Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes

52 (33.5%)

No

103 (66.5%)

Total Members Voted: 154

[alway]

Heh, that webcomic can be found in its entirety here and I would highly suggest it. And btw, the author wasn't joking about the vampire squash being a thing.

Back on topic, zombies are effectively a method of easily creating a plot in which they can base a modern apocalyptic setting. It gives them enemies who can be slaughtered without remorse and a sense of survival as the primary goal. Could they go and create some elaborate back-story to do effectively the same thing? Sure; but keep in mind how badly most apocalypse back-stories go. To get an apocalyptic setting out of modern reality, one needs to either invoke nuclear war (which, if anything, is more constrained in possibilities than zombies), invoke aliens (just as cliche as zombies, and even harder to pull off well), or put the player in an apocalyptic setting which is localized to a specific small region.

Using zombies then gives the gamer an idea, instantly, what the game is about; story is of relatively minor importance. From there, the developer is free to implement more or less whatever sort of gameplay they wish without much thought for possible interference from the plot.

[Draco18s]

Heh, that webcomic can be found in its entirety here and I would highly suggest it. And btw, the author wasn't joking about the vampire squash being a thing.

The image I posted was wrapped in a URL tag.
But yes.  Digger is worth reading.  I've twice considered purchasing printed copies.

[lordcooper]

A zombie RTS could be cool if done right.  You control a small squad of 4-8 versus thousands of zombies.  It would need a killer plot though.

Maybe?

No.  That is turn based and is in a fantasy setting.  I'm really not sure why you're suggesting that?

Actually a zombie scenario is implausible.
If one waited atleast 1 week then all of the zombies would die of starvation.

That one -really- fast metabolism.

[Virex]

What if the zombies were all children in cute outfits, and the cure was in a bottle just across the room but you can't get to it without killing a few. 

Then when you distribute the cure they all start crying because you killed their best friends!

Knowing myself I'd probably shoot the remaining kids to make them shut up...

[Draco18s]

A zombie RTS could be cool if done right.  You control a small squad of 4-8 versus thousands of zombies.  It would need a killer plot though.

Maybe?

No.  That is turn based and is in a fantasy setting.  I'm really not sure why you're suggesting that?

It has undead.

[Deon]

I've been noticing this trend for a good bit myself. There's one thing that has bothered me in Zombie campaigns of any media/sort. Why aren't there any zombie animals? Whether exclusively, or just as rabid and ferocious as human zombies? Let's say the local zoo or pet store just got hit by the same outbreak that has caused your town to go to hell. Zombie elephants, crocodiles, and hell, even sea creatures. Zombie mice/rats and even bugs would be especially a nightmare since there's so damn many of them. Nowhere is safe anymore, seeing as even the most innocent creature from the standard house cat to even a mosquito can infect a person into a zombie themself.

The only other game(s) that come to mind that do involve mother nature getting infected by the same problem is Parasite Eve and Resident Evil.

It's pretty simple. Most of the viruses are species-specific. Some of them are genus-specific and a few are family-specific. Having a kingdom-specific virus would be totally weird, especially one which acts in SUCH a certain way: turning into zombie. Even if a virus could be contracted by another animal, it would be either carried over or cause totally different sympthoms. A common scenario would be a virus which zombifies certain species but kills others or is carried/ignored by them (as a madness virus in 28 days later).

[a1s]

More something like this:

Wow, I was going to suggest that, and it turns out I was stealing ideas from XKCD.

My idea was to give the player bios to collect from every person they killed + cure at the end (which, though not a certainty is what you're questing for from the get-go). The great part being that you want to kill zombies because it gives you more bios*- way to be a jerkass, player! 

*well either that or you don't care about the text bits, in which case this wasn't aimed at you.

Ok, next idea: you kill zombies for 4 hours and then it turns out you are a crazed gunman, and they're just people.

[Draco18s]

Ok, next idea: you kill zombies for 4 hours and then it turns out you are a crazed gunman, and they're just people.

There's no moral choice.  The game forced you into a singular path, there was never an option to not kill the "zombies."

[Flying Dice]

Ok, next idea: you kill zombies for 4 hours and then it turns out you are a crazed gunman, and they're just people.

There's no moral choice.  The game forced you into a singular path, there was never an option to not kill the "zombies."

What if the game was set up in such a way that it would be entirely possible to run through it without ever killing a zombie, say if they were slow-moving and with proper preparation, stealth and timing you could make it through every situation without ever causing harm to them. But, on the other hand, there would be plentiful weapons and tons of zombies around, so the vast majoriity of players would go ahead and gun them down by the score. Using that as a base, the idea actually seems interesting, provided the 'true' ending was only played if you beat the game on the hardest difficulty, or with some arbitrary constraints, etc., to prevent it from being massively spoiled right after release.

[Draco18s]

It's still too contrived.  If you sneak through the whole thing: surprise, they weren't zombies, you were just crazy?  And now you get the happy ending.

Although, given that, all moral choices in games are contrived.  No game yet has made me feel remorse or guilt over having done the "wrong" thing (only frustration).  I'm not even sure XKCD's mod would do it.  I think that'd just make me feel disgust.

[Saint]

I'm tired of zombies.
Think of something new already.

[Moghjubar]

It's still too contrived.  If you sneak through the whole thing: surprise, they weren't zombies, you were just crazy?  And now you get the happy ending.

No: you sneak around, and then it turns out they really are zombies and they finally mass on you and kill you. Always got to be one step ahead of the player.

[GlyphGryph]

Draco, some games, I think, manage to come off feeling justifiably contrived, and DO offer real choices. Like the Fallout 1 and 2 games - you can make quite a few choices in that game that, while occassionally binary, are not completely contrived. In fact, you might not even realize on the first play through how big an impact some of your choices can have.

I could see a modern game offering that level of choice and more if it wanted to, though I haven't seen many try.

Oh, and Fallout had zombies in it

[Andir]

There's a significant difference (IMO) between having zombies and basing an entire DLC or game around zombies.

I have no problem if one of the creatures in the game is a zombie as long as it's not the only creature.

[Virtz]

Oh, and Fallout had zombies in it

Not really. Ghouls were always just mutants. They never rose from the dead. Well, there was that one guy they buried alive in FO2, but still.