DayZ - Tragedy of the Commons: The Game - Extra Credits

[@extrahistory]

Sometimes when we fight each other for weapons, we end up shooting ourselves in the foot. What do games like Day Z teach us about ourselves, and how we can strive to be better?

[@FuzzyLogicality]

Extra Credits DayZ probably wouldn't be fun without bandits, you can either fight them off or be the bandit, but both options are more fun and challenging than shooting predictable Ai.

[@NuclearSavety]

Hmm i dont think German energy politics us a good comparison. First nuclear is phased out instead of dirty coal power plants because people got scared by decades of political fearmongering. Thus climate protection goes down the drain. And second, even worse, you have forgotten that the small energy consumer i.e. the households have to pay for the energy change in the end. Thus the energy change actually is the tragedy of the commons: everyone who had to spare some bucks invested in solar or wind energy as fast as possible to get the highest state subsidies resulting in a weakening of the grid and skyrocketing electricity costs for everybody...

[@dragoniraflameblade]

Maybe do like in Metro and pay each other in bullets or some kind of common commodity that's also really valuable.

[@MrGrisac]

This is maybe the most inspiring video I've seen in a long time, not only for game design, but for social impact... You gave me a lot to think about....

[@nathanielwilliams3891]

One issue with this analogy is that DayZ is just a game, rather than a something more real that actually affects people's lives in a tangible way. There are no real consequences to screwing up other than needing to respawn, and the simple fact is that many players find the going-solo-and-killing-everyone-else approach to be more engaging than cooperating with a bunch of internet strangers, which is ultimately the most important factor.

[@jellymanwich6299]

"As long as there are two people left on the planet, someone is gonna want someone dead." - The Sniper

[@NortheastGamer]

That can remain true with just one person!

[@tomaszhurek9695]

@@NortheastGamer Perhaps even more so.

[@AKASkobble]

As long as there's 2 drops of oil left on the planet, America is gonna want someone dead.

[@creativecreeper2860]

The sad truth

[@justfrankjustdank2538]

the sniper? there are at least 3 snipers, whomst have you of spake?

[@connoissuer_of_class]

My thoughts when supermarkets started getting raided...

[@humanum2860]

Explanation for those in the future: This was posted during the great toilet paper shortage of 2020.

[@Valery0p5]

Aka the COVID pandemic

[@Morgformer]

My thoughts when capitalism

[@Kerfuffles92]

I was just thinking they shouldve reposted this lol

[@msoda8516]

Mine too

[@alicethetransdalek7333]

Have you ever heard the tragedy of -darth plagueis "the wise"- the common?

[@wisdommanari6701]

ZA WARUDO! MUDAMUDA! WRYYY Bwahahaha

[@robertf3606]

It's not a story the Jedi would tell you...

[@Kirkklan]

Y'see, there was this one dude who could use the force to create life or som'n like...

[@1sdani]

Have you ever heard the tragedy of our lord and savior DIO?

[@Darth_Bateman]

THATS MY JOKE NI WO KUROSU NO-DA!!!

[@funnylaughed7423]

God, this aged perfectly.

[@philip8498]

the raiding of the supermarkets and the mad Panic buyers send their regards

[@AmazingAmatzu]

@@philip8498 raiding the capital building sends THEIR regards

[@philip8498]

@@AmazingAmatzu i mean, that isnt really related to the tragedy of the commons

[@RockOnTheKitchenTable]

I know right scary accurate

[@Roadhouse-h1v]

FR

[@Kapin05]

Weird unrelated side-note to the artists here, but I love how whenever you say "heck" a snake shows up. It's a nice easter egg in these videos.

[@lythd]

i never realised that thanks

[@SyntheticParanoia]

I just wanted a can of beans - instead I got 8mm chunk of lead implanted in the skull. Did not taste the same.

[@Mothman1992]

Synthx that really depends on where you get hit. the right part of your brain will make you taste or smell anything. Hell, you could taste purple

[@XVINutkabob]

And agent orange

[@Twitch375]

DayZ has zombies?

[@bliffybliff4196]

Now they have been replaced with RUSSIAN PLAYERS

[@LittleLoyal]

j Schroeder an insult that would work for the 2014/5 version of the game bb

[@neonaaat6850]

Does that means zomebies in DayZ saw players pvp,took pity on them and left?

[@justcaused6182]

AHAHAHA HAHA OH MY GOD YOU ARE SO NOT FUNNY

[@flynn659]

I don't play the game, but are you making fun of the fact that players(especially well armed groups) are so much the problem to beginner players that they forget about the zombies?

[@MatthewZenith]

DayZ is a bad example to use to make this point, because there's very little reward or impetus for cooperation in that specific game. The zombies in DayZ never "end", they will always respawn. They reward very little if anything for killing them, and consume your resources for the attempt. They've always been a janky, badly-programmed mess that are not fun to fight, which is why most players avoid fighting them except in self-defense. Nobody "hunts" zombies in DayZ as an active effort because it's a pointless thing to do. You will never "clear out" a town, you will never retake a settlement, there's no incentive to cooperation in DayZ beyond your clan or your best mates versus other people doing the same. Loot respawns on every server reload, so there isn't actually dwindling resources, and the resources that do exist in the game only really exist for the purpose of killing other players because there isn't really anything else to DO in that game besides kill people, farm pumpkins or read Moby Dick.

[@NathanGatten]

MatthewZenith This.

[@Azsouth]

Totally Agree w/ this, anyone who has played DayZ knows resources respawn on reset and everything is geared towards getting advantages over and killing other players.

[@ozoneooze]

This was the right answer to this video.

[@GaiLuron578]

Yep, that's precisely the purpose of the game. DayZ is designed to create these cliche zombie movie scenario, it has nothing to do with human psychology. It's as stupid as saying that if everybody was just standing still during a football game, then no one would lose. Yes, and it would be the most boring game in the world.

[@marcinmazurek8124]

At the very least, cooperation and solving the tragedy of commons would resolve the issue of winding up naked in the middle of nowhere with a bullet in each leg because you found a sandwich and a pair of pants someone more heavily armed than you hadn't.

[@devinchandler8428]

8:03 remember PUBG when u need ammo but your friend says he doesn't have any and when he's dead, u loot him and sees that ammo u need like 200x bullets and he doesn't have the gun for that ammo and you unfriend him for good

[@serencefrostbite3362]

Why does this feel like it's from personal experience? XD

[@gregoryyang8988]

What really happened: How does one drop ammo? I am dumb.

[@rolandcaters7258]

Gregory Yang when you die, you drop all your stuff, and you can also drop stuff to either clear out your inventory or to give to an ally

[@gregoryyang8988]

@@rolandcaters7258 I know. What I meant was that the teammate may have been too dumb to even drop ammo.

[@mummel2013]

The renewable energy part is not quite correct. Greetings from germany. Nice videos tho

[@The360MlgNoscoper]

Yes to Nuclear energy, no to whatever Germany is doing nowadays

[@Ggdivhjkjl]

Then could you please tell us what is correct about Germany and how to access the money you want to give us?

[@niydfass1060]

How so? I would really like to know.

