Poll: Fast Zombies or Slow Zombies?

[DiMono]

Slow. The thing that makes zombies scary isn't that they're terrifying initially, it's the fact that no matter what happens they just keep coming. That makes them unique amongst monsters. There are lots of fast monsters, but very few slow ones, and even fewer with the persistence of zombies. So, slow, all the way.

 

[Sag185]

Slow zombies all the way i would like it that the zombies were slow to start with and maybe if they got in a horde or got angry then they speed up just like on walking dead? slow zombies = atmosphere fast zombies = not real zombies in my mind ^_^

 

[C95J]

An avalanche rather than a pack of wolves, if you catch my drift.

Thread-winning post right there.

both are fast though

 

[interspark]

i voted slow, but i guess i lake a variety, i mean, a hord of shuffling zombies is good! but how about a few super ninja zombies here and there? or a megaton zombie as a leader/boss? also i guess it depends on what mood you're in at the time

 

[interspark]

An avalanche rather than a pack of wolves, if you catch my drift.

Thread-winning post right there.

both are fast though

you know what he/she means

 

[Tiny116]

I've abstained from this poll because you've left out the all important third option "Either or, depending on the situation)

OT: Mostly I tend to prefer Slow Zombies, however in games for L4D fast Zombies work a treat. And films like 28 days later should be kicked so hard up the ass their liver pops out of their mouth for thinking they can call their rabid crazies zombies.....*ahem* Anyways I digress.
I just read a book called "Patient Zero" It puts a slightly new spin on the Zombie Virus (something to do with Prions) and the Zombies are actually sort of alive (heart beats once in a blue moon) but the body systems are working so slowly bodily necrosis occurs (I don't want to go into to much detail to spoil the book to much) But anyway the zombies in this book were pretty damn fast, not L4D fast but fast....And it worked a bloody treat.

My point, it completely and utterly depends on the setting.

 

[Kair]

Slow zombies are abundant, and for some reason it is a lot more satisfying to rip, smash or plough your way through a mass of zombies with whatever scheme you can conjure than running from a few fast zombies.
For films it may be better with fast zombies though, as slow zombies do not make much of a plot.

 

[xdom125x]

i happen to like slow zombies in movies while liking fast zombies in videogames.
the slow allows time for drama in a movie so you can advance plots between zombie fights.
the fast allow the game to be action packed.

 

[SmokingMirrors]

Slow.

Because i've always thought of a zombie as a metaphor; the living embodiment of death- that which perhaps terrifies us the most. They are what we will inevidable become and thus their slow, shambling approach symbolizes how if we aren't careful our lives can just be taken from us in an instance.

Hence why in most films involving these undead the ones that don't take their threat seriously, start messing around... end up dying.

Atleast thats how i've always seen it- or perhaps I look for a deeper meaning when there isn't any. Who knows, and who cares really?

 

[voetballeeuw]

Slow, the tension builds more when you have a large pack of slow moving zombies heading towards you.

 

[Sun Flash]

You prepare for fast zombies, you can handle slow ones. But if ou prepare for slow, fast ones is gonna get'cha

But I'll take either since both are awesome.

 

[Sn1P3r M98]

Slow, it makes things seem more desperate (I'll take The Walking Dead as an example).

Spoiler

In the scene where the group goes to CDC and begs to be let in, the slow mass of zombies creeps up on them, building up tension when finally the door opens and everyone shuffles (no pun intended) inside.

This is much better (in my opinion) than something like: "Let us in, please!" *Fast zombies proceed to eat everyone*

 

[Lukeman1884]

Fast zombies are generally scarier than slow zombies IMO. Slow zombies generally need a horde to accomplish anything, as you can pretty easily outrun a single stumbling undead. A fast zombie could attack a small group before they even realise what is happening, infecting them and starting the invasion of the undead.

 

[Phoenix09215]

I prefer slow zombies just because, In my opinion they create a scarier atmosphere in both games and movies. Fast zombies make it feel more like an action game (L4D is the obvious example).

 

[Drazeric]

Slow all the way. It would be way more fun if they shambled instead of come sprinting at you. Fast moving zombies would be way to hardcore for my liking. I dont care how good of shape you are in eventually you will get tired they will not. Slow movers you could just run a few blocks up sit down chill an' wait two hours for them to get to you.

 

[WanderingFool]

From a biological perspective, slow zombies are more accurate. Muscle fibers are destroyed with movement, but are replaced incredibly fast in living creatures. In the undead, muscle fibers wouldnt regrow after destroyed, so a zombies would destroy its ability to moves quickly if moved fast.

Also, the zombies brain runs on the most primitive of brain functions. So I think the ability to run would be impreded somewhat by a rotting brain.

 

[Duskwaith]

"The Walking Dead" series had the perfect mix of slow shuffling zombie who could burst into a fast enough trot when the need arose

 

[Asuka Soryu]

Slow zombies. I grew up with that, it was common for me to see them as slow. It made you think people could get away, unlike the speading freaks... I mean, they're dead and decaying, yet now they can run a marithon.... `.`