and only hostility that can occur is from fear. Here is real example: I live near the border about 70-80 Km and at the moment there are 10.000 war refugees in camps there. They have no passport they have no food, they are desperate. However they don't go on a killing frenzy, and if they did that there is little the police could do to stop them except killing them all which European union will not allow such use of force. They sit quietly praying, hoping that help will come. Also there are many people from my country helping them, although it is expensive for them they still do it. I was having the same thoughts myself, I  should bring them some dry clothes since it has been raining for 3 days now. I believe that humanity always prevails over fear.

Hardships can bring people together, but its far more common than worse qualities of human animal come into play. People may be emphatic creatures, but only because they can afford it in modern western society and because there is pull to be "decent" if you wannt to fit in. And human being is a social animal, hes raised with idea that he has to be part of society. When those limitations are removed and person is rendered to level of his basic needs, an animal takes over. You simply wannt to live, no matter what.

There is a reason why wars bring out the worse and the best in people, unfortunately with its mostly worse. Rape, pillage, murder are suddenly becoming norm. Thru all the wars in human history, on all sides. And those people have choices, something that survivors in extreme situations often lack.

Your refugee camp is actually an excellent example. First of all, those refugees know, that if they make a fuzz, then measures will be taken against them. There have been precedents. Thinking that government would just let them spread is naive at best. Their survival depends on how obedient and docile they are. Sure, there will be rebels among them, who are 2 young or 2 stupid, but general population will stay put. Second, they have hope; they know that their hosting country have to provide for them - it wont be a Ritz, but their basic needs will be addressed. And third, taking hostile actions against another member(s) of the group(direct or indirect) would most likely turn that whole group against you.

Also, keep in mind, mob mentality is not the same that of each individual that is part of it. But once bullets start flying and red start spraying, mob dissolves extremely fast. Self-preservation kicks in, the same animal, who wannts to live. Animal that expects others to die for him. And generally there are maybe couple of dead and some wounded, not rows and rows of corpses. That much animal wannts to live. Even slightest threat of death causes it to abandon his to-be comrades.

People help those refugees because they can afford it. They have home, they have job, they have food in their fridges, they have future. Nobody will take last piece of bread and take it to those refugees. Or last coat. Or last can of fuel. When we talk survival, there is no guarantee that you get that loaf of bread replaced. There is no 911 on speed dial, no supermarket behind the corner. Only one you can truly count on is yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dirmagnos said:

And human being is a social animal, hes raised with idea that he has to be part of society. When those limitations are removed and person is rendered to level of his basic needs, an animal takes over. You simply wannt to live, no matter what.

There is a reason why wars bring out the worse and the best in people, unfortunately with its mostly worse. Rape, pillage, murder are suddenly becoming norm. Thru all the wars in human history, on all sides. And those people have choices, something that survivors in extreme situations often lack.

What makes you think that killing (or robbing or raping or whatever) everyone you come across is the best way to survive in a TLD-like scenario?o.O

I for one would definitely not go on a blind killing spree, but rather try to find as many allies as possible and form a group instead. Not only because surviving in a group is easier than alone, but also as a defense mechanism against hostile psychopathic loners we might come across. In my book it's pretty much madness NOT to try to find allies in a post-apocalyptic survival situation.

Moreover, forming groups is one of the most basic human instincts. We've been doing that ever since we climbed down the trees. Probably earlier. 

Even if humanity magically discarded all ethical and cultural achievements of the last 2 million years overnight (which is pretty unlikely to happen), most people would still want to live in groups. Which would pretty much "force" them to behave properly, at least towards the members of their own group. Just saying.

 

Edited by Scyzara
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not saying that player should go all fps on the game, im just saying that expecting civilized behavior from both npcs and players should not be a norm.

True, surviving in a group would probably be easier, depending on supply amount in the region(if there is just not enough in the region, then something got to give), but how can you gather that group if you cant really trust any1 ? Some may be sincere and wannt to join to survive together, others may be merely interested in ripping you off, third type is just a murderous sociopath with a smile, who will give you a sicilian necktie when you sleep.

How much fate would you be willing to put into some random person who you probably never met be4 ? People do things that they would never think they were capable of, when they are hungry, hurt, cold or simply afraid.

Most of various "survival" shows lack one crucial element, isolation - if youre hurt, or hungry or whatever, you just pick up sat phone and radio home to pick you up. And you know that you will be rescued. And your mistakes wont cost you your live, unless youre a moron of course. Nobody is gonna save you in the Long Dark.

Would you be willing to trust a total stranger, not knowing anything about his background or motives ? Nobody will come to your rescue if youre down and nobody will punish you if you do something wrong.

