Do you guys think?

[Kingllama 18]

Do you guys think that the cities don't really look destroyed enough for a zombie apocalypse?

I feel like sometimes they do if the zombie apocalypse was like a couple days old you know.

What do you guys feel about it?

[ahorseofcourse 22]

Not worth the work that would go into it as of right now. If the timeline was months or years after the apocalypse there would be no loot like there is now.

[Mitritch 4]

Have you ever been in Prypyat zone? I was there, and I can say that 20+ years are not enough for buildings to even look like worn out - despite the lack of maintenance to them.

Back on topic - destroyed cities would be appropriate if there were full scale combat between two major forces with heavy armament. But I doubt that such event will happen during decease outbreak - at very maximum, Police operations will be commenced, and Police usually don't have artillery, tanks and aviation with heavy bombs. And even if army would be employed (as a last drastic measure), still it will use firearms, not heavy weapons. :)

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

What destroyed the buildings? People just got sick and started murdering each other. Doesn't seem like any major combat or military event ensued. In fact it seems like the military pulled out entirely, leaving their equipment behind.

We went out with a whimper, not a bang.

[Sinaz20 0]

Yeah, not really.

The thing that I always find chilling in zombie apocalypse movies is the empty (not destroyed) cities. It's a trope, for sure, but it's effective.

I think a nice bit of ambiance to add to the game would be to incorporate a panicked yelling sound effect to survivors being mauled by zombies.

Could you just imagine you're looting in the quiet, nothing but the ebb and flow of the wind. Then you hear echoing in the distance cries for help and panicked yelps.

Hold that thought-- off to the suggestion forum :D

[Big Boss (DayZ) 23]

There were some military ops going on, with the (usually) horribly placed mass graves and body bags. Ops fell apart and the military pulled out most likely.

I don't think much was going down that could cause massive structural damage, but I expect there would be some fires that ensued. More destruction to the map might be done later on as "polish."

[MrBloodworth 1]

Get a satchel charge and correct it.

[vonlinchen 26]

Do you guys think that the cities don't really look destroyed enough for a zombie apocalypse?

I feel like sometimes they do if the zombie apocalypse was like a couple days old you know.

What do you guys feel about it?

I've never understood why people think that a city would be destroyed just because its occupance have turned into zombies. There was no battle with tanks & artillary, people just died.

[Ingway 4]

A zombie appocalipse would cause alot of fighting but i hardly imagine it would cause buildings to be greatly damged, if it was some kind of all out war like normal then it would be acceptable.

Also, i'm pretty sure we are playing not long after everything went down the shitter, so to expect the buildings to be in bad shape due to time wouldn't work as well, i say it's fine just the way it is.

[JinxX 11]

Well if you think about it the last thing a military may do if a city was infected with zombies is quarantine it, and if they couldn't hold it they'd probably blow it up to try to contain it.

Really depends on the zombie story, we're assuming people infected with the Z-Virus (luls) just started dying off and converting. Which case no one would have seen it coming.

[Kingllama 18]

Well i'd assume they would be damaged due to the fact people barricading would cause damage when zombies attacked. I feel as if the people who were alive would create most of the damage. The satchel charges don't take down buildings from what i've tested or the rpg.