Poll: Zombie SURVIVAL, or Zombie HUNTING?

[Dastardly]

Yes. So many zombie games. So much zombie-themed DLC. It's been the year of the zombie, for sure. A lot of folks are really getting quite sick of zombies, and they're pretty vocal about it... while others, like myself, feel that this recent glut of "games/stories containing zombies" hasn't affected us, because we don't see them as actual "zombie games/stories," at least not in spirit.

There are two kinds of zombie stories, at the core: Zombie Survival, and Zombie Hunting. I would make the argument that "zombie hunting" stories get so far from the core, compelling elements of zombie fiction that they really depart from the genre in everything but name, but to make the distinction clearer, here's a list of what each game type features:

ZOMBIE SURVIVAL
- Features many zombies, usually of a variety of types.
- Equipment is difficult to find, forcing the character to face scarcity.
- Things break or deplete over time, forcing the character to face entropy.
- Time is on the side of the undead, especially in combat--longer fights are bad ideas.
- Characters have goals usually unrelated to the zombies themselves.
- Avoiding combat is a viable, and usually better strategy than open confrontation.

ZOMBIE HUNTING
- Features many zombies, usually of a variety of types.
- Equipment is far more readily available, including military-grade weaponry and ammo stores.
- Weapons don't break, and while ammo can run out, more will nearly always be found.
- Time is less of a factor because scarcity and entropy are not as present.
- Characters are rewarded for larger zombie kill counts.
- Open confrontation is the preferred (or even only) strategy for success.

Really, you can see the core difference is in the resources made available to the character/player. If at any point, you're seeing a bunch of high explosives, or assault rifles, you're probably stepping waaaaaay outside the "survival" realm. When you have enough weaponry to easily switch from prey to hunter, you've left that realm behind completely.

Personally, I find zombie survival to be far more interesting, challenging, and compelling that zombie hunting--in both stories and games. Bursts of all-out combat can be interesting, if they are few and far between. Otherwise, they lose their impact. Characters should find themselves thinking, "If this fight goes even one minute longer, we're screwed." Retreat should happen more often than clear victory, and the goal should be to avoid combat whenever possible.

Some might say this makes for uninteresting games, but I think it's only because of our prejudice against non-combat activities(which the Extra Credits guys talk about in their most recent video), and our tendency to default to combat for conflict resolution in games and stories. Inventory management, salvaging, side goals like fixing equipment or finding people or reaching safe harbor, all of these can be used more prominently, allowing combat to truly feel like a "last resort." In a well-designed game, the zombies can (at some points) become background to the actual survival portion of the game.

(Incidentally, this could be applied to all survival horror games. Is it really "survival," or is it "monster hunting?")

Which do you prefer? You know my views now, but I'd be thrilled to hear from the other side of the aisle on this one.

 

[Metropocalypse]

I prefer survival, it makes the panic and fear more intense. I like playing a game and feeling like...the character COULD be me in that situation, and not some power-mad gunman.

 

[Dimensional Vortex]

I prefer survival, it makes the panic and fear more intense. I like playing a game and feeling like...the character COULD be me in that situation, and not some power-mad gunman.

Second.

An example of zombie hunting is Left 4 Dead, you kill so many of the little buggers undead monstrosities that it losses it's touch very quickly. I'm not sure of any zombie survival games but, wouldn't it be cool if you, at one point, had to run out of a massive cave with your comrades as zombies sprinted after you, and you had to run fast enough to get onto a boat and get away. If they had something like that it would be a real epinephrine pumping through your veins. I don't know really, but that is just my two cents.

 

[Batfred]

On a not game related theme, zombie hunting is the only way forward according to a study by the university of Ottowa. Check this link out [http://www.science.uottawa.ca/assets/pdf/Zombies_20aug09.pdf]. It is a little maths heavy, but the analysis makes for good reading.

 

[Geekosaurus]

I just don't like zombies. It's been overdone. Like WWII. So I doubly hate WaW's zombies.

 

[Lawnmooer]

I like survival more... More entertaining for longer (Making things turn into little pieces gets repetitive after a few hundred kills)

Though the title did make me thing of game about sneaking around to take out specific zombies like a hunter takes out what they are hunting... Which would be interesting

 

[GiantRaven]

I prefer survival, I've just never seen a game that has done it well.

 

[Dastardly]

I prefer survival, I've just never seen a game that has done it well.

A good (and quite fair) answer. Some games have flirted with it... even the early Resident Evil games. You'd often find yourself without ammo, having to hand-to-hand it with some mutants. You also had limited inventory space, forcing you to make choices. Not great, but on the right track.

Left4Dead could have done better. The infinite ammo dumps were the biggest problem. You never had to decide, "Okay, WHO gets this ammo?" You had to decide that with med-kits, but with all that ammo around you don't really need the med-kits as often anyway.

