[QUOTE=Dyson6;17783116]Sprinters are scarier because they can just come out of seemingly nowhere while the slower ones are easier to see coming.[/QUOTE]
The sprinters would provide a rush of adrenaline as they emerged on the horizon, rushing towards you.
The shamblers. They'd peak over the horizon and you'd just watch as they approach. They'd start to moan once they registered your presence. Shamblers are scarier methinks.
A zombie is a corpse, a dead thing reanimated, it lacks the co-ordination to run, anything that runs is an infected, dubbed zombie due to the lack of brain activity and simplicity. Run. Kill. Eat. Also, they need to eat. Shamblers don't gain any discernable advantage from feeding. They just do.
I hate this whole thing of "They're not zombies, just infected."
I want fucking zombies, not shitty infected.
[QUOTE=Zeddy;17783285]I hate this whole thing of "They're not zombies, just infected."
I want fucking zombies, not shitty infected.[/QUOTE]
Then why the fuck are you comparing them? There were no "zombies" in 28 days later, I don't know why people keep bringing it up in Zombie dicussions. It was never intended to be a "zombie" flick it just got lumped in with the popular "zombie" films at the time.
If you want sprinting zombies theres always dawn of the dead...
This explains why a Shot to the back in HL2 Didn't Bull trucking Horse shit.
And Why in Zombieland and L4D you didn't need a headshot to kill.
Fuck you VALVe, you crafty pack of djghadg
[QUOTE=professional;17783549]Then why the fuck are you comparing them? There were no "zombies" in 28 days later, I don't know why people keep bringing it up in Zombie dicussions. It was never intended to be a "zombie" flick it just got lumped in with the popular "zombie" films at the time.
If you want sprinting zombies theres always dawn of the dead...[/QUOTE]
There was one sprinter in that. It was a damned Asian jogger. That was it.
And I'm comparing them because thats what has happened to the zombie industry. No more zombies, its fucking "Infected". And its because of the 28 Later Series. There is taking creative license, and then there is being a douchebag. The 28 Later series took it to the level of "Asshole".
[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;17778766]-Argued that these are the most "realistic" zombies as opposed to the undead ones[/QUOTE]
[b]Wat.[/b]
Seriously, have you ever taken a health class?
[QUOTE=Sams Brume;17783653][b]Wat.[/b]
Seriously, have you ever taken a health class?[/QUOTE]
Have you ever been to a English class?
I did not say that I argued that, I'm just saying that's what other people argue, for whatever reason.
Depends how they are used in the film/book. Slow for a more atmospheric, psychological thing, fast for a more jumpy, actionier affair.
[editline]11:27PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeddy;17783644]There was one sprinter in that. It was a damned Asian jogger. That was it.
And I'm comparing them because thats what has happened to the zombie industry. No more zombies, its fucking "Infected". And its because of the 28 Later Series. There is taking creative license, and then there is being a douchebag. The 28 Later series took it to the level of "Asshole".[/QUOTE]
They're assholes because they made an idea that people liked and then copied? Wut?
[QUOTE=Zeddy;17783644]There was one sprinter in that. It was a damned Asian jogger. That was it.
And I'm comparing them because thats what has happened to the zombie industry. No more zombies, its fucking "Infected". And its because of the 28 Later Series. There is taking creative license, and then there is being a douchebag. The 28 Later series took it to the level of "Asshole".[/QUOTE]
What the fuck.
Every zombie in Dawn of the Dead (2004) sprinted, or ran to the best of their ability. There were no shamblers. I take it it's been a while since you've seen it?
As for the "zombie industry", how the fuck is it any fault of 28 days later? Once again, it was never intended to have anything to do with "zombies", this is evidenced by Danny Boyle's commentary on the making of the movie. If you feel the need to blame something, blame people's stupidity for not reading into the context of the film and automatically lumping it into the "zombie flick" category. I don't make any attempts to excuse 28 [B]weeks[/B] later, but that wasn't Danny Boyle's project. It was an attempt to milk a unexpected cash cow.
Regardless, the "sprinting" zombie is what exploded that part of the industry. Dawn of the Dead would have never been as insanely popular if it hadn't had sprinting zombies in it. Ignoring that, I still don't see how you think it's affected the "zombie industry" so majorly, there haven't even been that many "zombie" flicks since dawn of the dead, and infact, the few that I can remember, had "shamblers" in them, such as Land of the Dead.
Honestly I think fast zombies are a whole lot scarier of a concept than slow ones.
I like the slow ones because the fast ones are just like BLAAAAHH and the slow ones are like the ones that eat u slowly
fast zombies aren't zombies
[QUOTE=meepugh;17783845]I like the slow ones because the fast ones are just like BLAAAAHH and the slow ones are like the ones that eat u slowly[/QUOTE]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8s7JAmLF4M[/media]
Show me a scene in a Sprinter movie like this.