[@MrRafagigapr]

@@The360MlgNoscoper nuclear is safer cleaner and way more efficient and cheaper than renewables Germany fucked up and is buying nuclear energy from France

[@loginavoidence12]

@@niydfass1060 i build power substations and plants for a living. people think that magic and ponies raining from the sky will fix all emission issues and whatnot. some energy sources are not appropriate for the application. for example, if you were to turn an electric blast furnace at a steel mill, but you only have a solar farm in gen assets. that won't work at all

[@alanhembra2565]

I was actually on a server for DayZ where all the clan leaders made a pact and divided up the map with the military sites and large cities as neutral. We'd check with each other before going in to make sure there was no friendly fire. We also assisted new comers to the server and earned them not to loot other player bases. If they complied they got help and maybe an invite into a clan. If they stole everyone ganged up on them and drove them off the server. If people got bored clans would arrange skirmishes. If there was an accidental fight clans leaders worked it out. It was slit if fun. The admin added in several NPC factions in large groups and upped the zombies. There was a trade post eith NPC sellers and where players coyld make trade deals and trade in a protected space and the admins played as UN peacekeepers. It was awesome. Then a KZbin got wind of the server and came in with his fan boys and wrecked the community. He ran amok until the community figured him out and then when he got his add kicked so bad he couldn't get good footage he accused the community of cheating. So the community combined to run him off. He pulled his support of the server and defamed it online. The admin shut if down. This was of course the DayZ mod with Epoch not the crappy stand alone.

[@Edgewalker001]

And there you've instead illuminated some other wonderful properties of humanity. Namely how one person can wreck almost anything as long as their famous, rich or powerful enough.

[@nnovatakaren5515]

would you happen to know the youtube channel? for mocking purposes

[@swallowedinthesea11]

How many times do I need to apologise?! It was just for a good laugh.

[@alanhembra2565]

Yep. The KZbin was in it for money via his viewer ship while the rest of us played for fun. He even offered me cash if I set my own clan up as his victims. Pissed me off. He played for cash, we played for fun.

[@dumpsockpuppet5619]

Alan Hembra reminds me of the minecraft 2b2t server and the youtuber TheCampingRusher (minus the difamation part) althought i. That case one can argue if he really pkaned it or if it was just a side effect of a big youtuber highlithing the server brought a flood of fanboys (and griefers), also it was an anachy server wich had had plenty of civil wars before

[@AnimarchyHistory]

So... what you are saying is... the means of production... should belong to the citizenry who generate and operate it for the collective good...... Extra Credits confirmed comrades

[@mrelephant2283]

Workers of the Gaming Industry Unite

[@PackedWolf]

That part, communism had correct. Too bad all the contemporary "communist" regimes of the 20th century didn't follow that idea, instead concentrating wealth and power among a group of communist party officials; inadvertently creating the exact scenario that Karl Marx railed against, except it was party officials rather than corporate titans who got all the wealth.

[@flufflepants362]

COMRADE CREDITS

[@GhostInTheShell29]

I think the inherent flaw with communist revolutions is in order to take the resources of the country and redistribute them. You have to create an extremely powerful authoritarian government. To take said resources. Then that government needs to give that power and the wealth back to the people. There seems to always be a failure with step 2. I blame human nature.

[@aliencat1001]

GhostInTheShell29 read the bread book, anarchist communism is a thing

[@Roadk1ll21]

Does this means the solution to the Tragedy of the Commons will sit in early access for 4+ years?

[@RoyalDog214]

DayZ, the world longest alpha.

[@Roadk1ll21]

Who leaves alpha first? DayZ or Star Citizen?

[@TomJason25]

Yeah, next to Rust and Project Zombiod, yes?

[@123waynemark]

Day z is dead. They already stopped the content, and focused on porting.

[@db1416]

😂😂😂😂😂😂 nice one dude 😂

[@davidschaftenaar6530]

7:28 Uhm,, small correction: Germany has some of the highest electricity prices in all of Europe, They are nearly twice as high as those in France, for example.

[@AlienTreeGuy]

Also some of the highest co2 pollution per capita of all of western europe! Simply because of the unsubstantiated fear of nuclear power.

[@sebastienholmes548]

THANK YOU

[@davemonkey26]

7:30 I understand its supposed to be a spiral of "Me" but my dumb internet brain can only see a ton of Meme's

[@YiWeng]

Recently played Nicky Case's game "The Evolution of Trust": ncase.me/trust/ Seems relevant to the topic.

[@PCspray]

Thanks for the link, i'm now playing this Edit: Just finish'd ... WOW that was amazing !!!

[@TheLampl1ghter]

This game. I love this game now. Thanks for introducing me to this guy's work!

[@Gandalf_the_Black_]

That's a great way of showing that distrusting everyone leads to everyone losing out

[@exoskeletons]

Snek yeah

[@caramida9]

I've seen it when it first came out... it's lovely done

[@0KJaye]

Simple solution : in games with survival make the zombie threat big enough to actually make people feel like thier is a Choice to make. Zombies in day are no threat therefore no choice. I guarantee if you spawn people in groups in a house together with zombies pouring in people will work together. The threat has to be big enough that even ONE IDIOT knows he won't survive by himself. And maybe not even with a group......

[@2MeterLP]

Yeah, you barely notice the zombies in Day Z. And if the game isnt about surviving the zombies, that leaves only one group to use the guns on: players.

[@Doctorgeo7]

Don't be so sure. What's stopping the survivors from simply grabbing what they can and bailing? The zombie horde? People are still gonna try anyways because they trust themselves more than they trust a bunch of strangers.

[@2MeterLP]

Doctorgeo7 maybe 2 or 3 times. But if the zombies are so dangerous that you need cooperation to survive people will learn eventually. Too bad the real life only has one earth, so we cant learn through failure.

[@TheFatman2K]

There are zombies in DayZ? I just remember hours and hours roaming the countryside attempting to get to the same location as my friends so we could play together.

[@avtzmx1985]

i play an old game called tf2, we have a gamemode where you and 5 ppl fight against AI, so all 6 must cooperate to win that mode, but you always find assholes who only think on themselves and don't help the others, and you must pay to play that mode so many times you get stuck cos they are bad playin or don't want to hear the others

[@ZorlockDarksoul]

Props to the artists on this one. Once again, I was immensely amused by some of the visuals. I love that EC now has its own stash of memes to draw upon. And that Stardew Valley reference? Noice.

[@t40xd]

ZorlockDarksoul, Walpole made those memes from his financial wizardry powres.

[@hannahm7646]

I loved the star dew valley one XD

[@blunderbus2695]

IT WAS BWAAAAAAAAPOLE

[@mr.a8335]

ZorlockDarksoul Where's the Stardew Valley reference? I want to see it

[@ZorlockDarksoul]

3:30 Farmer trying to remember Shane's birthday.

[@bee2hive]

Greetings from Germany: We shut down our nuclear reactors in reaction to the disaster in Japan. We do produce a lot of wind and solar energy. But we are burning a lot of dirty (brown) coal to make up the rest. So at the moment we put out way to much CO2.

[@einarsharpe7637]

bee2hive modern nuclear is so much safer, and Germany is probably one of the better places to have a nuke plant

[@GrimRuler]

"Japan got hit by a tsunami! Quick, shut down our nuclear reactors" -Germany

[@azkamil]

precisely double the emissions per Kwh than France.

[@technoturnovers7072]

having a nuclear reactor blow up is like having a passenger plane crash; it's big, spectacular, and not actually very common in the grand scheme of things.

[@sazam1966]

And meanwhile, buy french nuclear energy.

[@ColoniaContraAtaca]

Ooooh, I can see this problem on KZbin hehe Great video as aways guys :D

[@kaionunes7162]

Que pena que vc não vai responder esse comentário,mas, legal ver vc aqui.

[@everyone5200]

Você ? AQUI ? KKKKKK MANERO

[@CraftBasti]

I'm sorry to disapoint you, but we germans actually buy nuclear energy from France.. (and they don't have nearly as many regulations as we do! Politics....)

