303: How Games Get Zombies Wrong

[NoDamnNames]

You cannot win against the zombie menace. In the end, the horde always triumphs. This is true of most zombie-related fiction. In fact, the zombie sub-genre is probably one of the most nihilistic on record; most zombie books, comics, films, and shows end up with most or all survivors turned into zombie chow.

You might be saying, "Yes, but that would make for a terrible game, a game in which nobody can ever win." (At least, you might be saying that if we didn't just shock you into a state of permanent aphasia.)

We'd say you have a good point except for one word:

Pinball.

That's right. Pinball. Pinball is a game you can never win. Like life, it has no end beyond the one where you finally lose your last ball and the game tells you how many points you've acquired. Pinball is the ultimate game representation of the zombie survival horror genre. It's about seeing how far you can get before the grim inevitability is realized.

To your point about Zombie games being too winnable, I offer COD Nazi Zombies in Kino Der Toten


While it is a bit different than other Zombie games, in that the zombies get stronger and stronger as the levels progress until all but the very strongest guns do little more than tickle them, and then there is the issue of ammo.

Kino der toten (and most nazi zombie maps) is NOT about going out and shooting zombies, it is about strategically finding a way to survive as long as you can (key words being as long as) because you cant survive for ever. People who merely run out and start killing zombies are quickly cut off and killed, and usually as a result kill their entire team as the horde that just over run them cuts off other team members.


The game quickly becomes about rationing your ammo, being able to navigate the zombie horde and know when to shoot/run/throw a trap/revive a downed team mate and most importantly, how to co-operate with your team members so the horde does not cut you off.

Nazi zombies is basically about how long you can go without slipping up and making one tiny error, because that tiny error costs you the game.


I don't know how many games I've seen going smoothly and then a fire sale spawns and the whole team is dead within minutes because the strategy fell apart when the selfish temptation of $10 weapons arose.


For me Nazi zombies is the perfect non Zombie Apocalypse Zombie game.

 

[thesavagehamster]

Great article! really spot on... i specifically enjoyed the caveat at the end though, L4D I&II really caught me on exactly the points in the article. I guess playing with the AI makes for a more Zombie-horror-esque experience, since its so friggin hard to actually survive

edit: reading over some other comments, @Yopaz - i think you miss the point here... as far as i can tell the author was talking about the treatment of the Zombie apocalypse as a theme, or lack there of, in video games as opposed to other art forms. The technical details of whether survivors "make it", or the nature of the Zombie plague is irrelevant to conveying of the real central fear-inducing agent (i.e. "subverted nature")

 

[Tuqui]

Zombies are fictional creatures used as a plot device. From the original night of the living dead, to shawn of the dead, zombies only exist as an unusual circumstance for character interaction. In games that interaction is usually combat. Solving the world's problems by shooting zombies is a fun excuse to shoot something. If you want a psudo-realistic zombi game, go play rebuild on Kongregate.

http://www.kongregate.com/games/sarahnorthway/rebuild?acomplete=rebuild

This, i totally was thinking on this game while i read the note, pretty good too. It does have a supernatural reason for the zombies and also a cure for it, but it's a great game.

 

[Lord_Gremlin]

I prefer playing as zombie. Resolves a lot of issues mentioned here. Also, speaking of last issue of always losing - you always win in the end.

 

[Urazel]

I still don't understand where the idea came from that zombie is like a spreading disease.

Zombies used to be a dead (or sometimes even living) creature (most often human) being controled by a bokor. (read vodun/voodoo priest(ess))
That is their mythological origin, but somewhere along the line, somebody took the trademark quality of the vampire or werewolf to transform it's victims into a creature like itself and applied it to the zombie, and now we have 8 gajillion games/movies/comics/manga/anime/novels/tvshows about this whole viral zombie thing, and I've gotten sick of it.

I am now inclined to automatically enjoy any media more if it presents zombies in a non-viral manner, no matter how bad it might be, it will compare favourable to ANOTHER BLOODY ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE SCENARIO!

 

[I want to leave because extra credits is gone]

It's a good zombi game. I have only won on harder mode once.

 

[LadyMint]

I wasn't too keen on the test-taking jokes in between the point the article was making, but the rest of the article did give me something to think about.

I definitely agree that zombie games should do more to emphasize the human threat alongside the zombie one. In just observing everyday automobile traffic, I can tell human beings would be their own worst obstacle to zombocalypse survival. So many split second moments of selfishness in just a day to day commute from Point A to Point B, I dare say if a Zombie lumbered onto the road there'd be a minimum twelve car pileup soon after.

