Poll: Would you buy Call of Duty: Zombies

Recommended Videos

Zeema

The Furry Gamer
Jun 29, 2010
4,580
0
0
If you stripped Black ops of everything but zombies and had 10 extra maps [with DLC adding more] would you buy it?

Personally i would, just because i really dislike the Multiplayer in Black ops and the only reason i play it is for zombies. So i get frustrated when they release DLC but there no choice of just downloading the Zombies.

So would you buy a COD:Zombies game and why would you? and if they did make a Zombies only game what features should they add?

More Maps? Weapons? Traps? extreme variance from each map?

EDIT: jezz the poll is at the same rate its a close battle indeed
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Mar 8, 2011
8,411
16
23
Nope. Nazi Zombies is boring as hell. The only fun I get from it is stupid stuff my brother and I do.
 

Waaghpowa

Needs more Dakka
Apr 13, 2010
3,073
0
0
Nope, after Black ops I decided never to buy a product from Activision until they make Guitar Hero: Judas Priest.
 

razelas

New member
Oct 27, 2010
419
0
0
Treyarch should just make their own zombie game already, damn it. What's taking them so long?
 

Hiphophippo

New member
Nov 5, 2009
3,509
0
0
As a standalone? For like 10 bucks maybe. Maybe. Actually, selling individual modes is the only way they're ever getting money from me on a CoD game. I'll never touch multiplayer anyway but might buy the rest. Again, maybe.
 

Miles000

is most likly drunk righyt noiw!
Apr 18, 2010
897
0
0
They would have to all be unique maps for me even to consider it. Hell maybe even different perspectives.
 

WayOutThere

New member
Aug 1, 2009
1,030
0
0
I don't like how they tell you to just survive as long as you can. Something more along the lines of "survive x rounds to proceed". I'm sounding like I want a CoD Zombies campaign mode but I'm not sure how that would work*. Point is, they could format the Zombie mode in a way that would get me to buy it at full price. As described in the OP though, no I wouldn't buy it.

* That is, with it remaining distinctly CoD Zombies power-ups and all, and not becoming Left 4 Dead or some other zombie game.
 

The_Blue_Rider

New member
Sep 4, 2009
2,190
0
0
Sure as long as there were at least 8 zombie maps and a fun story campaign that could be similar to L4D
 

maddawg IAJI

I prefer the term "Zomguard"
Feb 12, 2009
7,840
0
0
Honestly, the Zombie maps have probably been the best part of Call of Duty since Modern Warfare's all ghilled up mission. Its just mindless fun and humorous. I would probably buy a game comprised entirely of zombies over the other one.
 

Commissar Sae

New member
Nov 13, 2009
983
0
0
Nope, I find nazi zombies to be rather tedious and dull really. I suppose it could be fun with some friends but even then i dont see it holding me for long.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
I personally would not.

However I might consider buying a survival horror FPS made by the team that did Call Of Duty if they took the right approach with it. Of course I think done correctly it would be a new franchise, and shouldn't logically use the CoD name.

See, the relative grit and realism captured in some moments of the first Modern Warfare, like the famous "nuclear death" scene, and the simple fact that they were willing to push the envelope with that "No Russian" mission, means that they might be willing to push the envelope far enough to do a game that takes this kind of scenario fairly seriously, without getting into the sort of cartoonish presentation of a "Left 4 Dead", Campy Nazi alternate history scenarios, or the humor involved in famous political figures of yesteryear making a last stand in the white house.

Over the years a lot of people have talked about what a realistic military response to some sort of Zombie apocolypse might be like, given the horrendous treatment of the subject in most genere fiction, given that they want to deal with small groups of quirky survivors, whose story forms a heavy handed morality play... either that or they make the whole thing so ridiculous and cheezy that it's impossible to take seriously.