Human animal is most dangerous of them all, not because its strong(far from it), but because it, unlike wolves, wont announce its intentions with a growl, it will plunge a blade in your back with a smile. Even if he wont kill you outright, skipping with all your supplies while youre asleep, can be as dangerous.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dirmagnos said:

True, surviving in a group would probably be easier, depending on supply amount in the region(if there is just not enough in the region, then something got to give), but how can you gather that group if you cant really trust any1 ? Some may be sincere and wannt to join to survive together, others may be merely interested in ripping you off, third type is just a murderous sociopath with a smile, who will give you a sicilian necktie when you sleep.

Would you be willing to trust a total stranger, not knowing anything about his background or motives ? Nobody will come to your rescue if youre down and nobody will punish you if you do something wrong.

I'd definitely take that risk, simply because the probability to run into some murderous psychopath is at least a hundred times smaller than the probability to run into a somehow sane and cooperative person. Even after the breakdown of civilization. :winky:

Distrusting and avoiding anyone per se just because there's a remote possibility they might be sociopaths doesn't make much sense in my opinion. If I followed that logic I'd have to run away from every stranger I come across while hiking in the woods (or walking down a dark street at night) in general. For I can never know for sure if they want to do me harm either.

If you worry about everything that could possibly go wrong in the worst case, you're just going to lead a very anxious and unhappy life. And the worst of all is that you're almost certainly not even going to be able to prevent bad things from happening to you despite all your efforts to be vigilant. For the smiling psychopath from your example might also hide from your sight at first, wait until you go to sleep and then kill you in the middle of the night without ever revealing his existence to you.

Horrible thing do happen, yes. But it's pointless to always expect the worst. It's good to be aware of the possibility and to have a plan B at hand if possible, but giving up a very high chance for sth. good (win an ally / do a trade / get informations) just because there's a small chance for sth. bad (being robbed or killed) is not the right decision imho.

And as soon as you've found some allies, your future risk for being attacked (both by unseen psychopaths and hostile other groups) will start to decrease considerably. Only a madman would try to attack a group of 10 alone and even a bigger group would most likely rather prey on loners than on other groups. :normal:

Edited by Scyzara
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Issue is it is a game, a computer program.  Real life is a great model, but different limits exist in here.  While shooting things target gallery style is fairly easy to simulate with a pointer and a trigger button, most role-playing conversation has never evolved beyond turn-based speech-trees with fixed statements and responses.  

And like all elements that are chosen to be coded, there will be a benefit analysis made by the player.  Given choice, if the conversation method delivers the same or even less resources or protections than the bullet-to-the-head method, then becoming a psychopath will favor unless some form of risk can be introduced for having killed fellow humans.

Given a goal of infinite survival (the story must continue, yes?), then it's the Prisoners' Dilemma.  And it is always better to betray...

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone has a different view of the world, what people reveal to all of us in their posts (probably unknowingly) is how they view the world, their attitudes, knowledge and beliefs, i.e. who they are.
Within society as it is, as it always has been, there are social deviants we call them rapists, murderers, thieves, etc. They act out these behaviours despite the social order which is put in place.

What you also get are the opportunist social deviants. For example, during the second world war, people of that age really did believe the world was coming to an end, and although they had their usual social deviants, what was revealed are the 'opportunist social deviants', those rapists, thieves and killers all hiding, disguised as normal members of society but who act out their deviant behaviour when the apparent social barriers which normally keep them in check are disturbed/removed. However, they are still a minority, the majority of people in society are honest people and willing to lend a hand, and it is because of this majority that society exists as it does today (it has order).

Our personal perceptions lead us to believe society exists in a certain way. I'm not a psychologist but I am a social science student and what I do know is that we both shape society and are shaped by it, the fact that the majority of people are good natured is evident through the existence of laws, you are punished for stealing, you are punished for murdering, and you are punished for raping. The majority all hold the exact same values for devious behaviours, the fact that these laws exist is proof. The majority don't like deviant behaviour we go as far as lock deviants up for years on end, and even kill them in certain countries/states.

The fact that many men and woman join the military and give and have given their lives so that others can live is evidence that people don't always place the value of their own life above all else, but that of their family, friends, social groups, and country.
If I had to choose between my life and that of a adolescent, I'd give up my own, based on the fact that the adolescent simply has more years of life left to live, as I'm older. Would you not give up your own life so your child or someone else's could live? The answer seems obvious to me. 

The way you view the world is a reflection of you, I'm not here to judge anyone's view of the world but when you give your own view in a post it is there for everyone else to see. The point I'm trying to make is TLD is a survival simulator, not a psychopath survival simulator. If there are NPC's I'd expect them to behave like people, not like a bunch of psychopaths who have just escaped from a maximum security prison and are on a killing spree. I think if TLD was looking to make a survival game based on shooting things, they'll just be making another DayZ or one of the many other survival shoot em ups. Judging by the fact that weapons are so limited in game, I'm lead to believe they are trying to make something different here.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dirmagnos said:

Im not saying that player should go all fps on the game, im just saying that expecting civilized behavior from both npcs and players should not be a norm.