[QUOTE=professional;17783549]Then why the fuck are you comparing them? There were no "zombies" in 28 days later, I don't know why people keep bringing it up in Zombie dicussions. It was never intended to be a "zombie" flick it just got lumped in with the popular "zombie" films at the time.
If you want sprinting zombies theres always dawn of the dead...[/QUOTE]
People call them zombies because the concept is basically the same. They're mindless individuals who have no recollection of who they were, and their only visible intent is that of ripping regular people apart. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't even Resident Evil use the concept of a virus for the zombification of people? Why does everyone think 28 Days Later is different than the way most flicks and games do it? I think the idea of "voodoo" zombies is pretty lame, but I'm not into magic and shit like that.
I would explode from awesome if the zombie apocalypse had both sprinters and shamblers: the best of both worlds. Huge hordes of shamblers and individual, but fast-moving sprinters.
Still like shamblers though.
[QUOTE=gnome;17783822]Honestly I think fast zombies are a whole lot scarier of a concept than slow ones.[/QUOTE]
psychological scare > a shock scare
Always
Applies for fast and slow zombies:
[img]http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3752/zombiesurvivalsheetj.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=BricknHead;17783918]psychological scare > a shock scare
Always[/QUOTE]
Especially considering the way Shamblers and Sprinters kill you.
You see, a Sprinter is quick, they usually bite a major Artery or the neck to quickly kill you, since the point is that the person can get out of their grasp since, for all intents, a sprinter is just a normal human who has a disease.
A shambler, on the other hand, are not so merciful, when they have you in their grasp they can take their time all they want, I've never seen a Shambler bite an artery or the neck, it's almost always ripping open the chest cavity and consuming the still writhing organs of their screaming victims, or chomping down on the meaty parts of the arms or legs like it's some sort of chicken leg.
[editline]06:38PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mr.2007;17783935]Applies for fast and slow zombies:
[img]http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3752/zombiesurvivalsheetj.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
You have no idea how fast you'd die.
[QUOTE=BricknHead;17783918]psychological scare > a shock scare
Always[/QUOTE]
That's not the way I think of it though. I just don't think slow zombies are very scary. If anything, to me they're somewhat novel, just slow, hulking unintelligent people who are bent on eating you. I think it's scarier when the people aren't rotting, they're just people, but completely devoid of any sort of human nature. I don't think the scary thing about fast zombies is that they startle me, I think it's scary because generally the idea is you can't fucking get away from them and they're so eerily aggressive. Seeing people running at me at full-speed with full intent on killing me is scarier than a bunch of cripples slowly limping after me at less than a walking pace.
Even if you need headshots to kill shamblers, that doesn't mean that body shots or limb shots aren't effective (Unless the zombies are powered by necromancy or something similiar). You could concentrate fire on their legs, leaving them only able to drag themselves along, free for you to walk along, wearing thick clothing, and use blunt instruments to finish the job off. Or if there are loads, use flammable liquids or pitfalls to slow and immobilise them. Hell, even large amounts of razorwire or barbed wire will severely damage them if they have to walk through them.
Anything slow is easy to defend against. Anything fast, or even worse stealthly, is hard to defend against.
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;17783965]Especially considering the way Shamblers and Sprinters kill you.
You see, a Sprinter is quick, they usually bite a major Artery or the neck to quickly kill you, since the point is that the person can get out of their grasp since, for all intents, a sprinter is just a normal human who has a disease.
A shambler, on the other hand, are not so merciful, when they have you in their grasp they can take their time all they want, I've never seen a Shambler bite an artery or the neck, it's almost always ripping open the chest cavity and consuming the still writhing organs of their screaming victims, or chomping down on the meaty parts of the arms or legs like it's some sort of chicken leg.[/QUOTE]
They do? Where are you pulling these "facts" from, I don't think it's set in stone how zombies kill people. To my knowledge, in a game like Left 4 Dead (since we seem to be using all forms of zombie media as an example), people are literally beaten to death until they bleed out. And in 28 Days Later I don't seem to recall the zombies having any sort of method to their madness, they just tried to get at people in any way possible.
It's more of the fact that a psychological scare takes its time in your mind slowly driving you insane. You start to feel paranoia, and tension is constant. You're never safe. Fright never lets up. Everything collects in your mind and your imagination is left to ravish your mind and your thoughts.
A shock scare is just a quick "boo" and then once it's dealt with, it's over. You're scared for a few moments.
it all comes down to which scare you find more satisfying: a shock scare, or a psychological scare. Personally I find psychological scares to be far more terrifying because it couples the outside danger with your imagination. The human mind can lead to some fucked up stuff.
