Poll: Fast zombies.

[DazBurger]

Fast zombies are pretty new. Starting in 28 days later,these creatures were fast,terrifying and merciless. However,these zombies are often hated. I never got why these creatures were hated since I know only one guy who hates them and he isn't talking. Say why you hate them,and if you don't, then try not to start a flame war

funnily enough me and a freind had this discussion recently,

there are usually 2 types of zombies, there is the traditional slow moving zombie that can take lots of hits. there are also the zombies that are fast but take very few hits.

id recommend a fully/semi auto weapon when fighting this particular zombie as they are most likly in large groups, just spray the group before they can get to you. they are often too fast to melee

Well, there is also the original 3. Zombie.
The Voodoo-zombie, that started the all the myths.

 

[Deleted]

In real life, I'll take slow zombies anyday. Unless we get weapon spawns in different areas we're screwed if the zombies are fast.

 

[similar.squirrel]

I think they're disliked because they make everybody's Zombie Plan about ten times more difficult.

 

[The Lost Big Boss]

Well it depends, if they are zombie's by the definition then no we are fucked. If they are running and they only way to stop them is a bullet in the head we are all fucked. Now if they are lets say infected that can run then I would be more happy because they will 1. Starve to death 2. After a couple of weeks of not eating they will become so weak that they could not run 3. They can die like any human IE a couple of bullets to the chest. So ya I hate fast zombies, but not fast infected.

 

[Brown Cap]

Zombies are tehcnically real according to Max Brooks. And through his "scientific theories" it is impossible for zombies to run.


Thus, i dont hate them - they're just unrealistic (if were realistic to begin with)

 

[walkingdead127]

Fast Zombies make it more realistic. It seems slow zombies would be really easy to avoid.

 

[SlickShot]

Yes I like the idea but gods help me if I ever come up against any.

 

[titanium turtle]

wrap a city with razor wire perimiters at neck height, play load music and watch them (re) kill themselves

 

[talkyteeky]

I enjoy figthing them everyonce in a horde, but as a rule I think that since zombies have been decomposing or at the very least have rigamortis they shouldnt be able to run quickly

 

[Ilovechocolatemilk]

When you think about it, it's almost impossible for a real zombie apocalypse to occur with slow-as-hell zombies. If my grandmother could run away from one, chances are the rest of the world could making the rate of infection not enough to be "apocalyptic."

Thus, fast-moving zombies are "more realistic" than slow-moving zombies. It also makes movies more interesting to watch since any movie featuring slow zombies is either campy or comical, lacking the suspense posed by a real threat to the main characters.

 

[Maxnwil]

It really depends. The big thing that muddles the whole issue up is that infected/diseased people have become lumped in with the dead coming back to life. Perhaps this is because with advances in modern science, the number of people who believe in ghosts drops whilst the number of people who are scared of some disease turning them into a flesh eating monster has gone up.

Personally, I think that the fast zombies are fun to fight in video games, but slow zombies are more true to classic "zombie" form. If anyone is looking for a great read, check out "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies". Hilarious remake of a boring "classic"

 

[omfq]

it all depends on what story youre looking at now, zombies were originaly just the walking dead caused by a voodoo curse but since people have become so facinated by them and it seems like everyone wants to add theyre own type of zombie so its hard to say. a zombie appocalpse would be... interesting... to see how people would survive since so many people have become convinced that a zombies will in fact destroy the world and have prepared. anyways this discussion is full of people who have different definitions of zombies.

 

[Sejs Cube]

I honestly like a combination of the two. Maybe something along the lines that fresh zombies are fast, but as they decompose more and more they get slower.

 

[Gondito]

... running zombies are more badass

No, I don't hate fast zombies. In video games, they offer a decent challenge. As for the movies, that just makes good theater.

[small]photo of a guy with raised thumb and winking eye not available[/small]

there you go.

 

[zicoV]

No, I don't hate fast zombies. In video games, they offer a decent challenge. As for the movies, that just makes good theater.

true. but they would be a ***** when the zombie apocalypse comes around.

 

[social_outcast]

The idea is a reimagining of the concept: the worlds a lot faster these days so slow zombies aren't as frightening.
Also, having them retain speedy motor skills alows you to add newer science plots onto it

 

[huntedannoyed]

It's amazing that zombies could be made even cooler after 50 years* with something so simple as moving faster.

*I'm not sure how long zombies have been represented in the form that we are referring to, but you get my drift. Didn't Bella Lugosi do zombie movies before Romero?

 

[Jharry5]

I prefer the traditional slow movers when it comes to the undead zombies. However, I loved the 28 Days incarnation; at the time, it was a new and pretty terrifying take on the 'zombie' apocalypse (I know that the infected are not technically zombies in 28 Days). That's why it worked so well, it was meant to be an accellerated rabies or something. Now the 'Dawn' and 'Day of the Dead' remakes, on the other hand...

Undead zombies should be slow in my opinion. But the running zombies are a lot more dangerous. I just hope its Romero's version that the zombie apocalypse takes as its frame of reference...