Romero Zombie vs Rage Infected

[drewmaw 56]

During Rezzed, Dean "Rocket" Hall officially announced that the infected in DayZ are being considered zombies. A question came to my mind as to whether or not DayZ should adopt (or merely leave the option open to players) whether DayZ zombies should be the George Romero walking zombies or the Danny Boyle 28 Days Later "Rage" running zombies. I came across an interesting article on the Guardian, written by Simon Pegg, co-creator of one of my personal faves, Shaun of the Dead. He personally believes that the undead shouldn't be allowed to run (full version here) (Also, see new example of slow moving zombie animation in another ARMA mod below):

"I know it is absurd to debate the rules of a reality that does not exist, but this genuinely irks me... zombies don't run. The speedy zombie seems implausible to me, even within the fantastic realm it inhabits. A biological agent, I'll buy. Some sort of super-virus? Sure, why not. But death? Death is a disability, not a superpower. It's hard to run with a cold, let alone the most debilitating malady of them all."

"Zombies are our destiny writ large. Slow and steady in their approach, weak, clumsy, often absurd, the zombie relentlessly closes in, unstoppable, intractable."

"...speed simplifies the zombie, clarifying the threat and reducing any response to an emotional reflex. It's the difference between someone shouting "Boo!" and hearing the sound of the floorboards creaking in an upstairs room: a quick thrill at the expense of a more profound sense of dread. The absence of rage or aggression in slow zombies makes them oddly sympathetic, a detail that enabled Romero to project depth on to their blankness, to create tragic anti-heroes; his were figures to be pitied, empathised with, even rooted for. The moment they appear angry or petulant, the second they emit furious velociraptor screeches (as opposed to the correct mournful moans of longing), they cease to possess any ambiguity. They are simply mean."

"The Japanese video game company Capcom developed the game Resident Evil, which brilliantly captured the spirit of Romero's shambling antagonists (Romero even directed a trailer for the second installment). Slow and steady, the zombie commenced its stumble back into our collective subconscious."

"Inspired by the game and a shared love of Romero, Edgar Wright and I decided to create our own black comedy. Meanwhile, Danny Boyle and Alex Garland were developing their own end-of-the-world fable, 28 Days Later, an excellent film misconstrued by the media as a zombie flick. Boyle and Garland never set out to make a zombie film per se. They drew instead on John Wyndham's Day of the Triffids, as well as Matheson and Romero's work, to fashion a new strain of survival horror, featuring a London beset by rabid propagators of a virus known as "rage"."

"The success of the movie, particularly in the US, was undoubtedly a factor in the loose remake of Romero's Dawn of the Dead in 2004 with the upgraded zombie 2.0... desperate to satisfy the MTV generation's demand for quicker everything - quicker food, quicker downloads, quicker dead people."

"The genre was diminished, and I think it's a shame."

I personally think that zombies should be walking in DayZ as both many will agree and disagree. The question is, since we can all agree to disagree on whether zombies should be walking, shouldn't it come down to server preference? The Romero zombie threat could be offset by an increased amount of zombie count in the server. Which would make it just as difficult. As you aggro zombies in a realistic fashion, say 50-100m out, you're attracting a lot of attention, that attention draws more zombie interest, and, let's say, during your looting, the intensity of quickly looting becomes an issue, since THEY are coming! The zombie attention also draws player attention, etc. The walking zombie still becomes a real threat, especially in HUGE numbers.

Running zombies in DayZ are arguably more annoying than threatening. The ARMA engine arguably would allow for more realistic portrayals of Romero Zombies than Rage Infected. And, since we aren't calling them infected anymore, should we even follow a "Rage Infected" style zombie?

That all being said, should servers be allowed to choose? The difficulty of the DayZ mod doesn't stem from zombies alone anyways, it stems from player vs player and environmental survival. The zombies are just the trimming. As Rocket also said at Rezzed, "DayZ is a survival simulator, zombies were always just an interesting way to draw attention to a survival mod, much more interesting than say peak-oil." Walking Zed won't diminish the constant heightened threats of DayZ, at least no more than the rising hacker community, at least with a server choice between walking and running Zed, at least we're having fun. :)

Well, what do you think?