[@c4blew]

Although that´s more like a temporary thing because Merkel, as usual, has rushed that descision without having an actual plan how to do it. Doesn´t change the fact that Germany is one of the leading countries when it comes to renewable energy and other countries will learn a valuable lesson from our mistakes when they do the switch!

[@TheBespectacledN00b]

c4blew Well, you say that, but the nuclear industry is one that roads a lot to get going again once neglected, never mind actually shut down. Years of indecision from the nineties onwards has given us enough sturgeon to maintain existing plant and get new build going here in Blighty, even without ever deciding to actually shutdown.

[@c4blew]

Sure, apart from lobbying, the german government has pumped millions of DM into building these reactors in the past and knew they probably would be sitting on the costs of storaging them, so they naturally were inclined not to abandon nuclear energy and write that money off, but now that the decision has been made building new nuclear plants, at least light-water-reactors, would be political suicide and met by heavy resistance from the german population who are overwhelmingly against nuclear energy. Also without the massive subsidies that made the reactors profitable for the energy companies in the first place, building new plants is pretty pointless since it´s not profitable for them anymore. They might try to keep the existing plants running as long as possible but that also would be more and more difficult because of the security concerns of the german population. I´d say Germany for that reason will even start to pressure their neighbors like Belgium to shut down old brittle reactors near their borders like Tihange etc. because the security risk are too high. Breeder reactors is a different story however, since the used fuel rods from the LWRs, that now have to be costly storaged, could be re-used and would be much less radioactive afterwards. Also Breeders are far less dangerous since they can´t produce a fallout so I could see people changing their minds about that...but LWRs, no, that ship has sailed.

[@DIEGhostfish]

And you've been burning more coal and Natgas than ever thanks to Frau Merkel hitting the fucking panic button after Fukushima.

[@kruesae22]

Lasting Longbow but you can turnoff wind turbine and you can stop solar panels from inserting energy. In my country side are many turbines and if there is a windy and also sunny days, some of turbines won't rotate. The problem isn't too much energy, it is the distribution among Europe. For example the bavarian government blockades the creation of an "energy lane" through Germany, that would solve many problems.

[@dkz8394]

one week later *Extra Credits advocates communist revolution*

[@flufflepants362]

COMRADE

[@arnowisp6244]

Wouldnt be surprised if they did.

[@arnowisp6244]

Dkz 1917 They are social engineers in disguise.

[@Syphaxis]

To what? Further demonstrate the point made in this video?

[@flufflepants362]

REVOLUTION

[@hexerin]

Sorry, but this time you guys have over-thought the topic so much that you're creating issues that don't exist. The *real* problem with DayZ is that the "threat" of the zeds is non-existent. There's just so few zeds, and they're so incredibly easy to deal with in so many different ways. This makes PvE gameplay incredibly dull and tedious, which naturally incentivizes investment in the PvP gameplay.

[@Twitch375]

I think their focus was way more about communicating the idea of the Tragedy of the Commons. Even though DayZ isn't strictly as they describe it tries to be and helps that idea along.

[@NathanGatten]

Its a great channel, but the overthinking pf the narrative tends to be a recurring problem

[@thebadman6169]

Its because most zeds died again, they starved due to lack of players playing. :P

[@EugeneParallax]

Indeed. No matter what the original intent was, Zeds ended up being nothing but an obstacle to move around in a loot-dense areas freely. Merely having a zed chasing a player was making him vulnerable for detection by other players, let alone using firearms to deal with them, which meant they had to be dealt with silently or avoided entirely. It was never been considered anything beyond that. Spontaneous cooperation requires incentives and means. There were neither in DayZ - no direct real-time voice link or ally tagging for beneficial teamwork without friendly fire and betrayal, no need for teamwork against Zeds, futility of picking up or waiting on fallen teammates and necessity to separate spoils. The problem essentially is that DayZ is not a case for Tragedy of the Commons, as it didn't hinged on people perpetual self-interest, but rather that the mod itself was designed to be bare-bone and aside from pre-intended team bonds, nothing facilitated or maintained cooperation from mechanical perspective.

[@MitchellFarted]

Absolutely this. I get that they wanted to illustrate the whole "tragedy of the commons" to their gaming audience, but DayZ was a pretty poor example. DayZ wasn't meant to be a PvE experience, it's meant to be a PvP experience where everyone is out for themselves and the interesting conflict that it creates. This is why PUBG/The battle royale genre is the natural evolution of DayZ, it takes the core experience of DayZ (The PvP) and removes the useless bloat (The Zombies) to create a more focused and fun experience.

[@andrewuy1294]

Players don't just suddenly not trust anybody, there is actually reason behind this (you guys even made a video on this called bartle's taxonomy I think). It is because of the killers that the players are forced to not trust anybody because killers are known to betray and kill for their amusement and anybody could be killers so in the end you could say that the creators of this game knew that people were going to betray and kill each other (and that is the only thing we were going to do) in making this huge landmark of a game. It's not that people don't want to work with each other it is actually the complete opposite of that. People really do want to work with each other. Its just this idea that the killer will come out and stab you in the back.

[@SpaceMissile]

"Hey, welcome to the server! Here's an AK and some bandages to get started. We've got a nice, littl-" *gets shot immediately*

[@twinkacast]

When 90 percent of players shoot on sight you either shoot on sight or you die.

[@peterwhite6415]

@Himalayan Duck Pretty much, other times tranfers are really just done in groups with other groups on skype or discord since nobody will trust a random.

[@thatguyinthegroup2728]

You literally just repeated the video's point..

[@jakesmith4874]

This is also the dark forest theory

[@cheater556]

I feel like the tragedy of the commons doesn't work in the context of Day-Z. In Day-Z alot of the fun comes from messing with other people.

[@michamaciej9563]

dayz just shows what people resort to when they know they dont need to take responsibilty for their actions

[@Avenus112]

For people who find that fun yeah.

[@sdmitch16]

@@Avenus112 For people that don't, there are other games.

[@Avenus112]

@@sdmitch16 for real.

[@jessekane6224]

@Michal Maciej In my opinion, GTAO is what you get when people aren’t responsible for their actions

[@howudoinmun]

The problem with this example is that almost nobody plays dayzto surivive for as long as possible. They play it to kill other players, build bases and get cool loot. Killing other players is the end not the means.

[@OverexitedPlayer]

Now, a DayZ where the goal is to survive prolonged periods of time with everyone else... That could be interesting. Then again, its not at satisfying as murder.

[@howudoinmun]

Yepp, don't know how you would make that fun. But it would be very interesting if someone could make that work.

[@RurikLoderr]

We already have that game.. Ark.. That game requires you to work together if you want to get anything done. Arguably it even has more insidious kinds of PvP, since your body remains sleeping whenever you log out. One of the worst things you can do to a player is put shackles on them while they're sleeping. Yet, despite all of that, people tend to work together in that game so long as people don't betray your trust.

[@mekafinchi]

I like the snek that appears every time you say "heck"

[@TunaBagels]

The snek?

[@mekafinchi]

TunaSammich yes

[@lilyminer9164]

3:31 Is that? No it can't be shane from star dew valley. I didn't think you would use those characters thx

[@CristopherCutas]

very applicable right now.

