2017 - Official Announcement!

[Veleno92 10]

fantastic

[duckii 1]

you may call them what you want, but what I see on the screenshots are zombies...

Rocket tried to call them infected as well but it did not work :p

It does look very promising.

[Veleno92 10]

but if you do not like do not come to comment obliges anyone you do not

[kleutscher 48]

People may call them zombies if they want. In the end they are Infected. There is a big difference between infected and zombies.

Wich is kinda important to chose between calling them zombies or infected.

Zombies are dead and can only be killed by destroying their brains. Infected are still living humans being in somekind of rage mode and can be killed by many ways.

"The Infected (known as "fast zombies" in some circles) aren't zombies in the truest sense, and many (but not all) fans of Zombie fiction feel that the distinction is very important. Infected are people, technically still alive, whose bodies are ravaged with some sort of biological pathogen that irrevocably (and fatally) transforms the hosts bodies and minds. The immediate change is a total reversion to an aggressive, feral personality type. An infected will attack any human (regardless of past emotional connection) with rabid ferocity, and all the strength - and mobility - they can muster. The infected demeanor is notably hostile, hateful, and enraged (hence the name Rage). Both the biological infection, and its primal hosts spread quicker than their literary cousins, the Zombies. However Infected have been universally portrayed as more fragile, with a average life span of only weeks or months (as the body begins to dehydrate, muscles and other organs begin to fail), and can be killed by wounds to the torso, or bleeding out through extremities, whereas Zombies almost universally require their brain to be destroyed before final death, and can persist intact for years without food, water, or even oxygen."

[emoglobinsky 149]

you may call them what you want, but what I see on the screenshots are zombies...

Rocket tried to call them infected as well but it did not work :p

It does look very promising.

Because in fact, in Dayz it's just some bugged AIs that make a big lack of gameplay.

So calling those 2017 creature zombies or infected, in the end is not a problem of concepts, its a problem of gameplay elements: many people want to have slow yet dangerous AI, and some people prefer to have some humanoid AI that can run (in that case, i bet its because they can't do new anims for zombies/infected/pedobears).

So stop saying its 100% different from Dayz. It has almost same gameplay elements, maybe a different background story, but ingame feeling and mechanics will be almost the same.

That being said, the beauty shots are nice and i wish you luck to finish this mod !

[knar33 10]

Because in fact, in Dayz it's just some bugged AIs that make a big lack of gameplay.

So calling those 2017 creature zombies or infected, in the end is not a problem of concepts, its a problem of gameplay elements: many people want to have slow yet dangerous AI, and some people prefer to have some humanoid AI that can run (in that case, i bet its because they can't do new anims for zombies/infected/pedobears).

So stop saying its 100% different from Dayz. It has almost same gameplay elements, maybe a different background story, but ingame feeling and mechanics will be almost the same.

That being said, the beauty shots are nice and i wish you luck to finish this mod !

If you actually read through the announcement post you will see the gameplay elements are completely different. The only common features are infected AI (dayz had zombies, hence the name day Z) and a looting system, apart from that 2017 will have a completely different feel and playstyle. The main reason to differentiate between the terms infected/zombie is because they are two completely different things that present different challenges. For example, zombies can only be killed by dismembering the head. Infected however can be killed the same way a regular human can (usually). Hardcore zombie fans have a heart attack when people call 28 days later a "zombie" movie.

We are doing fast humanoid AI because it creates faster paced gameplay. In order for slow walking zombies to present a danger, there needs to be hundreds of them and the engine won't be able to handle it. We ARE doing custom animations for our infected, so it's not anything about being "lazy".

[RushHour 11]

I think this mod will be the next Day-Z

(! not as in Zombies as people have already discussed to death, just mean the impact it had in the gaming world)

[horrorview 10]

I'd love to see a single player survival experience that's "persistent", with certain general upkeep quests (get food, gather wood for fire, find fuel for vehicles, find more ammo, decorate/build/expand homesteads, etc) and a "restocking" of infected in areas once cleared. Obviously story driven quests and missions would eventually run out (unless we're able to make them, of course) so are there plans to incorporate some sort of system like this to keep single player fans entertained in lieu of multiplayer's survival of the fittest gameplay?

[Chaingunfighter 103]

I think this mod will be the next Day-Z

(! not as in Zombies as people have already discussed to death, just mean the impact it had in the gaming world)

Probably not, because DayZ is actually getting a standalone game. I doubt that BIS will make another standalone zombie game.