I've been working on a pen-and-paper zombie survival horror game for awhile, to explore some mechanics that can feed into this type of experience. The idea that time works against the humans, that everything breaks (especially when the infrastructure we take for granted collapses), and that for in many cases the idea is to avoid combat, or at least get out of it as soon as possible.

The trick with video games is probably to make the non-killing goals more important and entertaining than the actual killing of the zombies. I think that's why most games go the way they do--the developers can't think of ways to make the other goals more enticing, so they end up going back to making more weapons/ammo/ways to kill things, because that's easier. That also makes the problem bigger. The paradox here is that making a good zombie game means putting more focus on things other than the zombies.

 

[TerribleAssassin]

Survival.

Yet no person has the money to make my idea, a Fallout: NV Hardcore Mode where everything has weight and you have to keep hydrated, L4D's co-op encouragment and mainly makeshift and Civillian weapons, not like Left 4 Dead, were you can find M16's laying about...

 

[GiantRaven]

Left4Dead could have done better. The infinite ammo dumps were the biggest problem. You never had to decide, "Okay, WHO gets this ammo?" You had to decide that with med-kits, but with all that ammo around you don't really need the med-kits as often anyway.

Oh god, if I could change one thing about the game it would be the frequency of ammo spawns and replacement guns.

The trick with video games is probably to make the non-killing goals more important and entertaining than the actual killing of the zombies. I think that's why most games go the way they do--the developers can't think of ways to make the other goals more enticing, so they end up going back to making more weapons/ammo/ways to kill things, because that's easier. That also makes the problem bigger. The paradox here is that making a good zombie game means putting more focus on things other than the zombies.

Adding elements of foraging for food, shelter etc are an absolute must as goals go. Also, interesting NPCs that you can rescue at the expense of your limited supply reserves could be an interesting gameplay dynamic.

edit: also, since combat would not be the driving force of playing game. An interesting story could be woven into the game where you can find out the cause for the zombie outbreak through finding Bioshock-style notes in underground labs...or something. Underground labs are cool. =D

Survival.

Yet no person has the money to make my idea, a Fallout: NV Hardcore Mode where everything has weight and you have to keep hydrated, L4D's co-op encouragment and mainly makeshift and Civillian weapons, not like Left 4 Dead, were you can find M16's laying about...

To me, zombie survival perfection would come from taking a slightly tweaked version of Stalker and applying copious amounts of zombies whilst limiting your ability to find weapons to almost nil.

 

[zfactor]

I prefer survival because it is an actual challenge (like the first 3 RE games and some of 4). But I like the occasional lawnmower through a crowd tactic.

 

[TPiddy]

guys.... Dead State [http://www.deadstate.doublebearproductions.com/]....

Look it up.

 

[Dastardly]

Adding elements of foraging for food, shelter etc are an absolute must as goals go. Also, interesting NPCs that you can rescue at the expense of your limited supply reserves could be an interesting gameplay dynamic.

edit: also, since combat would not be the driving force of playing game. An interesting story could be woven into the game where you can find out the cause for the zombie outbreak through finding Bioshock-style notes in underground labs...or something. Underground labs are cool. =D

This, to me, is why Dead Rising was a triumph (flaws aside). The zombies were not your target, they were your obstacle and your timer (aside from, you know, the actual timer). You had to rescue folks, find supplies, and get it all back to safety. There were some things to be done better, sure, but also some really bright spots.

guys.... Dead State [http://www.deadstate.doublebearproductions.com/]....

Look it up.

Been following it for awhile. Too much talk about the combat itself. The party dynamic is an interesting addition, but I just get the feeling that--despite claims to the contrary--it's going to end up "Fill your party with combat-oriented folks, and walk around with no worries." I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Cosplay Horatio]

Zombie hunting leads to having no ammo and/or getting pinned or backed into a corner by infected.

 

[GiantRaven]

This, to me, is why Dead Rising was a triumph (flaws aside). The zombies were not your target, they were your obstacle and your timer (aside from, you know, the actual timer). You had to rescue folks, find supplies, and get it all back to safety. There were some things to be done better, sure, but also some really bright spots.

I really tried to get into Dead Rising but the timer was a big killer for my enjoyment. I would much prefer a setting extended to weeks and months rather than a game being finished in a few in-game days.

 

[Dastardly]

This, to me, is why Dead Rising was a triumph (flaws aside). The zombies were not your target, they were your obstacle and your timer (aside from, you know, the actual timer). You had to rescue folks, find supplies, and get it all back to safety. There were some things to be done better, sure, but also some really bright spots.

I really tried to get into Dead Rising but the timer was a big killer for my enjoyment. I would much prefer a setting extended to weeks and months rather than a game being finished in a few in-game days.