True, surviving in a group would probably be easier, depending on supply amount in the region(if there is just not enough in the region, then something got to give), but how can you gather that group if you cant really trust any1 ? Some may be sincere and wannt to join to survive together, others may be merely interested in ripping you off, third type is just a murderous sociopath with a smile, who will give you a sicilian necktie when you sleep.

How much fate would you be willing to put into some random person who you probably never met be4 ? People do things that they would never think they were capable of, when they are hungry, hurt, cold or simply afraid.

Most of various "survival" shows lack one crucial element, isolation - if youre hurt, or hungry or whatever, you just pick up sat phone and radio home to pick you up. And you know that you will be rescued. And your mistakes wont cost you your live, unless youre a moron of course. Nobody is gonna save you in the Long Dark.

Would you be willing to trust a total stranger, not knowing anything about his background or motives ? Nobody will come to your rescue if youre down and nobody will punish you if you do something wrong.

Human animal is most dangerous of them all, not because its strong(far from it), but because it, unlike wolves, wont announce its intentions with a growl, it will plunge a blade in your back with a smile. Even if he wont kill you outright, skipping with all your supplies while youre asleep, can be as dangerous.

 

Is this desperate enough for you, look for yourself these are the people in need do they look frighting, where is their animal instinct as you call it, where are the killers here please tell me? I think your mind is over influenced by the TV series which promote violence which is "fun" to watch, This right here is the real survivalism people are just trying to get by day by they sure there will be a few rotten apples here and there, but the majority of them are Doctors, Farmers, Engineers common people just like you and me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I've been trying to stay out of this discussion, but now I've got to bring up something. Two words, really.

Evolutionary behavior. 

Psychologists, anthropologists, and paleologists agree on one thing: Humans have evolved as social animals. This is deeper, much deeper than any cultural bias. Social groups actually predate our species, and is found among our closest relatives the bonobos, chimpanzees and gorillas. They (and we) survive through altruistic behavior and cooperation. Sure, there is conflict, there is drama, there is even war. But those things arise out of the foundation of cooperative groups. Only through such behavior can we ensure our genes survive to preserve the species. Sure there will be psychopaths out there, but their behavior almost guarantees that they won't live long enough to pass their genes on to a next generation. Altruistic behavior increases the chances of one's genetic material being passed on, and really, our genes are the reason for our existence. Survival of the species supersedes survival of the individual. After all, we wouldn't be here if not for our parents, whether they were good or bad ones. 

Yes, it's going to be bumpy for a while, should our protagonist encounter another survivor. Trust is a major issue, but it has to start somewhere. And it costs too much, is too risky, to kill a stranger for something they have, rather than suggesting (then implementing) a cooperative venture towards a common goal, such as bringing down that huge moose that was suggested elsewhere in this forum. Or getting rid of that bear that keeps chasing us off our deer kills and pinning us down indoors where we have no wood left to burn. 

Darwin's theory of survival of the fittest has been misunderstood too long. He didn't mean survival of the strongest, just survival of those with the best adaptation for their abilities and environment. That's what he meant. And in the case of humans, with our lack of inborn armor or weapons (such as teeth or claws or sheer massive size), our brains are the only advantage we have. And for us to make the most of our brains, we need to cooperate with each other, with or without trust. 

Not a psychologist, but rather a biology major, a student of history and animal behavior, and a veterinarian. I've included humans in my observations of animal behavior (after all, we are animals, too - not the top of the food chain neither, IMHO).

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Scyzara said:

I'd definitely take that risk, simply because the probability to run into some murderous psychopath is at least a hundred times smaller than the probability to run into a somehow sane and cooperative person. Even after the breakdown of civilization. :winky:

Distrusting and avoiding anyone per se just because there's a remote possibility they might be sociopaths doesn't make much sense in my opinion. If I followed that logic I'd have to run away from every stranger I come across while hiking in the woods (or walking down a dark street at night) in general. For I can never know for sure if they want to do me harm either.

If you worry about everything that could possibly go wrong in the worst case, you're just going to lead a very anxious and unhappy life. And the worst of all is that you're almost certainly not even going to be able to prevent bad things from happening to you despite all your efforts to be vigilant. For the smiling psychopath from your example might also hide from your sight at first, wait until you go to sleep and then kill you in the middle of the night without ever revealing his existence to you.

