Zombie/Infected [DLC] How much interest?

[Rg 0]

This poll is just to test the waters among the current community to see how much interest there would be for such an endeavour after A3 release.

With improved Physics & Animations, the prospects of something like this on RV3 get interesting.

I personally would want the more believable infected/rage 28 days later DLC, but thats me. ;)

Edited May 24, 2011 by Rg

[celery 8]

Would pay nothing - too easy to script them.

[Defunkt 431]

I am totally there, the fantastic thing about zombies is they're supposed to be stupid which makes co-op versus A.I. actually work well. It's a tried and tested formula and at the $10 DLC level I find it hard to see it failing.

Would pay nothing - too easy to script them.

I've not tried yours but I have plenty of others (am even dabbling with

) and you're always fighting with the native A.I. behaviours - results would be much better with support built into the engine. Edited May 25, 2011 by Defunkt

[NeMeSiS 11]

Would pay nothing - too easy to script them.

This.

But, it would certainly sell if done properly, and yeah, i would probably buy it anyway.

EDIT: And its almost hilarious how many zombiesmods are currently produced/worked on, i am also working on something (Avarage about 1 hour a week, so it doesnt go very fast) zombie related and i am trying to go the FSM route this time, although it is a bit of a hassle and lots of trial and error.

Edited May 24, 2011 by NeMeSiS

[froggyluv 2136]

While I think 28 Days Later is pure cinematic gold - I'd hestitate in this engine.

All zombies (even the old school 2kph walkers) know how to find you wherever you are hidden and thats what makes them scary. No matter how long it takes -theyll eventually get to you.

Unless interior AI movement where dramatically improved -I'm sure I could find areas inside structures where the AI just won't go -after a while that would feel gamey and not be dignified zombie behaviour.

Smashing windows and manipulating objects would be another must in a zombie world where anything can be used as a weapon -another problem with this engine.

Who knows what PhysX will bring to this engine -but I kinda doubt it would get me excited for a 28 Days Later kinda world.

[Splintert 10]

I believe a zombie mode would act best as a sandbox survival sort of thing. This would require advanced AI pathfinding, spawning mechanisms, and the ability to make barricades out of any object. I also think that slow, extremely dumb zombies are the way to go, rather than smarter, faster zombies. They are dead, after all.

The actual mission would have to simulate not only zombies and survival, but a living, breathing world. Things would have to change dynamically, not be the same every time. A combination of rescues based on player action, ammunition rarity, and free-for-all player activity could provide for an interesting time.

[dissaifer 10]

I'd definitely pay for the zombies, for the art work, sounds, new animations, some built in path finding (including houses) and attacking for barricades.

@Nemesis - right there with you... it becomes painful to change the FSM, only to find out there is a huge part missing.

[zooloo75 834]

I don't care if there is a DLC for zombies, but I would rather not have it or leave it to the modding community. The last thing I want to hear is "OMG I am going to get A3 for ZOMBIES!!! Do you want to play zombies with me in ARMA3?!"

That's the day the ArmA series' reputation goes down the drain.

Leave it to CoD to cater to the children and ArmA to cater to the mature military-sim community.

[Defunkt 431]

Leave it to CoD to cater to the children and ArmA to cater to the mature military-sim community.

I've seen a lot of complaints about the poor attitude of the 'elitist pretend solider types' on this forum who like to proclaim anything but their style of play (and only their style of play) isn't the right sort of thing at all and want the barriers to entry to remain high. I've never really credited it with much veracity but now, thanks to you, I can see it very clearly.

[Flogger23m 2]

I wouldn't pay anything. I don't like zombie games very much, and I am paying for an authentic infantry simulation.

Give me DLC packs like the BAF and PMC for $10 (new weapons, maps, missions) and I would be interested in buying it.

[zooloo75 834]

I've seen a lot of complaints about the poor attitude of the 'elitist pretend solider types' on this forum who like to proclaim anything but their style of play (and only their style of play) isn't the right sort of thing at all and want the barriers to entry to remain high. I've never really credited it with much veracity but now, thanks to you, I can see it very clearly.

I'm all open for new ideas, but CoD seems to own the whole zombie idea. It would be foolish for the ArmA series to head in that direction. If they do it right, then go for it, but they will also need to advertise the game alot more. I came to ArmA for the realism, not to play a kiddie game.

[gossamersolid 155]

No...

There are fine player created ones out there, if you want a zombie game, go play a zombie game...

[dissaifer 10]

I'm all open for new ideas, but CoD seems to own the whole zombie idea. It would be foolish for the ArmA series to head in that direction. If they do it right, then go for it, but they will also need to advertise the game alot more. I came to ArmA for the realism, not to play a kiddie game.

I don't think foolish is the right word. There are some very common things that would be addressed in a zombie mod that would directly impact Arma gameplay.

1. Pathfinding - yes, zombies in a field are simple to script, but in buildings is much more complicated.

2. Structures - there would be a direct need to have more buildings as running from zombies in a field would not be very interesting.

Now add those two components together and you have ... Close Quarters Combat that is AI capable.

While you think the CoD guys are making kidding games they are really improving their engines and making some money on the side with the experiments they've made.