ADDED VIDEO (From user: Ammo)

Edited July 12, 2012 by drewmaw

[amudkipz 46]

Romero zombies are slow and numerous and in general horde creatures, boyle zombies are more pack creatures, they tend to be confined to cities, but because there are fewer of them they are faster. Also romero zombies are unkillable if I remember correctly.

[Diggydug (DayZ) 331]

If they were harder to kill then yeah I'd prefer slower zombies in greater numbers. Basically the typical zombie where a headshot is the only way to kill them so each shot is precious. That, to me, allows for a true fight or flight response. The only problem with this is I don't think the servers could handle that many zombies to compensate allowing them to remain dangerous.

[snig08 1]

romero zombie ftw

[Roguepacket 12]

Oh yes, a discussion older than time itself. If server performance were not an issue, I'd personally like to see both zombie types - the large meandering Romero Hordes generally conglomerating around cities, with Rage Zombies striking out into the woods and outlying towns, hunting players. That will give you something to be afraid of in the woods other than bear traps.

[ThePunisher (DayZ) 12]

i agree with slow zombies, I love Project zomboids outlook on zombies as well and I think this would be some good reading for you folks for the whole fast vs slow zombies thing.

http://projectzomboid.com/blog/index.php/2011/04/fast-vs-slow-zombies/

be sure to check that out, another one of my favorite zombie games.

[KWilt 157]

Well, if they're not infected anymore (in the sense of 28 Days Later) I'm completely cool with shambling and bumbling.

[LumberBack 43]

yup, hords of harder to kill and slower zombies gets my vote. played on SE3 today which was stresstesting the 1.7.2.1 patch, it had over 1500+ zombies, didnt feel any slowdowns what so ever.

[Dingus (DayZ) 429]

I prefer Romero zombies myself. However, there are a lot of changes to gameplay having Romero zombies would have, particularly when it comes to the choice to fire a weapon or not. Slow zombies make firing your weapon less threatening, especially for our sniper friends. Adding Romero zombies would require several changes to "rebalance" the use of firearms.

[billytehbob 6]

I liked the zombies in the Walking Dead. Rewatching the first season, it seemed that individual zombies would move pretty slowly, but when they grouped up, they became a fast threat. You'd have the occasional ones that move pretty fast by themselves, but most of them would shamble along loudly trying to get to you, while also attracting more zombies at the same time.

[opticalshadow 27]

one of the massive limiting factors to slow zombies, is that the engine cannot handle large enough hordes to ever become a threat if they are slow. even 1500 zombies in the size of the current map is nowhere near enough to become a threat.

the other problem is, what slow zombies represent vs fast ones in other aspects, such as psycological. rocket has went pretty in depth with this over the course of many posts. fast zombies work for todays mindset far more then slow ones.

the other problem with slow zombies, is even in large numbers, they generally never become a threat, until you give them extream numbers (such as 5 zombies witin every few feet of the player at any time) no more room in hell does this nicly, but it is vastly smaller maps, so its easy to crowed.

also id really love to not refer to slow zombies as romaro zombies, the guy did a couple of good movies, but then he ruined them b having zombeis develop feelings, the ability to play instruments, and work firearms, yeah he did some major thigns for zombies, but he did alot of really really terrible things too.