Horrible thing do happen, yes. But it's pointless to always expect the worst. It's good to be aware of the possibility and to have a plan B at hand if possible, but giving up a very high chance for sth. good (win an ally / do a trade / get informations) just because there's a small chance for sth. bad (being robbed or killed) is not the right decision imho.

And as soon as you've found some allies, your future risk for being attacked (both by unseen psychopaths and hostile other groups) will start to decrease considerably. Only a madman would try to attack a group of 10 alone and even a bigger group would most likely rather prey on loners than on other groups. :normal:

Hundred times smaller ?!?! I wish i had your fate in humanity. Unfortunately history shows again and again that its not how things are in the real world. Where people simply walk by while some1 is getting killed in the alley just a few meters away. Not their problem. Where profit is almost always put ahead of human wellbeing. Because its business. Where lying, deceiving and corruption extends into the highest levels of the society. Because they can get away with it.

And in case of major disasters, as it happened in LD, all those worst qualities will only come closer to the surface. Greed, selfishness, anger, fear, stupidity. Even during smaller disasters irl, there is always riots, murder and rape numbers skyrocket, ydays best customers vandalize stores and businesses, arsons everywhere. And that considering that world havent gone to shit, that order will be restored and those perpetrators have a good chance to be recognized and apprehended.

Hundred times smaller. Lol. You dont need to be a psychopath to do any of it, you just need to be desperate, or hungry, or cold, or any of many other conditions or their combinations, to completely change your view on right and wrong. Even in a group, with limited resources, it will be a wolf pack mentality - weak will always be sacrificed for the good of the strong. Soft people in a hard world dont really have long life expectancy. Especially considering that whole idea of "western values" are built around those premises.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Axe said:

What you also get are the opportunist social deviants. For example, during the second world war, people of that age really did believe the world was coming to an end, and although they had their usual social deviants, what was revealed are the 'opportunist social deviants', those rapists, thieves and killers all hiding, disguised as normal members of society but who act out their deviant behaviour when the apparent social barriers which normally keep them in check are disturbed/removed. However, they are still a minority, the majority of people in society are honest people and willing to lend a hand, and it is because of this majority that society exists as it does today (it has order).

Our personal perceptions lead us to believe society exists in a certain way. I'm not a psychologist but I am a social science student and what I do know is that we both shape society and are shaped by it, the fact that the majority of people are good natured is evident through the existence of laws, you are punished for stealing, you are punished for murdering, and you are punished for raping. The majority all hold the exact same values for devious behaviours, the fact that these laws exist is proof. The majority don't like deviant behaviour we go as far as lock deviants up for years on end, and even kill them in certain countries/states.

The fact that many men and woman join the military and give and have given their lives so that others can live is evidence that people don't always place the value of their own life above all else, but that of their family, friends, social groups, and country.
If I had to choose between my life and that of a adolescent, I'd give up my own, based on the fact that the adolescent simply has more years of life left to live, as I'm older. Would you not give up your own life so your child or someone else's could live? The answer seems obvious to me. 

The way you view the world is a reflection of you, I'm not here to judge anyone's view of the world but when you give your own view in a post it is there for everyone else to see. The point I'm trying to make is TLD is a survival simulator, not a psychopath survival simulator. If there are NPC's I'd expect them to behave like people, not like a bunch of psychopaths who have just escaped from a maximum security prison and are on a killing spree. I think if TLD was looking to make a survival game based on shooting things, they'll just be making another DayZ or one of the many other survival shoot em ups. Judging by the fact that weapons are so limited in game, I'm lead to believe they are trying to make something different here.

Under right condition any1 can become a social deviant. They are not that rare as some may think. There are hardly any truly decent people in modern western world. And it all begins small, like pocketing a pencil at work. First time is always the hardest, after that it becomes easier and easier with each step. Sure, taking a life is nothing compared to stealing a pencil, but there are plenty of steps in between. And upgrading from aggravated assault to a murder is not really such a big leap. Rarely any1 just wakes up one day and decides to kill his neighbor.

Since we were talking WW2, then another example. Pretty much every1 knows about Hitlers attitude to jews and how it all played out. Taught at any school. However, history is written by the victors, as the saying goes. And i dont really remember from my history classes another simple historical fact, i stumbled on it by accident, since im a WW2 buff. After the millions of germans were deported from their homes in various countries across Europe. And i mean "you have one hour to pack and get moving" type of relocation. Into nowhere. Hundreds of thousands died as result. From hunger, exhaustion, elements. Civilians, who lived there even prior to war and had nothing to do with nazism.

And every1 were ok with it. Including "honest and willing to lend a hand people".