[@goeddy]

gotta say dayz is a bad example, the goal of dayz is not to beat the zombie apocalypse. in fact there is no goal to the game. so why should players work together if there is nothing to achieve or to be gained form cooperation. the only reason players work together is because they can overpower other players, and thats what they did. in games where there is a global goal for players to achieve, players usually work together remarkably well. even in games like rust or age of conan players dont fight other players because they couldn't achieve a goal on their own, they just want to achieve it faster plus fighting other players is also a lot more exciting then fighting an AI for hours. i understand your theory and what you are trying to say, but the examples you used where very poorly chosen/analysed. it feels like you just wanted something to confirm your theory and didn't bother looking into why players behave as they do in those games.

[@rmbee5412]

While it's true that some players enjoy choosing a goal that is mostly competitive (as you said, the goal is up for the player to decide), it is reasonable to assume that the same liberty in choosing a goal is used by other players to justify a more cooperative one, and thus apply some of the sociology discussed in this video to that end. Of course, a main thesis of the video was that group cooperation is in fact better for the individual overall, and that therefore even individuals who only act in self-interest should use it. Thus it's important to didtinguish between players who attack each other just for fun (for whom this discussion isn't relevant) with players who attack each other because they think it will be beneficial from a rescources perspective, even if it isn't in the long run. The latter group should be made aware of the psychological fallacy causing their actions, as it will improve their outcomes in-game.

[@RAFMnBgaming]

It may not have an explicit goal but it has an explicit failstate: Death. Arguably your existence should be spent trying to avoid that as long as possible, don't you think?

[@rmbee5412]

...And given that death can be avoided given sufficient in-game rescources, it makes sense to adopt a cooperation strategy for the sake of long-term death avoidance.

[@goeddy]

shure, but avoiding death is not the same as "defeating the zombie apocalypse". also cooperation does not really help much with surviving against the zombies. the safest way to play dayz would be to run around random villages and scavenge food with a crowbar. everyone does that once, until they recognize its just boring. see there is a mechanic in the game that spawns zombies around you if you shoot guns. thereby guns are completely useless for defense against zombies, except in very tight situations. the reason for this is to make player fights more interesting since on top of players shooting each other they will also attract more zombies. all of this is to emphasize dayz is at its core a pvp game. all the survival elements just serve to give more weight to death, thereby increasing tension in fights. now for rust and age of conan, survival itself isn't even much of a challenge, where there no other players, so that argument is even harder to make. another point to counter that whole argument is that generation of resources in games does not constrain to the same rules as reality. you can't overfarm a plot of land and it will loose its grass. resources always generate at the same rate, regardless of if, how or by whom they are beeing used. atleast thats the case in 99% of games. its not like its not possible to do it realistically, but it would be very complex to communicate such mechanics to players in a transparent way. its a lot easier to just have resource X generate Y amount per time, and thats it.

[@RurikLoderr]

I'm going to assume you guys never played DayZ for terribly long, because cooperative play becomes the means to control the large sections of the map after a while. I was a master admin for one of the more popular DayZ servers back when it was still a mod, and the vast majority of players that stuck around for long would find small groups they would work with. Those groups often fought over resources, but given how much attention we put into preventing cheaters from being able to wipe players progress (regular backups of the SQL database and tools we used to watch for suspicious activity) it tended to allow players to collect resources and even vehicles to hide in the middle of nowhere with some small asurance that it would still be around the next day. Once it became possible to collect resources that needed to be protected, people started working together almost immediately. Our slightly modified map allowed for three or so helicopters to be spawned at once, and I distinctly remember a time where a large group of players took control of one of the helicopters, loaded it with ammo, and took it around stealing people's shit before absconding to their hidden retreat in the middle of nowhere. The only reason that it didn't go further was just the limited ability to prevent server restarts, cheaters, and the lack of real base building mechanics.

[@ryanwelch1272]

A major problem with bringing the long term goal to these games is it’s kinda boring. With games like DayZ and Rust, getting resources is kinda boring, and it doesn’t have the same creative liberty as Minecraft or Terraria. Yeah, it’s safer to have the server work together, but it gets kinda boring. It’s fun when niceness is the exception, not the rule.

[@samr8889]

Yes I agree. If everyone co-operated in say Day-Z what would you end up with? Besids a barn full of stuff, and a lot of pepole ambling about beeing bored and not shooting stuff x3

[@kirklange]

Thought this was going to be a video on the tragedy of DayZ's development. :P

[@GamerSmacks]

You see I always fall for this trap, because I know someone will always fall for the trap, I just want a head start.

[@troypetersen1063]

I think you're forgetting one absolute flaw in this: I WANT the tragedy of commons, I WANT to have "dwindle down to the last man" scenario. This to me, is immensely fun.

[@qpSubZeroqp]

@@theinternetpolice4365 Which is exactly what this Troy person wants. Some people just want/like that kind of thing. Even in real life some people want war for nothing more than to create drama which is considered to be an exciting thing for them

[@ericesoteric3835]

@@qpSubZeroqp Some people just want to watch the world burn.

[@undeadwill5912]

I mean Jurassic park is intresting. But never as interesting as when everything goes wrong. Conflict makes the story.

[@drmaniac5763]

but.. why do we want to stop this in games? Part of what makes DayZ so great is the fact that this phenomena exists at all. If it didn't, the game would be outright much less fun. If anything, having a platform to indulge in this kind of behaviour is pretty cathartic, because we know we can't be that selfish in real life, and it serves to highlight how terrible that kind of action is.

[@javkiller]

Precisely. What made DayZ amazing is that it being a petry dish of humanity's worst debauchery made the rare altruistic act all the more impactful. Also it's generally fun to be an asshole in a game ABOUT BEING AN ASSHOLE.

[@lazilypunctual2863]

jav to bad I heard that they made the game pay to win

[@raptorguy3493]

D08 no they didn’t?

[@batenkait0s657]

what games have this?

[@jeric_synergy8581]

There are people who (stupidly) think that cooperation in the real world is for chumps. Those people suck. They are known as "libertarians".

[@adamblakeslee5301]

If we want to talk about systems of trust, we've GOT to talk about EVE Online. Nothing else demands cooperation and yet promotes betrayal like EVE.

[@isaiahfisher2337]

Imagine a world where governments didn't exist and the only real power structures were corporations, and you have EVE. EVE is practically capitalism, the game. But IN SPACE!

[@RurikLoderr]

And yet.. look at all those players have accomplished. They broke all expectations for achievement in terms of what the players have access to. Titans, impossible for one player to grind, are able to be made through cooperative play that all stems from players seeking out their own opportunities and desires. Individuals, working in their own self interest, wind up creating something collaboratively that would be almost impossible otherwise. If anything, I think EVE shows the success of capitalism, it's capacity for progress and growth in an otherwise entirely hostile world. Hell.. take the lowsec systems in EVE for example. Unlike nullsec (where the player alliances live) there are tons of restrictions placed upon what can and can't be done. Lowsec is a significantly more dangerous place to roam as gangs of criminals that know how to avoid the law of the land are just fucking everywhere. Yeah, nullsec is dangerous, but not as dangerous as lowsec and only slightly less safe than highsec. The power blocs in nullsec typically war out of boredom for how safe things tend to become. I've seen that played out time and time again.

[@samharris246]

RurikLoderr, EVE would be so successful if it wasn't impossible for new players to get into.

[@RurikLoderr]

One, it is successful. Two, it is easily possible for new players to get into it. Three, it's not for everyone.. it's a very complex game and it asks a lot of the players involved.

[@alexanderreusens7633]

There is an update for the alpha version, makes the f2p less like an unlimited trial version

[@HardyHarHar404]

The Hecknomancer Snake returns! Did you see it?

[@Atlessa]

got a timestamp?