I don't agree that you can't survive the zombie apocalypse, though. To me, it really depends on A) the individual trying to survive, B) what type of zombies they're facing, and C) the environment available to them. If we're talking the popular Super Zombies that run, leap, learn to use tools and potentially grow to massive hulks of destructive meat, then yeah. Everyone would lose eventually against those odds. But I believe normal, rotting zombies can eventually be dealt with, especially as Mother Nature's seasons roll over and over. Zombies in general don't think much of protecting themselves from everyday obstacles and injuries, so it would just be a matter of time before they're all rolling heads that you just have to punt to keep out of your way.

I dunno if I should suggest another zombie game. There's so many already. But, I would be interested in seeing one that takes place in a house that's already boarded up/fortified against zombies with you acting as a leader of a small group of survivors. Everyday you'd have to make sure the house was still standing up to the occasional zombie hordes, make sure everyone in the group was doing their jobs, and potentially go out to fetch supplies/help random people if you so choose. And along with the random zombie attacks, every once in a while you might be alerted to a stranger nearby trying to escape zombies, and be given an opportunity to get them into the house to add to your numbers. Different people would have different personalities/abilities, and that would add to that threat that Drinky McDrinkerton would leave a door or window open to zombie entry. And if someone gets bitten, trying to deal with them would be another aspect of gameplay. This would be one of those games that could be like Pinball, where things just get harder and harder until they're impossible, but I would try to sneak a winner's ending into it and I have several thoughtful options for that.

 

[Not-here-anymore]

Hmm. Zombie infection could be implemented in games in a number of interesting fashions.

To do it simply, take a standard FPS with zombies in it, and have the player character not be alone. They have a group of friends/family or a military squad with them, and will run into other people along the game. The catch? If these people die, they come back. Your friends and allies are now trying to eat you. Have them make an effort to hide scratches and bites. Have some of them commit suicide to avoid turning, allow friendly fire so the player can kill off those whom they believe to be infected. Make sure the party react to this, and will slowly start to abandon the player and/or distrust them if they kill more than one healthy human. Make enough tasks so the player will really struggle if they try to go it alone.

Take the above, and make it co-op. If a player dies, they watch in horror as their body reanimates and attacks the group they were once part of, with no control over their actions (then become another party member, I guess). If they get bitten? A steady decrease in movement, accuracy, and reaction time. Something to get across the idea that they're turning; becoming one of the undead. They can tell their partners. Or they can keep it secret. Up to them.

Option 3: Get... 16 players or so together. Survival mode, with the above rules. If you die, you're out. Leave the lobby. But not until you've seen what once was your body blown to itty-bitty chunks by the remaining survivors. A reasonable size sandbox will be needed, too. Players can band together as a team, go it alone, even deliberately get bitten and wait with the group until they turn if they wish.

Have every player create an avatar for their human character. After a few games, start incorporating these avatars into the zombie horde. Nothing will freak people out more than having a familiar face bite chunks out of them.

Of course, some of this probably goes too far for any company to actually risk making, but it'd be an interesting experiment

And that's without even touching upon the aspect of human danger in the face of zombie-ism. Well, much.

 

[bdcjacko]

boring, zombies are boring, your thoughts on zombies are boring, everything that can be said about zombies has been repeat a million times over the past 3 years. I mean you basically took the zombie survival guide, condensed it down to 3 pages, and sprinkled in the word video-game. Boring. Oh and you gave some random game industry straw-man electro-shock. Amazingly pointless.

Seriously what are you expecting out of Call of Duty hidden zombie levels? You shoot them with guns, duh, but still they get a lot of zombie right. It is wave after wave of zombies and you will never win, only survive to the next wave.

Then you have Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare, they get zombie right. They are everywhere, yeah you can shoot them in the head, but I find it even more satisfying to club them in the head with the torch.

You know...now I am starting to wonder which games you are having the problem with. Plants v. Zombies? That is just a fun flash game, you shouldn't be expecting too much from it. Minecraft? That is barely a game, and the cows hop, so the zombies are doing the best they can.

 

[Caliostro]

Great article, and, despite not being a fan of the somewhat gimmicky presentation (IMO while the idea of a "failed test" was quite nice, the faux real-time narration of punishments was unnecessary and just served to distract more than entice), the content is spot on.