[LumberBack 43]

one of the massive limiting factors to slow zombies, is that the engine cannot handle large enough hordes to ever become a threat if they are slow. even 1500 zombies in the size of the current map is nowhere near enough to become a threat.

the other problem is, what slow zombies represent vs fast ones in other aspects, such as psycological. rocket has went pretty in depth with this over the course of many posts. fast zombies work for todays mindset far more then slow ones.

the other problem with slow zombies, is even in large numbers, they generally never become a threat, until you give them extream numbers (such as 5 zombies witin every few feet of the player at any time) no more room in hell does this nicly, but it is vastly smaller maps, so its easy to crowed.

also id really love to not refer to slow zombies as romaro zombies, the guy did a couple of good movies, but then he ruined them b having zombeis develop feelings, the ability to play instruments, and work firearms, yeah he did some major thigns for zombies, but he did alot of really really terrible things too.

when i say slow, in reality i mean as fast as what players can run now... at the moment zombies run twice as fast and then do their stop and move dance when they catch up...

[drewmaw 56]

one of the massive limiting factors to slow zombies, is that the engine cannot handle large enough hordes to ever become a threat if they are slow. even 1500 zombies in the size of the current map is nowhere near enough to become a threat.

I understand your concern, but isn't now the time to at least explore the concept, since we're in Alpha? Testing now would at least explore why or why not it was/wasn't a good idea.

[DarkEvilDead 2]

Well to me zombies should move and reaction should go with how long ago they died. The longer they are dead the slower they should be due to rigamortis setting in if they are freshly dead then maybe they can still run fast. I think they should really have both in here.

[drewmaw 56]

Well to me zombies should move and reaction should go with how long ago they died. The longer they are dead the slower they should be due to rigamortis setting in if they are freshly dead then maybe they can still run fast. I think they should really have both in here.

Welcome to the forum btw! :)

[jukaga 271]

I have to throw my support behind Romero-type zombies. Follow the lore and make them only killable by head shots and appear in vast numbers. It would be nice if they roamed as well.

I had a Romero-World War Z situation in DayZ already. Camping in Berezino appts, for the hell of it I sniped a zed with my M14 AIM when all hell broke loose. The zeds knew something was up, but not exactly where. Creeping around the top floor I see zeds lumbering in from all directions in great numbers. It was terrifying and fun at the same time. I made enough noise that they figured out where I was... the sound of the horde climbing the stairs one at a time was really scary. I had to pop at least 30 or so before the horde dried up.

If we do go the slow shambling zombie route at some point, I hope we have a fatigue system where we cannot run infinitely long without resting, it would set up some interesting tortoise vs. hare dynamics if you hade a horde on your heels.

[jukaga 271]

Well to me zombies should move and reaction should go with how long ago they died. The longer they are dead the slower they should be due to rigamortis setting in if they are freshly dead then maybe they can still run fast. I think they should really have both in here.

Dead Island does this well, distinguishing between recently 'infected' who can run, and rotten zombified 'walkers'.

[Chewy102 9]

I like the fast infected. For example look at Dead Island. It had both slow and fast zeds. Slow zeds where very easy to deal with and where only a problem in big numbers (10+). Infected on the other hand could be a threat alone. That game couldn't have worked if it was just slow walkers, it needed the infected and the specials to keep the gmae from getting dull.

Walkers are only a threat if they are in massive numbers and if ammo was very rare. Even if with headshot only kills every person has the ammo to take out or kite an enitre town in Day Z.

I vote for a mix. Have the zeds that see a play in the distance (150m?) start to shuffle/limp/hop to the players last known location, and any sound/sight would update that location. Once a zed gets sight on a player within say 50m (less?) then they run for a kill.

[sunnz 24]

Dunno if anyone has played it, but the zombies from red dead redemption: undead nightmares are really well done.

They are fast, but not super fast, you can out run when if you sprint( they are the same speed asyou jogging), they can attack while moving and cause quite a lot of damage, also body shots do nothing at all to them but the lowered speed alone makes each zombie encounter much more fun.

In dayz zombie encounters are just frustrating because of how buggy they are and their zig zagging, i really do think just slowing them down wil make it better, but i doubt rocket will do that.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Simply running away would become a foolproof zombie survival technique? How would that ever create a compelling experience for anyone? As soon as you're out of ammo or things look to be going south you can just trot off into the sunset no worries no questions asked. Meet up with your friends for a picnic later, maybe?