Law is another aspect of society that is not exactly what you have described them. On one hand laws are meant to simplify our lives, by making them more organized. Problem is that many modern laws are either absurd or do not really serve society, but mere limited number of individuals, who had enough influence/money to push them thru. Huge part of politics is dedicated to that. While law is supposed to regulate society thru order, quite often in modern world thay do it thru fear instead. And its not just laws, its whole governmental policies that are build around that idea. Like this whole absurd "War on Terror". For almost 50 years americans were being scared by red threat, and then suddently it was gone. Russia became friend in need... situation that lasted for 10 years. And then new boogeyman was invented to keep people afraid and content, to justify enormous spendings on defensive complex, laws that slowly turn "leader of free world" into orwellian society(ohh, irony),  invasion of independent counties under false pretense, etc etc etc. Good people, huh.

And how many of those men and women join military because they are simply told that they are doing "right thing", while in reality they simply serve as cannon fodder to advance political and financial goals of so-called elite ? How many of them join because they have nowhere else to go ? Or because government promises to pay for their education ? Or because its a place where they get to live out all their most perverted fantasies with little to no fear of punishment ? From Gulags to Guantanamo, from Bay of Pigs to Syria ?

You may say now that youd be willing to give up your life for some unknown teenager, but such illusions rarely pass test of reality. Its easy to pretend to be all noble and righteous while sitting in comfort of owns home, but in reality cases of self-sacrifice for the good of others are extremely rare, one-in-a-million rare. There is a reason that every time it happens it becomes an instant social circus and those who manage to live thru it become minor celebrities overnight. And we are not talking own children, we are talking about total strangers under extreme conditions.

And i would expect NPCs to act like people, real people, not some imaginary idealistic/altruistic bobbleheads, that is an extreme rarity in real life. People who are afraid, confused, hungry, cold and sick. People who are people, not Terminators programmed for good behavior.

Would i like people to be good and decent and honest and empathetic. Yes. Unfortunately its not enough for it to be so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vancopower said:

Is this desperate enough for you, look for yourself these are the people in need do they look frighting, where is their animal instinct as you call it, where are the killers here please tell me? I think your mind is over influenced by the TV series which promote violence which is "fun" to watch, This right here is the real survivalism people are just trying to get by day by they sure there will be a few rotten apples here and there, but the majority of them are Doctors, Farmers, Engineers common people just like you and me.

Are they afraid and desperate ? Yes. But are they desperate enough ? Are they dying there ? Is there little to no hope ? And how far all those doctors/farmers/engineers would be willing to go if things would become bad enough ?

Btw, video for video.

 

Edited by Dirmagnos
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hauteecolerider said:

Psychologists, anthropologists, and paleologists agree on one thing: Humans have evolved as social animals. This is deeper, much deeper than any cultural bias. Social groups actually predate our species, and is found among our closest relatives the bonobos, chimpanzees and gorillas. They (and we) survive through altruistic behavior and cooperation. Sure, there is conflict, there is drama, there is even war. But those things arise out of the foundation of cooperative groups. Only through such behavior can we ensure our genes survive to preserve the species. Sure there will be psychopaths out there, but their behavior almost guarantees that they won't live long enough to pass their genes on to a next generation. Altruistic behavior increases the chances of one's genetic material being passed on, and really, our genes are the reason for our existence. Survival of the species supersedes survival of the individual. After all, we wouldn't be here if not for our parents, whether they were good or bad ones. 

Yes, it's going to be bumpy for a while, should our protagonist encounter another survivor. Trust is a major issue, but it has to start somewhere. And it costs too much, is too risky, to kill a stranger for something they have, rather than suggesting (then implementing) a cooperative venture towards a common goal, such as bringing down that huge moose that was suggested elsewhere in this forum. Or getting rid of that bear that keeps chasing us off our deer kills and pinning us down indoors where we have no wood left to burn. 

Darwin's theory of survival of the fittest has been misunderstood too long. He didn't mean survival of the strongest, just survival of those with the best adaptation for their abilities and environment. That's what he meant. And in the case of humans, with our lack of inborn armor or weapons (such as teeth or claws or sheer massive size), our brains are the only advantage we have. And for us to make the most of our brains, we need to cooperate with each other, with or without trust. 

Not a psychologist, but rather a biology major, a student of history and animal behavior, and a veterinarian. I've included humans in my observations of animal behavior (after all, we are animals, too - not the top of the food chain neither, IMHO).

All that banter about social groups is interesting, yet it refers to already exiting social groups. Groups, that even being strong enough, generally view outsiders with suspicion. And that in already established community. And survival of that community is defined by strength, not altruism. Be it strength of the muscle or mind. Only cases when altruism is shown is out of need or ability. Be it need for new genes in gene pool or influx of new ideas, or simple fact that community can accommodate new member(s) without compromising its overall strength. And regarding parents - there is a reason why maternal instinct exits, natures failsafe to preserve species. Otherwise it would atrophy long time ago.