[vrcraptor 11]

All I want to know is when I can start my "Survivor Man" mission... :)

-Raps

[Echo_94 1]

So do you guys have any sort of ETA on when we can expect a Beta or Alpha of this? Me and my ArmA buddy are VERY excited for this :)

[pressytcn 10]

i remember this from the dayz mod i'm not a fan of dayz mainly because it was close to impossible to host your own server or create a mission using the mod

if however this mod will allow coop without having to spend money on a server i could see it being an interesting mod with those models it almost looks like the game stalker

[celery 8]

People may call them zombies if they want. In the end they are Infected. There is a big difference between infected and zombies.

Wich is kinda important to chose between calling them zombies or infected.

Zombies are dead and can only be killed by destroying their brains. Infected are still living humans being in somekind of rage mode and can be killed by many ways.

"The Infected (known as "fast zombies" in some circles) aren't zombies in the truest sense, and many (but not all) fans of Zombie fiction feel that the distinction is very important. Infected are people, technically still alive, whose bodies are ravaged with some sort of biological pathogen that irrevocably (and fatally) transforms the hosts bodies and minds. The immediate change is a total reversion to an aggressive, feral personality type. An infected will attack any human (regardless of past emotional connection) with rabid ferocity, and all the strength - and mobility - they can muster. The infected demeanor is notably hostile, hateful, and enraged (hence the name Rage). Both the biological infection, and its primal hosts spread quicker than their literary cousins, the Zombies. However Infected have been universally portrayed as more fragile, with a average life span of only weeks or months (as the body begins to dehydrate, muscles and other organs begin to fail), and can be killed by wounds to the torso, or bleeding out through extremities, whereas Zombies almost universally require their brain to be destroyed before final death, and can persist intact for years without food, water, or even oxygen."

Zombies are people that have undergone a horrendous transformation into a near-mindless state where they mostly just want to kill and eat people.

Infected, however, are people that have undergone a horrendous transformation into a near-mindless state where they mostly just want to kill and eat people. One couldn't possibly associate them with zombies in any way.

1. Learn the difference.

2. Learn the difference.

I have no idea why people insist that infected are anything like zombies.

Edited September 2, 2013 by Celery

[Veleno92 10]

would be nice if the main enemy were not other players but they were zombies

[knar33 10]

Zombies are people that have undergone a horrendous transformation into a near-mindless state where they mostly just want to kill and eat people.

Infected, however, are people that have undergone a horrendous transformation into a near-mindless state where they mostly just want to kill and eat people. One couldn't possibly associate them with zombies in any way.

1. Learn the difference.

2. Learn the difference.

I have no idea why people insist that infected are anything like zombies.

It's very simple, zombies want to eat people, infected don't. They just want to destroy/kill people in primal rage. And then there is the whole difference between being alive and dead :eek: Your definitions are very inaccurate.

All 4 of those pictures you linked are of infected. With the Dawn of the Dead remake, Romero himself even resisted the change to fast runners because they were not what he himself considered to be zombies.

[kleutscher 48]

Joe Horan joined the 2017 Dev team. He's going to be our models/UI guy.

Some of his work that he did for DayZmod.

UI work:

http://imgur.com/a/HZ1P7#0

http://imgur.com/a/Qnb3h#0

http://imgur.com/a/lTCZT#0

http://imgur.com/a/c5Zj6#0

3D / O2 work:

http://imgur.com/a/LpkcE#0

http://imgur.com/a/1xBNA#5

http://imgur.com/a/rHhIz#0 (sketchup)

[emoglobinsky 149]

Love the camp concept, we can see a very nice link to the "Build modular mod" to allow people gathering and create new camps !

[Wolfstriked 11]

The modder of the best UI/3D stuff around enters 2017 team means alot.He must have liked what he seen when introduced to your plan and what your trying to do.;)

[celery 8]

It's very simple, zombies want to eat people, infected don't. They just want to destroy/kill people in primal rage. And then there is the whole difference between being alive and dead :eek:

Those are arbitrary differences because there is no universal rule or consensus that infected don't cannibalize or that zombies are pathologically dead. I concede that the "eat" part was an unnecessary addition.

Your definitions are very inaccurate.

I don't think so. In my previous post I described the barest characteristics of a zombie. Infected are a subtype of zombie that for all intents and purposes fill the role of zombies in whatever game or story they populate, and the only difference is the extent to which their supposed non-zombieness is hammered in.

All 4 of those pictures you linked are of infected. With the Dawn of the Dead remake, Romero himself even resisted the change to fast runners because they were not what he himself considered to be zombies.

Dawn of the Dead 2004 has zombies; its summary and even script mentions zombies. Left 4 Dead has zombies, or would you say that its product description is false advertising? In any case, all four pictures feature zombies, and two of the four zombie pictures feature a type of zombie that the authors want to explicitly distinguish as "infected".