[@HardyHarHar404]

2:41, right as Dan says 'heck'

[@maxalej]

The snake is actually more old than that but don't remember the episode in which episode appear

[@DrJurdenPeterbergsteinlerwitz]

I totally disagree, but you will prob not read this: DayZ had/has absolutely no reason to co-op. None at all. Resources respawn, so it is not like loot become that scarce because of player, the loot is just scarce in general promoting/forcing to kill strangers. There are nothing else to do in DayZ than eat, walk and find guns. So the only gameplay possible is gunfights, which is why people KoS not due to T of Commons. Loot becomes even more vital with the fact that you can build absolutely ZERO objects; No base, no crate, no locker or anything to store. There is no reason to coop in DayZ, besides with your friends. Strangers are useless and the only coop you can have is a chat over the mic. People does not just share equally in real life due to friendship. We are group animals and cooperation makes survivability easier, than if you ate all yourself and let the colony starve. Nature at its finest. This is not the case in DayZ. Sharing makes YOUR chances to survive lower, while hoarding increases it. Nice idea, but you should have picked another game to relate to. DayZ simply does not have the content to promote anything else than KoS.

[@lewiscarroll4145]

Nuclear power is the answer especially a thorium reactor

[@loremipsumdolorsitamet9542]

ALL HAIL THORIUM

[@MorsInvictus]

Sure, why use clean wind and solar power if we can instead use a dangerous process that leaves us with radioactive waste for the next 200,000 years or so. :P As for the thorium reactors: We'll see about that if they manage to develop one that actually works as advertised. There's still a lot of speculation involved.

[@tacticstonk4740]

@@MorsInvictus simple, we need enough power to use all of are different things

[@klosnj11]

@@MorsInvictus look into thorium reactors. Very different animal to the uranium reactors. The waste has a way shorter halflife and the plants can easily be designed to be melt-down-proof, even (especially) in the event of human failure or natural disaster.

[@TheTank1900]

I’d like to point out that the original tragedy of the commons example was almost entirely fabricated by Britain’s nobility to seize common land for themselves. In almost every community the common land worked out great because there was trust and community within the villages. Trashed of the Commons only comes into effect when there isn’t trust and where maximizing personal profit is the biggest goal.

[@anlumo1]

I think this has to do with the size of the community. As long as it's 100-150 people maximum, it works fine. After that, the system breaks down.

[@TheTank1900]

to the contrary, there were large communes throughout Medieval Europe that existed with communal spaces for generations. Take Dithmarschen, for example.

[@dynamicworlds1]

anlumo1 most commons for most of the middle ages were within that size range. Add a small amount of enforcement for larger ones and you're pretty well off.

[@TheTank1900]

not necessarily. There were a number of large ones that lasted for generations just fine by just being a commune. Dithmarshen for example only ended when it was invaded and conquered by local nobility afraid its existence was starting to cause dissent over a hundred years after its creation.

[@Seth9809]

Are you sure you aren't just a socialist?

[@plainlake]

Not exploiting all for short-term personal gain? Get out of my yard pinko!

[@SuperVoodude]

Another tragedy of the commons example: The houses that leave a bowl of candy out on Halloween. Those giant bowls are usually empty in less than an hour 😩

[@bificommander7472]

SuperVoodude But the kids who took the big scoops aren't screwing themselves, since they probably weren't planning on coming back after filling up their bag.

[@alyasgrey9370]

I've rarely had anyone just grab everything in a bowl when I've put one out.

[@nddragoon]

3:48 the combat shotgun and super shotgun have different ammo counts and chainsaw is in weapon wheel 0/10 literally unwatchable

[@thetarr2]

yeah ok but 420 ammo heehee funny number

[@matsthecat3401]

Aaannnddd the chainsaw has ammo?

[@antonioscendrategattico2302]

Bracing myself for all the libertarians in the comment sections.

[@fulcrum2951]

They're 'libertarians'?

[@_swamp_witch]

@British Mapping I think you've got it mixed up here. The term Libertarian was originally used to describe anti-authoritarian leftists, often anarchists (Peter Kropotkin, for example). Today, however, "libertarianism," is used to describe ideologies opposing state interference in the economy, and emphasizing competition over cooperation. Milton Freedman, or the U.S Libertarian party would be examples of this type of "libertarian."

[@Sparticulous]

That is a stab in the heart man. Nothing wrong with us

[@undeadwill5912]

@@_swamp_witch because we actually shrink the governments power over the individual.

[@louisa.520]

@@_swamp_witch how is that not the same. Doesent being anti goverment mean anty Authority? Is anarchism actualy a left Ideology? Because Kommunism and socialism which both need (as far as I know) a lot of governence and they are both considered to be left ideologys.

[@jonathanvautour7899]

Dear extra credits, I understand that the use of DayZ in this scenario of PvP shooting-yourself-in-the-foot. That being said, many survival games revolve around PvP as a central mechanic, to put humans against each other. If a game is purely focused around the common enemy, the undead, there would be no PvP, as it would be useless. But it is not, and having PvP can actually entise players to work together against a bigger threat of other humans(in a perfect scenario that is, which I have actually been apart of myself) If you ever get around to seeing my comment, take a look at what else we can learn learn from survival games like DayZ 1) The self vs. The group vs. The everyone 2) How humans interact when truly given the choice to kill everyone 3) PvP vs. PvE, pros and cons 4) Primal instinct vs. Methodical thought, which will get you further 5) How realistic is too realistic in survival game scenarios That's all I got for now, but I'll be back. Cya!

[@badoli1074]

I'm pretty sure DayZ was only taken as a representative title for the whole genre. Of course the whole genre of survival games inhabits this issue. The video was not meant as a rant about the game, but an explanation of the system that lies underneath, how it influences the behaviour of players and how to design future games around that. Your points are valid, but have nothing to do with what the video was trying to say.

[@laerin7931]

I think the fallacy is their assumption that DayZ was meant to be a PvE shooter, and people just started fighting each other because of lack of trust. That's not the case, however. The PvE component is quite poorly designed, and pretty much everyone played that game specifically for PvP. All of the games in that genre were designed specifically for PvP, and people played them specifically for that experience. In other words, it's not the issue, it's something that the developers of those games intentionally designed their games for(the original DayZ mod was created by someone influenced by his army experience, where one exercise had them dropped off into the jungle with the goal to survive, with each soldier working on his own). It would be a good example if the game was actually designed in a way that would make mutual cooperation of all players valuable, but instead there's really no reason to have such levels of cooperation in DayZ, because the reason why one is playing this game is specifically to fight other players.

[@AnthonyGarcia-lz1zc]

I don't think EC assumed DayZ is a PvE shooter. I mean he even says it in the video. As game designers, they rely on this piece of psychology to make the game fun. He's explaining WHY DayZ works. Not how it should work.

[@xplorethings]

And then, when there is a lull in energy consumption in Germany, they just dump all of it on neighboring countries with little regard for their power grids, often causing localized blackouts. Well, what a system! It's just large scale enough that you failed to see all the resources required to keep it working, which disappoints me.

[@Murdrad]

I love the cows, I love how EC draws animals. The silly houses from EH are the best part of EH.

[@jamespotter1436]

Co-op is just sooo important in so many situations! Just think about how ants work

[@Exindiv]

I love that you actually used and explained the term "tragedy of the commons" correctly.