If you excise the contextual elements then zombies, as isolated elements, are rather boring... Might as hell have generic thugs for all it matters. This is something some movie and TV directors started to realized, my personal favorite right now being The Walking Dead, but something that seems to elude most game designers. Closest I feel we've gotten to it is the Left4Dead series, that manages to evoke the feeling of extreme isolation and wasteland world. Even then there's still work to be done.

I have some hopes for Dead Island given it's absolute masterpiece of a trailer emphasizing, for once, the human drama and desperation of a zombie outbreak more so than the actual zombies. That said, the developers have made some statements since that left me wondering whether the trailer was more of a fluke, or at the very least Jarhead-syndrome, than an actual representation of good things to come.

Then again, to be completely honest, this is a problem with the horror genre in the games industry in general isn't it? The game (and movie) industry seems to continuously confuse terror and fear with gore and shock. Startling someone, or making them feel sick, is easy. Truly terrifying them requires something else entirely.

snip

I'll admit I haven't kept up with the most recent behaviorist developments, but I think he might be referencing to the most commonly known, and probably older, behavior modification theories. Those that I remember only distinguish positive and negative reinforcement, and no reinforcement.

Positive reinforcement would be the administration of any stimulus seen as positive by the target. This could be accomplished by giving them something (e.g.: a back rub, a chocolate bar...etc) or taking something away (e.g.: a very annoying alarm sound, a literal or metaphorical thorn on one's side, etc). The bottom line would be that the individual in question would see it as a positive stimulus.

Negative reinforcement would be the administration of any stimulus seen as negative by the subject. Again, could also be accomplished by giving something (e.g.: an electrical shock, a slap, etc) or taking something (e.g.: a toy, food, etc.). So long as this was seen as negative by the subject, it could be accomplished in any fashion.

While I maintain that I'm not exactly up to par on this specific subject, it does seem that differentiating between how you accomplish the positive and negative stimulus is more of a linguistic concern and, to be completely honest, almost pedantic in nature. I mean, is it honestly relevant if you accomplish a negative stimulus by giving or taking something? Isn't the pragmatic result the exact same? That the subject sees the result as either positive or negative?

Absolutely not relevant to the topic, but this is also my area so I do enjoy discussing it.

/further psychological rambling.

 

[Trolldor]

No game I can recall has ever allowed you to thwart a zombie invasion by shooting them all.
Not one.

 

[Dastardly]

How Games Get Zombies Wrong

Oh, dear, game industry ... you seem to have failed your Zombie Aptitude Test. Let's review where you went wrong.

Read Full Article

In short, most games are about zombie hunting, as opposed to zombie survival.

In a good zombie story/game/etc, the zombies themselves eventually become background noise that occasionally rises up to cause problems, in the same way that the ocean is always there... but only once in awhile does it throw a storm or tsunami our way to remind us who's boss.

The survival aspect comes in navigating this undead "ocean" to find supplies to fill your basic needs. Survival also demands that, whenever possible, we avoid or flee combat, rather than actively pursuing it. Scavenging and sneaking are two things that most games don't do well, and they're usually just a small break from near-constant combat.

The clear reason they're not done well is that action = distraction. You don't have to spend time dealing with deep characters are complex interpersonal drama, because 'splosions! But that's what makes the zombie apocalypse so much more powerful.

Not only are you having to deal with avoiding the zombies, you're having to work harder to meet basic needs. Perhaps harder than you've ever worked. You're having to wrestle with yourself--despair, confusion, maybe a bit of inadequacy. Depending on what "reanimating the dead" says about your religious beliefs, you may be without your god, too. You're also having to wrestle with others--work with them, steal from them, be stolen from, fight, get along, go back and forth...

There are enemies on all sides, including the inside. That intra- and interpersonal drama is what makes the scenario so powerful and unique. And not many developers have what it takes to get into that. I'll agree that without compelling interpersonal drama, the non-combat survival aspects make for pretty boring gameplay... but that's like saying pools are boring without the water.

 

[mcnally86]

Does Dead Rising count as a game that shows other humans as the real threat?

I am going to have to agree. The first not the second DR. Once you get a few levels the zombies can be largely ignored. I rush passed them at top speed or crowd surf them. But once your health gets low oh man its like blood in the water and all the sharks get exited. When you are dieing you have to try so much harder to get passed one zombie let alone a horde.