If they say decided to push things in the direction of some very "back to the basics" black magic zombies so they could ignore the pseudo-science garbage which causes a lot of the problems in most takes of the genere by trying to insert logic into a scenario that has to defy logic to work, but worked on the idea of the military restoring it's command structure and engaging in a rational response, using all the trappings one would expect like calling in air support, using tanks, and acting as a forward observor for artillery when and where appropriate, they could create a rather interesting spin on the idea, sort of trying to capture a "this is what the military responding would probably actually look like", similar to the way they presented military response in the recent "Battle For Los Angelos" (I think I remember the name correctly) to an alien ground invasion.

While using black magic seems to be counter productive to a realistic scenario, I will say that one problem I've always had with the "Zombie Virus" idea is that if the so called Zombies are actually sick people, I don't see why one would have to aim for weak points like the head, or why they would as durable as the scenario usually requires. After all if they aren't actually dead, but resisting injury due to over-hyped adrenal response and lizard-brain violence, puting a few rounds into the Torso is going to solve the problem. In scenarios like that it's hard to justify why they don't need to breath, or how they are going to keep coming with say their heart or lungs shredded. If your going to ignore issues like that for the sake of the genere, why bother to even say it's a virus, and just go back to the whole "Zombies are an occult phenomena and thus don't have to make sense" logic. At least then it's understandable why you might need a head shot, or to fully dismember the bloody things.

Also magic gets around the problem of having to deal with the issue of a spreading infection. As horrifying as a "hot zone" type scenario was years ago, technology for things like communications and coordinated response have increased dramatically. The odds of an infection spreading from a "Patient Zero" isn't really all that likely. Typically they either have to ignore the whole logic of how the virus spread (oftentimes with the excuse that the survivors don't know) or providing snippets of a scenario that doesn't stand up to a plausible analysis as a lot of detractors of the genere will say.

On the other hand if you say that it's caused by a ritual equivilent to what things like the "Great Ghost Dance" was supposed to do, you can justify the magical nature of the attack combined with people not believing such things were remotely possible, for it cropping up everyone all at once, and not following any kind of logical pattern that could be countered, as well as justifying the very specific kill requirements.

All of this is well outside the basic question of this thread, but the bottom line is that I think a company that has no real problem with showing the mass slaughter of civilians in a fairly realistic fashion, along with slow, painful, nasty death, could probably do the genere justice. They probably wouldb't be squeamish about people being eaten alive in nasty, horror movie detail, and showing all the freaky stuff that is implied in most Zombie movies but never actually shown.

To put things into perspective, the idea of horror is to get a rise out of people. In a horror movie you might have the characters go through an empty maternity/pediatrics ward and find all the kids are missing, and the rooms where they would put the newborns trashed an empty. However just imagine a scene where they actually showed this, with zombies chowing down on six year olds, or walking into a room full of newborn babies and going to town like 300 pound gluttons at an all you can eat buffet. All the reasons why that is wrong, disgusting, and absolutly horrifying is EXACTLY why stuff like that should be in a horror game, especially if your splicing it with an action component where the player is going to be killing zombies. It *IS* possible to freak someone out when the protaganist character/player isn't all that paticularly vulnerable. You see zombies chowing down on babies on a security camera, in all the gruesome detail, it's going to hit home, because no matter how buff the hero is, or even how we're pretty sure the good guys are going to win in the end, that still happened and there was nothing you could do about it... and more importantly your never going to be able to unsee that as a player. Horror by it's nature should push people's buttons, and the teams that do Call Of Duty seem to have that talent as you can tell by the contreversy. It would be nice to see them exploiting that talent in a way that doesn't involve politics. They might be able to push the needed buttons for jaded genere fans, the way EA has failed to do it with series like "Dead Space" (at least so far). :)
 

LaMer

New member
Dec 23, 2010
222
0
0
If there is an option to play as the zombies, then yes. Otherwise, stick to L4D. Wait, Left 4 Dead was always better at that too. I guess no, then.
 

VaudevillianVeteran

No Comment Necessary.
Sep 19, 2009
54,592
0
0
Nope... I mean, it's fun at first, but after a while, you just get bored as hell. It's the kind of minigame that you bring up with people who kind of play CoD but not really.
Besides, wouldn't you miss raging at Team Deathmatch?