[@jsbarretto]

Just a heads up: You state that paying law enforcement is a disadvantage of introducing laws to prevent the tragedy of the commons. While this is true, it's also a disadvantage of privatising land: this time, the private landowner must pay their own security guards to do the same job (or - as in modern western economies - the state pays law enforcement through taxation). Since the landowner invariably wants to make money (why else would one bother administrating such a project?), this cost just gets placed upon everybody else as a component of the land lease - meaning the overall cost of privatising land is generally higher than socialising it. Whichever perspective you take, preventing tragedy of the commons amongst an arbitrarily large population (anarchism doesn't work in a community of any substantial number of individuals due to lack of trust) NECESSARILY requires the paying of law enforcement in one way or another.

[@jsbarretto]

Disclaimer: I'm very strongly in favour of economic Georgism.

[@dstblj5222]

Not really because while people generally don't most business have a acceptable loss percentages at the point of economic return

[@Seraphim_Works]

Or the companies could band together to provide their own common but private security without the bureaucratic oversight. This isn't unprecedented either. Medical professionals near me banded together in small groups to offer affordable health insurance once the Obamacare regulations hit.

[@BingusTheWockis]

@@jsbarretto doesn't almost everything ever produced require land to produce it?

[@fabienso5889]

One of the basis of your argument is that the landowner wants to make money Some philosopher whose name are quite well known disagreed on that and believed that the creation of a new selfless man was possible through education and/or social pressure

[@zeromailss]

oh man, this is definitely one of the best educational channels out there! I learn sooo much from watching all of the videos and a lot of them are applicable in real life, keep up the good work EC team!

[@bbbzzz234]

While I appreciate your positivity, this was not one of their better videos...

[@justiceheartliberty8618]

にゃあエイリアンMeowAlien 💆

[@releasethekraken5039]

Read the communist manifesto instead. At least they're up front about their narrative and political views

[@herbivorethecarnivore8447]

Long story short, people who kill on sight in survival games are always the problem.

[@plainlake]

IRL too

[@2MeterLP]

You barely notice the zombies in Day Z. And if the game isnt about surviving the zombies, that leaves only one group to use the guns on: players.

[@sydneygorelick7484]

This hits different in the Corona era

[@rubyoliver3317]

I am constantly impressed at how deep this channel is in terms of encouraging viewers to engage in the big picture, in the community of our world. So so good!

[@Squirrelbslayer]

Ok, now do one about the megalixer effect. Where an item is so good it never gets used.

[@marcogarcia3023]

That happens when people save good stuff for big battles, in bt5, I have really good stuff, but I never use them for a big battle.

[@Jak239JC]

Is there a reason why that happens?

[@RAFMnBgaming]

Make it possible to lose the item in battle, that way there's always a "use it before you lose it" incentive for the player. Kinda like Super Sonic. You don't want to pop it before you have enough rings to sustain it to the end of the level/boss because that will leave you vunerable but the longer you put off using it the more likely it is that you'll drop all your rings before you get the chance.

[@karolmierzejewski1392]

Managing resources? You mean hoarding every item/potion and like never ever using it up in case a really tough battle comes?

[@homemhomemcriancahomemmulh3873]

Basically what i do in pokemon?

[@texteel]

in most games I always feel they are "cheating". Then I slowly warmed up to them, starting with potions my char crafted, and branching out from there. At first they felt like outside help, something I should be able to do without.

[@XyntXII]

well that example with german energy is funny, since those got cut big time quite some time ago AND that is not a german/EU power plug.

[@The360MlgNoscoper]

Just use Nuclear there is no safer option.

[@georgezwick3717]

“Remember the tragedy of the commons, Remember DayZ” It sounds like the beginning of a poem.

[@justicedunham4088]

Germany isn’t a good example when their carbon footprint is higher now due to the energy sources being extremely inefficient and requiring coal plants to be turned back on (the dirtiest moment in time) to make up for shortages, and pay other countries to take their power when too much is produced and threatens to destroy the power grid

[@giordanokruger3826]

The mod (now standalone release on Steam) "No more room in hell" is a pretty fantastic example of this concept, your character can just grab EVERYTHING he sees and try to solo it all but that never EVER works, meanwhile if you are considerate of the needs of the group and share the gear fairly your group (with You in it) is almost guaranteed to survive.

[@deniskomarov342]

Ye... some times you will meet good soul who will shoot you in back for medecine. So work with group but don't trust them

[@hughmilner7013]

Ironically, the best example of "the commons" being protected by community cooperation is... the commons. English commons were highly effective at being sustainable, but was destroyed when landowners gained control over the commons. As some others here have stated, corporations have regularly employed "tragedy of the commons" arguments to privatize land use and, caring very little for an individual scrap of land in a large landholding structure, have no problem being unsustainable. Privatization is therefore generally a threat to the long-term future of common resources. In short, small communal land use control is generally quite effective and sustainable. Those social controls work well in a community where the impact of irresponsible land use is easily seen, and where the loss of common resources would be a major loss to all who use it (true from pasture lands to fishing grounds). In small environments, extensive regulation and control (such as dedicated policing or laws) are replaced by the local social pressures to conform to standards of behavior, and the recognition of (and concern for) consequences to neighbors and family if the resources are squandered. But, as Extra Credits rightly points out, humans are rather bad at taking long-term and large-scale perspectives, and the larger the system gets, the more just taking that little bit extra sounds reasonable and "harmless." This is reflected in the modern world in lots of ways, such as people groaning about or shirking paying taxes (not seeing that these resources maintain roads and services that we all depend on and benefit from), or such as global climate change (one person won't change the climate at all appreciably, but there's 7.6 billion of us, so...). One of the problems I see games suffering from is that there are no consequences for bad behavior. In most survival games, anything can be built or destroyed in moments, so breaking rules (and things) costs you little to actually do, and often can be easily repaired (so the cost of it happening in return is minimal). Additionally, the cost to the player to misbehave also remains minimal. Social ostracism works great when you are trapped in a community, but a player can often shift from game to game with minimal consequences, so there is often little need to play nice. Games seem to need some mechanism to enforce rules and restrictions - costs to make cooperation more valuable than competition. For instance, making multiplayer survival games require more cooperation to progress or to destroy said works (so even playing destructive PVP requires cooperation to function), or in general focusing on making the PVE experience the most rewarding part of gameplay. Finally, I feel that a non-insignificant number of people get on games to play out their worst instincts safely and without consequence (and I'm glad that they do it on-screen rather than in-person), but this means that people often do not come to the game looking to play as their better selves.

[@jeric_synergy8581]

What a surprise! The elite spoiling things for the masses!!! As per usual.

[@stephano353]

so it is essentially a more complex version of the prisoners dillema?

[@legomacinnisinc]

Yeah, I was getting that too. My first introduction to game theory was this whole idea.

[@hedgehog3180]

Which is also where it fails because the prisoners dillema assumes no communication and the tragedy of the commons has that as an hidden assumption but if you take one second to think about it, it becomes obvious that the others will just tell whoever is over exploiting to cut it out. If they don't stop then they'll risk being outcast which is more or less certain death.

[@dumpsockpuppet5619]

hedgehog3180 but beung told to cut it out is regulation and statism, and having to do anything for others or to do any sacrifice for the sake of others is comunism, HOW DARE YOU?!?!?!?

[@spindash64]

There’s a difference. In the Prisoners’ Dilemma, betrayal is better in the short AND long term. In this situation, there is legitimate reason to cooperate, and the main reason to cheat is actually a fear of cheaters

[@kenansabic2901]

spindash64 Explain to me how is there a benefit to betrayal in the prisoner's dilemma?

[@ZoggFromBetelgeuse]

Great video! Really inspiring! Now please excuse me, I've to buy stockpiles of noodles and toilet paper in the grocery store, before my neighbours do. (Written in France in march 2020)

[@horizontal4099]

Extra Credits: everyone share! Hungry Games:

[@epauletshark3793]

Did you misspell that, or are you referencing something different...