[RushHour 11]

would be nice if the main enemy were not other players but they were zombies

This will happen when the threat of infected is bigger then the potential threat of other players.

For DayZ, not so much. Hence the biggest threat was other players.

[Chaingunfighter 103]

It's very simple, zombies want to eat people, infected don't. They just want to destroy/kill people in primal rage. And then there is the whole difference between being alive and dead :eek: Your definitions are very inaccurate.

All 4 of those pictures you linked are of infected. With the Dawn of the Dead remake, Romero himself even resisted the change to fast runners because they were not what he himself considered to be zombies.

Infected want to INFECT people with the virus, it's mother nature's (ineffective, but entertaining fictionwise) way of spreading the disease. If they just killed their prey, it wouldn't help at lal.

[Wolfstriked 11]

Lately I have been wondering if the ease of the infected in Dayz is what actually is its draw.See,when I play Arma3 vs bots for awhile then suddenly play Arma3 PVP my heart pounds with excitement and then I desensitize to it and it gets boring or not as exciting.So lately I have been wondering if the easy infected is actually good for the game.With Dayz you quickly get comfortable searching for supplies to survive and then hours later a real threat appears and he wants you dead and its exhilarating.But then a part of me wonders about that feeling I had the first week of playing Dayz.The infected being deadly and scary was THE reason why Dayz was so amazing the first week of playing iirc?I did not get shot at by other players just yet and all I wanted to do was survive.My mind reeled with the possibilities and this made me so immersed into the world that when a player suddenly came at me screaming with an axe my adrenaline went thru the roof.It was sensory overload and it was amazing.The instant though that I read that you just go into a bush and zeds will lose aggro or just keep running as they can't catch you and it was all over for me.And then it became a broken zombie game where I just laughed at infected and then got super pissed when I got sniped from afar.But at other end it grabbed many players who liked the race to gear up and then PVP at NWAF.

Just would like to see infected as the threat of game to have a "What if" scenario.

[bad benson 1733]

the first week of playing Dayz.The infected being deadly and scary was THE reason why Dayz was so amazing

Just would like to see infected as the threat of game to have a "What if" scenario.

actually. when dayZ started out, the zombies/infected (whatever) were much more dangerous. they didn't have line of sight checks. so once aggroed you had to deal with them or simply die. they also had the ability to knock you out much faster. those two factors made them actually much more dangerous. it wasn't just getting used to them, it was rocket nerfing them because people were whining all the time.

i remember dying from zombies when two buddies were right next to me because they could quickly eat you once knocked out when you health was low. something like that was impossible to happen in later versions.

at the start it was really hardcore and it was what made it great (for me) PvP or no PvP. i stopped playing when i realized that these changes made dayZ into free for all with lots of walking (basically wasteland with broken zombies). all the zombie apocalypse implications were totally gone.

i think not a lot of people realized how much the zombies actually got nerfed. so despite all the anti mechanic and balancing talk the game (again for me) got actually ruined by nerfing/balancing.

[Wolfstriked 11]

So true Bad,the mod was killer at first.Sadly,there was just alot of design decisions done and the mod ended the way it is today.Rocket from beginning was all for the PVP as main draw and so zeds were an afterthought.Funnily,so much work was done to the zeds while at same time making them easy.I am hoping though that they might have realized that harsher infected could just add to the experience but now its late stage,mod is way overdue and now they are trying to rework the infected.Just have to wait and see what they bring to the table.Its also funny how they tried so hard to figure out a way to lessen the shoot on sight mentality and make players work together more and it might be as simple as hard ass zeds.

[bad benson 1733]

yea. to me Celery's zeds are still the best. 3 hits and you're done. who cares about realism. it's all about consequences. the rules of the game world. the chernarus apocalypse series really shows how Celery gets that and how much he achieves just by balancing ammo supplies and stuff like zombie damage.

i personally would be fine with one shot = player down zombies. maybe add a possibility to be helped by players shortly after. but i think making literally "unfair" zombies is the only way to create that feel of zombie movies. where you respect them no matter how often you played the mission. people these days ask way to much for "smooth" uninterrupted gameplay. it ruins a lot of interesting challenging gameplay concepts.

just imagine every run for loot in a village would mean 50% chance of death by zombies (or at least getting downed) instead of sprinting through houses having a congaline of retards behind you that can be lost by running into the next bush.

the line of sight idea isn't bad generally. but just alone without more conditions it's silly. what was used as an approach to "improve" the zombies actually ruined them. IF you implement line of sight checks there have to be more checks. like distance and time etc. it makes no sense that they stop looking for you in the exact moment they lose line of sight. but anyways. i should stop rambling ;)