Group as a whole is stronger than each individual in it, question is how to form group strong enough for it to survive. Most definitely not by inviting every passerby into it.

And how much would it cost to be shot dead by that stranger, be it out of malice or fear ? We are not machines after all. One cant simply discard being human, otherwise there would not be any place left for war, poverty, greed or rage, as none of them benefit in any way society as a whole.

Your mentioning Darwins theory is rather ironic, considering that you just placed your interpretation of it above every1 elses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dirmagnos said:

Are they afraid and desperate ? Yes. But are they desperate enough ? Are they dying there ? Is there little to no hope ? And how far all those doctors/farmers/engineers would be willing to go if things would become bad enough ?

Btw, video for video.

 

This proves nothing but your stubbornness, Video for video what does this mean ?? we are comparing tragedies now? I don't get it I don't see your so cold killers in your video too the animal instinct there is nothing from that, just a bunch of people kicking out fence and the police reacting. I myself have kicked out so many fences and garbage cans in my high school rebellious years I've lost count so does this make me a killer??? NO just a hot temper which is not good I admit and some people just can't get over that but most of them do. It is called growing up. I would like to quote Frank Herbert or more precise a piece from his novel Dune:

"I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."

This is a great philosophy I suggest you read the book he describes how a person can overcome his animal drive to achieve the impossible. In some way we all do it when is necessary, when the danger is real sure at first there is fear and confusion but after a while the fear passes and then you become stronger both mentally and physically, in other words you adapt there are tons of amazing facts about the human body and mind the hidden potential the strength you draw from the simple things when the time is needed to act  or more importantly knowing when not to act. I myself have been in many crisis situations, I trashed my car almost died in colleague I've rescued a man from bleeding out on the ground who cut himself from glass trying to break and enter a convenience store. I got stabbed in the leg once, I've had dozens of motorcycle accidents with no one to help me and so on.. and here I am live and well and in good health both mentally and physically, so to sum up my point is this: I am not saying that people don't do bad things, however most of the bad things a normal person would do no matter how hungry or thirsty or otherwise they regret it afterwards and most of them will at least try to make amends in some way, everything can happen but that doesn't mean that at the first sign of trouble everyone will go ballistic and go on a killing spree .

Edited by vancopower
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dirmagnos said:

 Soft people in a hard world dont really have long life expectancy. Especially considering that whole idea of "western values" are built around those premises.

There's a huge difference between being "soft" and being social. And if you honestly believe that - in a true post-civilization survival situation - some loner who attacks everyone on sight has a higher life expectancy than people working together as a group, you should honestly reconsider your mindset. For if I saw you killing my group buddy Joe in his sleep, the very first thing I'd do would be calling group buddies Bob & Jane, stop being "soft" and bash in your skull together. Very questionable if that would prolong your life expectancy.

And it's nonsense to call the most basic rules of human coexistence "western values". We're not talking about stuff like freedom of the press or gender equality here (these could possibly be called "western values" and even then the term is misleading), but about the most basic moral rules like "do not kill", "do not steal", "do not rape" and "do not harass". These rules aren't western at all, they're shared by all cultures around the whole planet, from the Inuit in Greenland to the Australian Aborigines and from the San people in Africa to the natives of the Amazon Rain forest in Brazil. 

People who violate these rules don't do it because they get magically confused and can't tell right from wrong any more, but because they simply ignore what is right and what is wrong for the sake of their own advantage. It doesn't matter at all how hungry or cold you are, you will always know by instinct that killing a man for his blanket is wrong. Being hungry or cold may increase your internal tendencies to ignore this knowledge, but it won't take away your moral compass.

For this compass is a genetically encoded part of the "human animal" you're so afraid of. And most people will try to follow their compass, even if they don't have to. Simply because it feels right for them. And yes, I do indeed believe that the VERY vast majority of people would choose cooperation (or at least non-violent interaction) over murder. At least where I live and also in Canada where TLD takes place.

If you grow up as a child soldier or in a civil war country and learn from your parents that slitting your neighbors' throats is fine because they belong to a different ethnic group, your internal moral compass will probably be horribly damaged indeed and you may become completely indifferent to killing other people over time. Massive propaganda and traumatic experiences with violence can also cause people to mentally "exclude" other groups from their moral standarts. That's one of the major reasons why crimes against humanity are so common during wars.