[editline]06:47PM[/editline]
it's kind of a battle between a physical / emotional scare as well
[editline]06:49PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=gnome;17784069]They do? Where are you pulling these "facts" from, I don't think it's set in stone how zombies kill people. To my knowledge, in a game like Left 4 Dead (since we seem to be using all forms of zombie media as an example), people are literally beaten to death until they bleed out. And in 28 Days Later I don't seem to recall the zombies having any sort of method to their madness, they just tried to get at people in any way possible.[/QUOTE]
l4d isn't a zombie game. It's a run and gun shooter. The emphasis is on killing as opposed to survival.
In zombie media, the protagonist is always at a disadvantage
[editline]06:49PM[/editline]
mainly due to numbers
Necromorphs. Combination of Sprinter and Shambler, mutated beyond all recognition, FROM BEYOND THE STAAAARS! and for a legitimate death requires you to actively shoot at the long dangly things attached to indestructable blades which are currently being driven into your neck (I mean the arms, you disgusting zombiefucker). Then comes the special versions of them... Behold! [media]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6SchU8D-e1s/SRZWw0wVKHI/AAAAAAAAFJE/bZLZPX1qg4M/s400/dead-space-necromorph-art-20080925031748383.jpg[/media]
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;17783965]
You have no idea how fast you'd die.[/QUOTE]
I beg to differ.
[QUOTE=BricknHead;17784162]It's more of the fact that a psychological scare takes its time in your mind slowly driving you insane. You start to feel paranoia, and tension is constant. You're never safe. Fright never lets up. Everything collects in your mind and your imagination is left to ravish your mind and your thoughts.
A shock scare is just a quick "boo" and then once it's dealt with, it's over. You're scared for a few moments.
it all comes down to which scare you find more satisfying: a shock scare, or a psychological scare. Personally I find psychological scares to be far more terrifying because it couples the outside danger with your imagination. The human mind can lead to some fucked up stuff.
[editline]06:47PM[/editline]
it's kind of a battle between a physical / emotional scare as well
[editline]06:49PM[/editline]
l4d isn't a zombie game. It's a run and gun shooter. The emphasis is on killing as opposed to survival.
In zombie media, the protagonist is always at a disadvantage
[editline]06:49PM[/editline]
mainly due to numbers[/QUOTE]
Okay first of all, bullshit. L4D is a zombie game, but that's not we're here disputing. We're disputing the concept of zombies, of which IS applied to L4D because the term "zombie" does not necessarily mean "slow-moving cannibals raised from the dead". And because Valve calls them zombies. So they're zombies. Since the things themselves do not exist, they are what the creator says they are. You can't argue what the correct idea of a zombie is and then criticize me for bringing up left 4 dead, when it completely applies. The idea is the same, regardless of your petty qualms.
Moving away from L4D though, you say that fast zombies only give an initial "shock" scare, but I think it's more than that. It's not the shock of seeing them that's scary, because obviously once you've seen them you wouldn't suddenly think "oh it's okay, that's not scary, they're just crazy people out for my blood, running toward me at full speed". It's not "OH SHIT THEY JUST POPPED UP" scary, it's "Oh fuck oh fuck they're after me I can't get away what do I do" type of scary. If it's not psychologically frightening to be chased by sprinting, screaming madmen who were once just people, then I don't know what is.
In short, I haven't watched a movie that depicted fast zombies jumping out and saying "boo". As far as I've seen, fast zombies run at someone full-on, even from a long distance, screaming and flailing all the way. Just, to me that would be more horrifying in real life than shambling, groaning, bags of decaying flesh.
dear gnome,
ilu
now chill out
[QUOTE=gnome;17784713]
Moving away from L4D though, you say that fast zombies only give an initial "shock" scare, but I think it's more than that. It's not the shock of seeing them that's scary, because obviously once you've seen them you wouldn't suddenly think "oh it's okay, that's not scary, they're just crazy people out for my blood, running toward me at full speed". It's not "OH SHIT THEY JUST POPPED UP" scary, it's "Oh fuck oh fuck they're after me I can't get away what do I do" type of scary. If it's not psychologically frightening to be chased by sprinting, screaming madmen who were once just people, then I don't know what is.
[/QUOTE]
This. I think a mob of flesh hungry undead beings that have the ability to run, clamber and climb after me at full speed would have a bigger psychological impact on me than a mob of slow, slumbering bags of rigor mortis, that can easily be avoided.
I take everyone who's saying Fast zombies aren't scary have never been chased in real life by something that can run faster than you and is hell bent on killing you.
shamblers all the way.
[QUOTE=BricknHead;17784936]dear gnome,
ilu
now chill out[/QUOTE]
I love you too and I'm plenty chill.
Like
waaaaayyyy chill
Both.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