I think the timer definitely needed some adjustment... but bear in mind that later game modes (unlocked) allow you to spend more time. The thing I really liked about the timer was the idea that it presented: You can't get to everything. Something will always be missing, time will always be a bit too short. That urgency (and futility) is an element that zombie games absolutely need.

The bad thing about the timer was the fact that one bad choice could force you to start over... of course, it's short enough that starting over isn't life-ending, but it can certainly be frustrating and tedious.

 

[OniaPL]

We need a Walking Dead- themed multiplayer game. No, not the tv- series, but the comic! A massive world where you can build settlements and must defend them, and ammunition is scarce.

If you haven't read this excellent comic, do it now. Seriously. It has the right idea about zombie apocalypse in my opinion, it's no glorified bullcrap.

 

[GiantRaven]

This, to me, is why Dead Rising was a triumph (flaws aside). The zombies were not your target, they were your obstacle and your timer (aside from, you know, the actual timer). You had to rescue folks, find supplies, and get it all back to safety. There were some things to be done better, sure, but also some really bright spots.

I really tried to get into Dead Rising but the timer was a big killer for my enjoyment. I would much prefer a setting extended to weeks and months rather than a game being finished in a few in-game days.

You can't get to everything. Something will always be missing, time will always be a bit too short. That urgency (and futility) is an element that zombie games absolutely need.

This is what I don't like. I want to take my time to explore every nook and cranny I can find. Oh the hours I wasted on Stalker doing that. I definitely get what you're saying though, it would be tough to replicate that urgency in a different manner.

If you haven't read this excellent comic, do it now. Seriously. It has the right idea about zombie apocalypse in my opinion, it's no glorified bullcrap.

I will hands down, with complete and utter seriousness, state that a Walking Dead zombie is pretty much a perfect zombie.

 

[dsilvoul01]

Zombies have always been over-done, even in a movie genre its exceptionally difficult to 're-invent' a zombie. It's always the same, or nearly the same process, Scientist X invented Virus Z, great human achievement for medicine blah blah blah (or warfare)... Oh Shit Scientist X dropped a Vial of Virus Z blah blah blah Humanity is screwed blah blah blah, entranced for Zombie Apocalypse where all the humans that are left are whiney little piss-ants that are too focused on themselves to work together as a team to defeat the mindless (or in some cases 'slightly intelligent') zombie horde that chases them around trying to feast on their innerds and brain-meats. (The other Likely story scenario being that Zombies came from Hell yadda yadda religious apocalypse etc rinse and repeat.)

I prefer Zombie Hunting over Survival, simply because in a World Filled with Zombies its not truly an apocalypse it just means their is more for everybody else alive. SURE we'll have some catastrophic failures for energy and vehicular transport, and SURE we'll have rotting fleshbags that chase us around to eat us, but hey we have weapons, and I'm sorry to say but just because the world has Zombies doesn't mean humanity suddenly becomes defenseless and stupid. I never understood the whole scrounge around for items etc bit, granted survival is key, however, in every Zombie-genre we still have tools... and to make weapons = Survival. I prefer to view the Zombie Genre in the way Zombieland portrayed its intracacies. A bloody good time, you'll have some survivalists and some Hunter-Crazed individuals a la Tallahassee, both have their merit, but I would say I have to prefer Tallahassee's method of Ass-Kickery over running away... TAKE NOTICE, if PROPER-PRECAUTIONS ARE TAKEN (aka burning the dead), there is only a finite number of Zombies, albeit a large finite amount. But hell, hunting lowers the population and in survival mode the less of them their are the better we will survive.

 

[Dastardly]

This, to me, is why Dead Rising was a triumph (flaws aside). The zombies were not your target, they were your obstacle and your timer (aside from, you know, the actual timer). You had to rescue folks, find supplies, and get it all back to safety. There were some things to be done better, sure, but also some really bright spots.

I really tried to get into Dead Rising but the timer was a big killer for my enjoyment. I would much prefer a setting extended to weeks and months rather than a game being finished in a few in-game days.

You can't get to everything. Something will always be missing, time will always be a bit too short. That urgency (and futility) is an element that zombie games absolutely need.

This is what I don't like. I want to take my time to explore every nook and cranny I can find. Oh the hours I wasted on Stalker doing that. I definitely get what you're saying though, it would be tough to replicate that urgency in a different manner.

If you haven't read this excellent comic, do it now. Seriously. It has the right idea about zombie apocalypse in my opinion, it's no glorified bullcrap.

I will hands down, with complete and utter seriousness, state that a Walking Dead zombie is pretty much a perfect zombie.

You'd have liked the Survival Mode. It's basically letting your health decay over time, but you spend time finding food and fending off zombies. It's all about seeing how long you can go surviving in the mall. Still sort of a timer going (with the health), but you're actually encouraged to find every nook and cranny.