[@Thomas-wn7cl]

Who took the commons in Britain? The wealthy landowners. Some forests also used to be in the commons, and it was where people gathered their firewood. So, once the common people were thrown off the commons and the land ended up in the hands of the elite, the common people were squeezed for every last necessary of life and many people actually died for lack of basic resources that were at least partly provided by the commons before they were privatized. So maybe Neoliberal privatization of modern common resources might just end up in a capitalist squeeze, just like it always has.

[@isaiahfisher2337]

Which is why the "tragedy of the commons", which is usually used to say "we should privatize everything", makes a much better case for some form of cooperative or planned economy. Just make sure that everybody knows the rules and there are consequences for breaking them, and there's no need to split up land for consumption, or create private tyrannies.

[@Thomas-wn7cl]

Peregrine O'Connor, or, in the case land, it could be broken up into small holdings as opposed to giant estates. Hunting in the USA would also be a good example of regulating resource consumption.

[@TheBespectacledN00b]

Thomas Except those elites then create four field crop rotation and selective breeding which in turn meant more food was available. This plus the displacement of labour was, among other factors, what made the industrial revolution possible.

[@Thomas-wn7cl]

TheBespectacledN00b, monks introduced crop rotation, and it was implimented by their tenant farmers on eclesastical land. It was certainly not the idle rich that came up with these improvements. Many other industrialized farming methods, like Cyrus McCormack's reaper, came from the United States, and improvements like seed hybridization and many other crop improvements came out of the state extension universities, seed companies, and Quakers.

[@thatboringone7851]

That's definitely what happens when you privatize with no thought to regulation, purpose, or who will control the thing in question. Design a system where there is incentive to fairly provide based on the original purpose, and regulation over actions that would detract from it, make it more appealing to the right people, and it can (keyword can) work. That said there are definitely things that are better off or have less of a risk of not providing for it's purpose when not privatized. Privatizing everything without thought is as unhelpful as never using it at all.

[@systemhalodark]

And this is exactly why I strongly dislike most "survival" games and the insidious hobbesian ideology they encourage. What made Minecraft great was that once resources are secured, you may strive for greatness instead of living in the fear of others.

[@runelt99]

Did you ever play an multiplayer game without admins enforcing non pvp?

[@Mercure250]

The great thing about Minecraft though is that you can do a lot of things without PVP.

[@Mercure250]

Jumping to conclusions much? I just said Minecraft is a great game if you don't like PVP, since you can do a lot of other things in it. And I happen to not be a big fan of PVP in survival/building games. Is all.

[@ZxCrono]

Mercyre250, you might want to avoid minecraft then, especially online. but I guess you don't play online, or only play online with pvp off if you haven't been completely raided by another player already... even with pvp off, people still find creative ways to fuck with you. lava dumping, tree burning, TNT, people get REALLY creative sometimes..... and if you go as far as to regulate these things, all you do is make minecraft worse for people who like using these things for legitimate purposes to suit your needs. by all means though, I don't have to play with you, and THAT is what makes minecraft great, it is a sandbox first, then a survival/building game... if I don't like how you play in your sandbox, I can find another.

[@SupersuMC]

+Mercure250 I play on a whitelisted non-PVP server that has applications through its Subreddit (which I won't mention because of fanboys, as discussed above in another thread). It's a small community where we each pretty much do our own thing, whether it be roleplay or building awesome structures or whatever. One player, true to his username, fishes for enchanted gear to make superweapons. As for me, I tend to tame a pack or two of wolves as PvE buddies, tame a horse, and do some farming and mining as if I were playing singleplayer Minecraft, which is just as well considering the fact that the community is small enough that you often find yourself alone. :)

[@ilejovcevski79]

Ironically, in a real life zombie apocalypse this how the outcome would probably look like :/

[@jondoe5937]

Probably? More like what it already looks like. Hunger isn't an issue in third world, war-stricken areas like parts of Africa because there's not enough food to go around, but because certain groups and individuals (warlords, dictatorships) simply don't share it.

[@ilejovcevski79]

Yeah.....and that's what makes me sad....

[@person_who_likes_games3826]

7:10 thats a terrible idea

[@haydencrawford8552]

This video has become relevant again because of the fucking coronavirus and TOILET PAPER, and hand sanitizer

[@Groovebot3k]

Anyone who has played D&D already knows about sharing incentives when it's time to divide up the treasure... assuming your paladin could keep the thief from being selfish.

[@Edgewalker001]

While the thief is slowly amassing gold and experience until he can prestige class to assassin and pay to have fancy enough gear made to backstab everyone in their sleep. ...What? You KNOW I'm not allowed to play chaotic evil characters anymore... =p

[@OfficialBiggBenn]

Edgewalker001 Edgy. Chaotic evil characters can be a lot of fun if played right but just backstabbing everyone else in the party isn't fun ;) James Kaplan And then the fucking Paladin takes some of the loot because it has an evil aura or some shit, even though it's a magical artifact that could help produce a ton of good in the hands of the wizard, if only the Paladin didn't have a stick up his ass. Or maybe that's just my personal experience with paladins :D

[@texteel]

I heard many complaints about paladins holding the group back, refusing to work with certain characters, this "magic hogging" is totally new, but should be expected of zealots of "everything different is evil"

[@OfficialBiggBenn]

Caleb Wilson, If it makes sense with your character, I say go for it. Don't be surprised if the other players get annoyed though. Unpredictable behaviour is obviously unpredictable, and if it's too random it just ain't fun to play with. But like I said, as long as it's in character it's only half as bad. texteel, To be entirely fair, I'm fairly certain it was actually an evil artifact. But I could've annihilated an entire enemy army with it, but noooooooo, it's evil, period.

[@romano21A]

I live in Germany, we actually built solar panels on our roof and are selling the power for a higher price than the power we buy for normal usage. But the incentives and therefore the prices dropped quite a bit, so if you build solar panels now you're selling for less, so you have to try to use the energy yourself and probably even storing it

[@ketchakik]

There's one big problem with getting this to work. People in online games don't view other players as human. Makes it really hard to get people to care about other players

[@emikochan13]

That's completely incorrect. people want to compete sometimes, doesn't meant your opponent isn't human, it's not like they are losing anything if they lose the game.

[@trent3836]

"in online games" Oh, if only.

[@mrpokemon1186]

Oh boy, this is relevant again!

[@epauletshark3793]

Small groups who know and trust each other is how the best governments function. But we try for huge centralized governments that have huge amounts of corruption and people working for personal gain.

[@amandazanone9525]

Germany getting rid of nuclear power is not good

[@Noxempire]

Maybe the People would Work together If the Zombies were actually a threat.

[@mccordinator]

Earthbound outro music YESSSSSSSS :D

[@mikked01]

Now you will learn the power that comes from being third!

[@LoonAtticLtd]

Elinor Ostrom actually proved that the tragedy of the commons can be avoided without requiring top-down regulation. For this she became the first woman to win the Nobel prize in Economics. Granted, she proved the tragedy of the commons as avoidable only if eight conditions were met, such as fast and fair conflict resolution and effective monitoring, which is probably why the adage appears true in most player groups in DayZ (although on that note I'd love to see a metagame evolve attempting to utilise her methods within a DayZ server), but her work provides a fascinating insight on how these sorts of widely held truisms on the nature of human behaviour can be dispelled by implementing systems and evaluating the factors in place when such a system does fail or succeed. I'd recommend anyone who enjoyed this video to research Ostrom and her principles for common-pool research as it makes for a really valuable addendum to the outlining of the tragedy of the commons as explained here. Hopefully one day we'll see a part two covering Ostrom's work and how it can be or has been applied in games.