But TLD doesn't take place in Rwanda in the 1990s or during the battle of Verdun or in Nazi Germany. It takes place in rural Canada where people are well-socialized and have intact moral instincts. Most NPCs we come across would thus presumably not behave like traumatized child soldiers expecting everyone to kill them on sight, but like normal human beings who grew up in a (more or less) peaceful society.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vancopower said:

This proves nothing but your stubbornness, Video for video what does this mean ?? we are comparing tragedies now? I don't get it I don't see your so cold killers in your video too the animal instinct there is nothing from that, just a bunch of people kicking out fence and the police reacting. I myself have kicked out so many fences and garbage cans in my high school rebellious years I've lost count so does this make me a killer??? NO just a hot temper which is not good I admit and some people just can't get over that but most of them do. It is called growing up. I would like to quote Frank Herbert or more precise a piece from his novel Dune:

"I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."

This is a great philosophy I suggest you read the book he describes how a person can overcome his animal drive to achieve the impossible. In some way we all do it when is necessary, when the danger is real sure at first there is fear and confusion but after a while the fear passes and then you become stronger both mentally and physically, in other words you adapt there are tons of amazing facts about the human body and mind the hidden potential the strength you draw from the simple things when the time is needed to act  or more importantly knowing when not to act. I myself have been in many crisis situations, I trashed my car almost died in colleague I've rescued a man from bleeding out on the ground who cut himself from glass trying to break and enter a convenience store. I got stabbed in the leg once, I've had dozens of motorcycle accidents with no one to help me and so on.. and here I am live and well and in good health both mentally and physically, so to sum up my point is this: I am not saying that people don't do bad things, however most of the bad things a normal person would do no matter how hungry or thirsty or otherwise they regret it afterwards and most of them will at least try to make amends in some way, everything can happen but that doesn't mean that at the first sign of trouble everyone will go ballistic and go on a killing spree .

Really, thats all you have to say ? Stubbornness. You provide video of some generic interview with one of the volunteers who talks about hope as support for your argument. When i provide video argument of the same quality, about pretty much same people(at least they are in same situation) who, from one side, are rioting and have no problem to resolve to violence and from other resolve to tear gas and water cannon usage, you simply dismiss it. And neither party in this video is starving to death or is directly threatened by another. Refugees dont care about law,  they just wannt to get in.

Bunch of people kicking fence and police reacting ? So its a norm for a good lawfearing people then ? On occasion to cause a small riot or two ? To the level that police resolves to use of tear gas and water cannons ? "Hmm, what to do, what to do, maybe go to a pub or go riot a bit on the town square..."

Hot tempered ? There is an actual section in jurisprudence called crime of passion. That goes all the way up to murder. As a sentient intelligent being you could control your impulses and not to kick those cans, yet you chose to do it anyway. There was absolutely no practical benefit from those actions. You may have grew out of it, but how exactly will you grow out of worldwide disaster, an event of massive proportion that you have no experience with even in the slightest ?

Quote is nice, albeit pointless, since were talking about regular people stranded after major disaster, not special forces soldiers who have been training both physically and mentally for years, or indian yoga gurus who dedicate a lifetime to mastering power of spirit over body. Fear is a natural reaction that ensures preservation of the species, you cant just shut it off by thinking about it, unless youve spend a significant amount of time preparing oneself both mentally and physically for it. Or youre a sociopath, who have issues with any type of emotions.

And you obviously have no idea what youre talking about, when presuming that people will remain good and decent in face of extreme hardship. They will either give up and die or they harden themselves and do what needs to be done. Regrets... regrets are irrelevant, because they are part of some distant foggy future, while you are cold and hungry and hurt right now. And when it comes to make a choice, then its not really a choice at all. When it comes to survival, an average person will always chose himself over others. Its programmed in us on basic genetic level. Survival and self-preservation. Aside of already mentioned Prisoners Dilemma there are hundreds(if not thousands) of various researches and tests that show exactly same thing. When pressed against the wall and nowhere to run, people are not as noble and honest and just, as they believed themselves to be.

You provided plenty of examples from personal experience. Unfortunately none of them have anything to do with events of LD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot of interesting opinions and ideas in this thread, and it's always great to get detailed feedback and thoughts from our players. That being said, I'd ask that everyone remember to stay on-topic and avoid aggressive discussion and politically charged commentary. Please remember why we're all here -- To discuss a video game -- and try to return a respectful and calm tone to this thread. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Scyzara said:

There's a huge difference between being "soft" and being social. And if you honestly believe that - in a true post-civilization survival situation - some loner who attacks everyone on sight has a higher life expectancy than people working together as a group, you should honestly reconsider your mindset. For if I saw you killing my group buddy Joe in his sleep, the very first thing I'd do would be calling group buddies Bob & Jane, stop being "soft" and bash in your skull together. Very questionable if that would prolong your life expectancy.