In the first the military replaces zombies at the end of the story and in the second its bigger zombies at the end. So the first fits more of your twilight zone/scary door thesis, "it turns out its man." Anyway every boss fight is with crazy people. Ok DR2 did that pretty well too, that one furry gave me nightmares and the redneck snipers were tough. But how about your criteria you cant live and you need to be infected? Well if you get to the end and escape on a chopper a new mode unlocks. You play endless mode and they tell you you must have had a hallucination from all the zombies plague you caught. Cause there is no chopper now and your starting to turn. Play the rest of the game stealing dwindling resources from the non-crazy people you were saving earlier.

The biggest challenge was prioritizing your time to decides who lives and who is not worth trying to save. Save one old guy who you need to carry or a couple of Japanese gents with a language barrier problem.

 

[Tadd]

I think I read an article somewhere on cracked.com about how the Zombie apocolypse would fail miserably...

 

[Dice Warwick]

I see the point being made, and agree. It be nice to see someone make a civilization type game that takes place in the zombie apocalypse. But one thin I do disagree with is that you can survive a zombie apocalypse, but I agree that "Shooting them with a gun" is not the right way.

 

[Serioli]

Or read All Flesh Must be Eaten and its various supplements to get different ideas, both about zombies and possible long term survival scenarios.

Have to decide whether the zombies are supernatural or 'scientific' (infected) as there is a BIG difference in survival chances, spread etc.

(That cracked article mixes both 'scientific' disease based zombies and supernatural zombies and then cherry picks a solution. The majority of it's solutions/reasoning don't work with supernatural zombies because they are animated by [del]plot-hole-filler[/del] magic, nor do they work with 'scientific' infected as they are still alive and have a living persons biological responses).

 

[pneuma08]

I am reminded of the church event in Left 4 Dead's Death Toll campaign, where another "survivor" makes trouble for the group by calling the zombie hordes.

 

[kuyo]

negative reinforcement is when you take away a bad stimulus in response to desired behavior.
Shocking someone in response to undesired behavior is a positive deterrent.

I remember a game where people had the cure, so the game was about changing as many of the other side as possible. You'd change if you were bit or shot by the opposing side, and you could only take a limited number of transformations before you body gave out from the stress.

 

[Xenomortis]

I think the article misses or at least glosses over something in the "why are Zombies scary" section.

Zombies are about subversion.

Zombies are like a form of really aggressive cancer: Just as cancer subverts healthy cells and corrupts their normal function, so, too, do zombies subvert healthy humans. It might be with a bite or a scratch, or maybe it's by dint of death itself, so that when one's demise comes it never truly comes. This is the subversion of sickness, of disease. Zombies are scary in the way that Ebola or HIV are scary. Zombies are the black plague of monsters - get too close, drop your guard, and they will do more than just kill you.They will infect you.

Yes, but there's more. This trait is typical of Vampires and Werewolves in fantasy yet I don't think those are as scary as a Zombie; they may be more threatening one on one, but they lack something zombies have (or more, they have something zombies don't). Vampires and Werewolves are predators and like all those that hunt and prey on others, they have at least a trace of rationality. Zombies don't - they lack everything that characterises other animals and are so alien that they are totally unrelatable.
It is more than what they do to you, individually, but how they act. They are absolute in their aim - they simply wish to feed and by extension, propagate. They go about this with such zeal and single-mindedness that any attempt to stop them seems futile (and indeed, this is the premise of all zombie fiction).
They, collectively, are a disease themselves. Their actions are akin to some of the most basic lifeforms on Earth; they're a virus; an incredibly virulent affliction that will destroy their host organism - its own environment.
It's this that is at the core of the zombie menace.

That's something I think video games do currently capture, but not fully. Certainly zombies are depicted as mindless and never ending.
But yes, a lot of games do merely use them as though they were any other foe.

I've had a thought:
Imagine Left 4 Dead, but without the athletic marathon runners for aggressors; replaced by the old fashioned slow moving, iconic antagonist of the zombie genre.
Then imagine that it only took the one hit to cause you to turn; that you couldn't even afford to let one zombie bite or even successfully lay a scratch on you.
Suddenly the game becomes a lot more foreboding; entering tighter spaces, even opening a door becomes a risky but necessary endeavor; you can't hold off the zombie hordes staying in one place forever.

That wouldn't capture everything, but I think it would be an improvement over a lot of what we see now. It's hard to do much more whilst staying in that co-op format.