And if you think I'm lying... look at Take on Helicopters.

[Nutlink 10]

I kind of laughed when I saw this thread because I knew right away there'd be some folks who would absolutely despise the very thought of BIS adding anything unrealistic to the ArmA series. Personally I would pay $10 for it just for an "official" zombie mod that we could all use as a standard. Any more than that and it's not worth it over the community addons. I'd just hope they don't put it in the final release because I'd obviously rather them work on the core game. Any zombie ideas can be DLC.

And GossamerSolid, the same could be said for BAF and PMC, yet some of us still bought those didn't we? There's enough demand for it I'm sure that a zombie DLC would sell just fine without affecting the core game.

[zooloo75 834]

I'm not against the idea of a zombie dlc, as I'm not forced to play it. I would buy the DLC, as it would be an interesting twist in the gameplay, but it just doesn't seem like it would be fitting in the Armaverse.

[JojoTheSlayer 35]

Not for the Arma series.

I dont think they can compete with the other zombie stuff out there tbh.

I would rather have Killing Floor 2 or Dead Island for my zombie tick.

[zooloo75 834]

Not for the Arma series.

I dont think they can compete with the other zombie stuff out there tbh.

I would rather have Killing Floor 2 or Dead Island for my zombie tick.

Exactly. Leave zombies for ZOMBIE games. This isn't a zombie game, this is a mil-sim.

It's like getting SimCity for C&C styled gameplay.

Edited May 25, 2011 by zooloo75
Analogy

[That guy 10]

no, just no. please no. As a mod is just fine. preferable in fact. As soon as BIS does it, it becomes cannon, and suddenly there are friggin ZOMBIES in the real world.

zombie type missions can be fun, but don't make them official :)

[froggyluv 2136]

@Making Zombie pathfinding will improve Arma CQB: LOL, if this is the motivation to better enhance Arma's interior battle aspect -then so be it!

Honestly tho, the amount of time people have asked and wish for better interior cqb, I think if it was doable in this engine then it would have been done already for it's own sake. Perhaps this next installment will have improved on this, but I doubt one fantasy DLC would be the catalyst for such dramatic changes.

A Zombie/militaristic survival game could be great if done properly -a game of survival, traveling for resources, looking for other humans for support and maybe even an RPG like search for the cure. But when I think of Zombies and survival, I can't help but imagine some crazy mad scramble action needed: jump thru windows, pick up any object to use as weapon or tool, jumping and climbing as you'd often be scrambling to save your very life.

Somehow Half-life engine comes to mind as more appropriate...

[antoineflemming 14]

No. You want Treyarch's zombies, go play Black Ops... jk. But really, in my mind, zombies = arcade-style gameplay. Yeah, sure, many people would love it, but it's place is not in ArmA. All the added features that can improve ArmA gameplay could be added without a zombie dlc. Sure, hopefully ArmA 3's mod tools will allow for modders to make their own DLC's as far as the size of the projects. But for something official? no. It's like the same thing for the mech lovers. Sure, it'd work as a mod, but not as something official when ArmA is a milsim. Especially when only 2 or 3 DLCs come out.

[twisted 128]

I wouldn't pay anything. I don't like zombie games very much, and I am paying for an authentic infantry simulation.

Give me DLC packs like the BAF and PMC for $10 (new weapons, maps, missions) and I would be interested in buying it.

i agree. zombie games are ok but not what i ever look for from arma

[pbishop 10]

2 words and a number -> Left 4 Dead

[Defunkt 431]

What a shame so many people can't see past Military Simulation, it seems odd to me given this series has a long tradition of being highly flexible and adaptable. The problem with "go play a Zombie game" is that none of the games on offer let you postulate a realistic military response to the end of the world or a post-apocalyptic survival sandbox, they are just hack and slash affairs.

It might be a stretch to suggest such a DLC would solve the A.I.'s negotiation of building interiors but the necessary ability to disconnect some of the A.I.'s fundamental behaviours could open up a world of possibilties for modding that are just inordinately hard without some additional engine support. Things like fighting in rigid formations (which might be used for Ancient, Civil War & Napoleonic settings) and other not-normal behaviours that might be required for a War Against the Machines or Alien Invasion scenario.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

I'm down for zombies in the sim environment. Anyone played Celery's missions? There's only two, sure, but both are funking epic!

[froggyluv 2136]

What a shame so many people can't see past Military Simulation, it seems odd to me given this series has a long tradition of being highly flexible and adaptable. .

Its not being against in favor of Military simulation -its that the engine is built for Military engagements highlighting itself in the mid-long range affair. Zombie attacks are inherently extremely cqb (unless your talkin zombie Rommels), which the engine just doesn't support. At the very least you need substantial melee or it's reduced to fire, backpeddle, fire, get on a tower, fire, zombie attempts to climb tower, no damn kick in the face button, fire, outta ammo, fall and die...

I would imagine a fight with a zombie being the worst fistfight in the world, nimbleness of avatar required.

Mods are fine and hopefully a better melee attack will eventually come supporting this. But an official DLC :rolleyes:

Edited May 25, 2011 by froggyluv