And it's nonsense to call the most basic rules of human coexistence "western values". We're not talking about stuff like freedom of the press or gender equality here (these could possibly be called "western values" and even then the term is misleading), but about the most basic moral rules like "do not kill", "do not steal", "do not rape" and "do not harass". These rules aren't western at all, they're shared by all cultures around the whole planet, from the Inuit in Greenland to the Australian Aborigines and from the San people in Africa to the natives of the Amazon Rain forest in Brazil. 

People who violate these rules don't do it because they get magically confused and can't tell right from wrong any more, but because they simply ignore what is right and what is wrong for the sake of their own advantage. It doesn't matter at all how hungry or cold you are, you will always know by instinct that killing a man for his blanket is wrong. Being hungry or cold may increase your internal tendencies to ignore this knowledge, but it won't take away your moral compass.

For this compass is a genetically encoded part of the "human animal" you're so afraid of. And most people will try to follow their compass, even if they don't have to. Simply because it feels right for them. And yes, I do indeed believe that the VERY vast majority of people would choose cooperation (or at least non-violent interaction) over murder. At least where I live and also in Canada where TLD takes place.

If you grow up as a child soldier or in a civil war country and learn from your parents that slitting your neighbors' throats is fine because they belong to a different ethnic group, your internal moral compass will probably be horribly damaged indeed and you may become completely indifferent to killing other people over time. Massive propaganda and traumatic experiences with violence can also cause people to mentally "exclude" other groups from their moral standarts. That's one of the major reasons why crimes against humanity are so common during wars.

But TLD doesn't take place in Rwanda in the 1990s or during the battle of Verdun or in Nazi Germany. It takes place in rural Canada where people are well-socialized and have intact moral instincts. Most NPCs we come across would thus presumably not behave like traumatized child soldiers expecting everyone to kill them on sight, but like normal human beings who grew up in a (more or less) peaceful society.

Again, im not talking about turning LD into an fps, its the last thing game needs. Im not talking about gunning every1 on sight. Im talking about logical warranted caution.

That whole talk about group is nice, but also presumes that you are already part of the group, people who you can trust. But in case of LD you start alone, you dont know any1 in there. And you absurdly presume that every survivor in the area is just sitting there, waiting for some guy to come along and ask them to join his group.

You like to talk about whole group mechanic, but comfortably forget all the hazards associated with formation of that group. And it far more dangerous that approaching some pretty girl in a bar and getting "fuck off" as response, that stops many even in our relatively safe society(or the same girl who flips off a guy just because he can be a creep).

Basic moral rules, funny. By that reference 99% of humanity are an amoral bastards. What you have written is an generic as it can be and no society follows(or followed) then to the letter, or even in general. "Do not kill" makes every soldier, policeman or even doctor(and God knows how many other professions) a monster. "Do not steal" places pretty much every1 into the same category. How many teenagers would fall into third category ? And fourth one, lol. I believe it was Nietzsche ho sad something along the lines that morality is an illusion, invented by the strong-willed for the weak, who are unable to make a difference between right and wrong themselves. Or now wel gonna debate about degrees of morality ?

Again, spoken as man who never really been truly hungry(or cold). Because it is exactly instinct that drives people to do horrible things that they do. Lack of control or restrain. Instinct is exactly opposite to that thin layer of civility that modern humans are so proud of. People has been killing people for thousands of years, and most likely will continue doing so for years to come, for a blanket, for a loaf of bread... guided by rage, by hate, by fear, by hunger or any other of basic needs or emotions. So-called moral compass is a comfortable illusion that allows us to think that we are better than a horse, for example. Rest is just fear... of punishment, of judgement, of unknown. We are just so used wit that idea, that we think its what we are. Take an average Joe, drop him in a hole and keep him on water for 2 weeks(just enough to survive), and then drop John in an tell Joe to slap John to receive a good hot meal. And then to hit him. Then to beat him. Then maybe even to kill him. And one of them will comply. Maybe not at first, but give it time and proper motivation, and it will happen. People are people, anywhere, everywhere.

All your argumentation completely disregards thousands of years of evolution and history. Based on presumption that now we are better than those people then. We are not. Humanity may have evolved technologically, but we havent really gotten 2 far emotionally. Otherwise wed be colonizing space, instead of fighting endless resource wars or lying and pointing fingers at every1 but ourselves. And speaking of Rwanda, if people are so good and decent, then why nobody gives a shit about endless civil wars of Central Africa, that have been raging for decades ? Why instead those who speak about freedom and rightness the most are more interested in pumping Iraqi oil and apparently far less in keeping country together ?

Edited by Dirmagnos
Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears the warning posted didn't serve its full purpose, as I've removed no fewer than half a dozen posts in its wake. This thread is now locked. Attempts to reignite the arguments being carried in this discussion will result in formal warnings. 

Thank you to everyone that was able to remain calm and respectful during this discussion. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.