[@aquariumnite]

Germany imports fossil fuel or nuclear energy during the winter when it is dark and less windy. Humanity currently doesn't have the energy storage technology to operate a pure renewable energy grid without spinning reserve. Take it from an electrical engineer who researched graphene capacitors. Nuclear is the way to go for carbon neutrality.

[@verdatum]

You can sell excess solar energy on the grid in the US as well...Except for Hawaii, where they have a massive overabundance of solar energy, so instead, you gotta store it locally, generally with a battery bank. The major problem with the US model is that a lot of people buy into these companies that give you panels for free in exchange for the revenue obtained from selling that power. So I urge people to instead secure a loan, and buy the panel yourself. You get tax breaks on it, and you get to reap the benefits, particularly in the summer. It also keeps your house cooler by shading your roof.

[@animatepotato545]

Basically what people must know in this pandemic

[@TheApoke]

Ajit Pai should watch this video.

[@theroguenetwork1083]

6:37 Cheeky Easter egg you got there

[@LaceNWhisky]

In 2020, replace every reference to guns and ammo with toilet paper.

[@FallenEpic]

5:05 *NO!* That is what *caused* the Tragedy of the Commons in the first place! Originally most land in England was common land. Over grazing became a serious problem when the very wealthy started to privatize land, they would still graze on common land and use their land for crops (or not at all even just to show off how wealthy they were).

[@shioneshiori4471]

I think he pointed out that the drawback of that would be way worse than the benefit.

[@q20gamer90]

I saw the crowbar tune in to a snake when unsaid heck

[@vitabricksnailslime8273]

The "tragedy " of the commons. Oh yeah. The nobles have annexed almost all of the land, leaving a tiny portion for the use of the peasants. And, holy shit, they're overusing it! What a tragedy. Guess we'll have to enclose this for our exclusive benefit so that it can be saved.

[@eugenekilgallon587]

The issue with "the tragedy of the common" is that it became an example without it ever having happened(literally- as in we have no written record of it ever having happened in England) the needs of the community check the forces of individuals fairly effectively.

[@CaptainKillroy]

All you say is true. For I have experienced everything from Cannibal Cults, to bandit groups, to The Brotherhood of Steel, To The Drifters, to militaristic groups, and dictators, to safehouseses and taxi services. Such is the joy of DayZ -John TAN (Captain of The TAN Army stationed in Zub Castle)

[@lextatertotsfromhell7673]

Ai : watches this AI: the best course of action is to exterminate all humans Humans fight over resources and kill each other Ai: nevermind

[@vol10O000]

2:41 look at the crowbar that becomes a snake

[@dylanhindnarch5655]

You ever heard of foxhole?

[@JaceGem]

7:08 Problem is that... well, they're getting rid of a much more efficient fuel source in favor of a less efficient one. Wind, solar, and water power will only get you so far, but nuclear, when people aren't fucking morons and actually use their heads, is so much more powerful than all three combined.

[@andrewriker2192]

God, I hope we can get games to teach people how to think/feel for the common good.

[@Metyhel]

READ THE BREAD BOOK

[@lorizoli]

"It seemes that the secret to avoiding the self-intrest spiral is in..." Robbing taxpayers blind and promising them mathematically unobtainable results . Congrats.

[@Nyghtking]

Wouldn't work IRL at least in America since we're taught from the ground up to prioritize ourselves over everyone else. What you just explained would be called socialism, one of the things we've basically been programmed from when we are young to think is a bad thing for some reason, and if there is one thing people in America fear it's having to give a portion of what they own to anyone else even if they don't need it and even for the greater good.

[@Nyghtking]

That was communism, they are similar but one of the differences if that the people should control the means by which items are produces and distributed which is socialism, communism is the idea that private property should be removed and everyone should have access to everyone elses things. This is a vary basic break down of both of them.

[@Nyghtking]

devinhallsworth - you mean communism? while similar they are vary different, but you'll find a lot of people use the terms interchangeably. The basic ideas for both are as follows: Communism: no one owns property, it is all shared. Socialism: The people should control the ability to make and distribute items. What you just gave an example of are two countries that weren't socialist, they were communist.

[@GnarledStaff]

Nyghtking Establishing a fair or equitable system of sharing resources based on trust or social pressure is not necessarily socialism. It can actually be democracy. Government is designed to address the tragedy of the commons and other social issues. Fascism deals with it by giving it to the corporations that are owned by the government. Capitalism means the government, if it exists, has less control over these corporations, often just ensuring that they follow a few simple rules (like not murdering the competition). Dictatorships and Monarchies are run by a single person who makes decisions on how the commons can be used and by who. Oligarchy means that several people have that power- often a few families rule a whole nation. A republic elects someone to make these decisions, often having periods of time that they serve so if they do poorly they can be replaced. Democracy is a system of government where everyone in a community votes on major decisions. It is arguable whether everyone has to agree and whether those who disagree are forced to go along with the results. This is typical of some tribal government. This is also very close to how many small towns operate (in the US). Often social constructs such as “traditions” keep people from acting out too much and will reinforce accepted (hopefully positive) behavior. Think of the stereotypical small town where everyone goes to the same church and we all know when that one person starts to do something a little different. Socialism developed because in cities this sense of community existed among the poor- but unlike the small towns the business owners and corporations were not part of the community and this were not kept in line by community respect and tradition- they were free to abuse the common folk- many of which were immigrants. Note that this was the time period where we started realizing that workers needed rights. This is where the 40hr work week and companies having to pay for workers medical bills if they were injured on the job came from. So the idea of socialism evolved as a sort of enforced democratic community. They added some more rules and changed the name. The reason they had to come up with a new name is that many in the US think that our republic system is democracy. (Voting does not make the democracy, its actually based on consensus. Though the definition has arguably changed because people have been misinformed for so long.) Communism is often seen as the end result of socialism by idealists who see it as a utopia. What it really is is mandatory ___. I dont want to say mandatory socialism because the examples we have tend to look like dictatorships. Where as democracy is something you join communism is something forced upon the community. (Socialism is somewhere between the two, ranging from essentially democracy to essentially communism depending on the specific example). The problem with democracy is that it has a very weak government. Basically, ALL the people have to decide to do something. Historically this mean that wise men had to go along and convince everyone that they were right. This may work in a small community or even when working out disputes between two or three communities but once it becomes impossible for one man to explain his proposition to everyone and answer each individual’s question the system starts to break down. Thats why the US is a republic that tries to encourage democracy at the town level. This also means that when one county or state needs help- be it soldiers, firefighters or blankets- we can order another district to assist instead of waiting for each individual to decide to head over with their musket or extra blanket.

[@Nyghtking]

Geordin Soucie - interesting, so based on what you said which do you think America is or is becoming since the government seems not to care about the average person anymore and the government keeps turning down ideas that would help the common man in favor of things that benefit only rich people and corporations?

[@Sewblon]

"What you just explained would be called socialism" Not necessarily. Its possible to pay people for contributing to the well being of others and penalize them for harming others while the means of production still lie in private hands, and that is all we really mean by "mutually beneficial incentive structures."

[@Atratzu]

Extra Credits has to be one of my favorite educational-gaming channels. :D

[@SilverMe2004]

Nope, that is not the Dayz that I've played. might as well have used pubg as your example