And no, something this fundamental to the game design cannot possibly be left to a server option. You're basically asking them to design two different games with different animations, AI, behavior routines, path finding, spawn mechanics, etc. That's a huge and unnecessary burden on the designers.

[xeaglenec 13]

dayz will never have slow zombies. this is a waste of resources. if you want to play against hordes of zombies, you will have to look for a engine capable of handling that. maybe project zomboid with shitty 2D graphics is the answer for you

[drewmaw 56]

dayz will never have slow zombies. this is a waste of resources. if you want to play against hordes of zombies, you will have to look for a engine capable of handling that. maybe project zomboid with shitty 2D graphics is the answer for you

Let's keep things respectful in here. The game is in alpha, and clearly the community is split when it comes to such topics. It's important to discuss these things in a mature manner.

[SymphonicX 0]

First and foremost, performance of the game is ESSENTIAL.

If it jeapordises the game to have all SHAMBLERS (that's what they're called...not "slow zombies") then it's simply not worth it.

But the runners v shamblers debate has been raging since 2001...Personally shamblers are SO much scarier in real terms. The idea that you're trapped down the end of an alleyway and a slow, painful lingering death awaits you - is far far more terrifying than knowing that in 2.1 seconds you're just gonna get ripped in half or hand your head ripped off pretty instantly.

Remember this line from The Walking Dead season 1: "I could only get away...because they were eating my family alive". Horrific. In a world of runners, that's not possible.

As for video games though - it's either or for me. L4D was a fantastic game that featured runners - not many games have done shamblers much justice.

The whole "run away" thing only works so much - you can only run so far and around so many corners. Just look at what Rick Grimes saw in Atlanta in TWD ep1 yr1 - he turned a corner ON A HORSE and was still overpowered by them - the idea with shamblers is that they move slowly, they creep up on you, and they occupy a vast, vast space that you cannot simply just run away from.

However the way Day Z map is, it won't work with shamblers - it just won't. The map needs updating and the whole thing needs massive urbanisation - and so many tweaks to characters and stuff - I don't think it'd be worth it.

Shamblers FTW though.

[Techercizer 82]

From another thread on the subject.

Slow zombies would require many, many more before they were a threat. And then there is the problem of disposing of bodies. Even checking on the NUMBER of dead bodies takes a fair amount of CPU at present so cleanup is done rarely and carefully.

That and personally, I don't really like the traditional concept of zombies - they reflect societal fears that we have outgrown somewhat. Modern "28 days later" zombies reflect the fear of infections, of things we can control and see, the loss of our humanity, the breakdown of order, nameless/borderless enemies. The modern zombie interest is really, imho, a social commentary on the fears of modern society. They capture nicely the things we fear.

This implementation was chosen because the infected are threatening, but their number can be controlled and balanced so the servers can be up, living, and remain stable for 24 hours. I realise this is a disapointment to some, but if it comes down to something being cool but costing performance or not being workable - then its not included.

This has actually been really a really insightful view. I've always viewed "fast zombies" as a dumbed down bastardization of the original archetypical manifestation of the inevitability of death. I'd never considered that their artistic merit could lie in shifting societal fears from the unknown external factor to the unknown social other in our ever-increasingly interconnected age.

It's not enough to make me love them right off the bat, but it's artistic merit I hadn't thought fast zombies possessed before today. Also, engine limitations are a B.

Rage "zombies" are a different kind of fear than slow zombies, and the engine just can't handle the numbers we'd need to do slow zombies right anyway.

[xeaglenec 13]

Let's keep things respectful in here. The game is in alpha, and clearly the community is split when it comes to such topics. It's important to discuss these things in a mature manner.

Did I called your mother something? I just said that project zomboid has shitty graphics.

Dayz will never have slow zombies. This is not my word, go search for rocket's view on that. He already said that you cannot handle the huge amount of slow zombies necessary to create a real threat in the game. Thats why the zombies are fast.

Edited July 11, 2012 by EaGLe