2017 - Official Announcement!

[Horner 13]

Looks impressive. Best wishes in your project! I hope to see/play this mod when it is finished.

[Emberwolf 0]

I prefer the Celery zombies over the DayZ zombies, because the gameplay mechanics are more consistent. The three-strikes system is brutal but it works. The player gets immediate feedback for everything. Two strikes from death, one strike from death, and then death. Bandages erase all strikes, but you can waste bandages by using them with only one strike (yet saving them for two strikes is a lot more risky). You also need to commit some time to apply a bandage, which makes you vulnerable. There's a bit of strategy involved. It may be simple, but it's consistent.

In DayZ, you get a desaturation filter for health. Bandages don't always stop bleeding. A zombie can do a small amount of damage by biting your face, and then snap your legs in half by biting your face again. Zombies can also knock you out randomly. This is inconsistent randomness that seems to be at odds with ArmA's functionality, and I personally found this a lot less fun to deal with. Not to mention that either situation takes control away from the player (as opposed to the three strikes system, where the player has full control until they die, which is less grating). I can concede that having more types of injuries is more realistic, but I'd rather die outright than crawl two kilometers to a hostpital with broken legs and a black and white filter.

[Wolfstriked 11]

Just checked out a few videos of Chernarus Apocalypse and it looks great.Gonna have to give it a go and see the differences first hand though.

[XoloX 10]

Dunno if yall noticed but the domain is nowhere to be found for 3 days now.

[gdscei 1]

Dunno if yall noticed but the domain is nowhere to be found for 3 days now.

I'm hosting the site. This is because I've been working on a server re-setup.

Not that there's much to see on the website at all though ;) It's just a "Coming soon" page with our logo. However, the site should be up again within 2 days.

[shinkicker 5]

I prefer the Celery zombies over the DayZ zombies.... <snip>.

Its not DayZ. Totally different new code base.

The AI is being done by Craig of Zombie Sandbox Mod, so it will be closer to that then Dean Hall's work.

[giorgygr 61]

Its not DayZ. Totally different new code base.

I hope it will be that way in the end.

Basically Celery's zombies was the MOST performance-affordable way to have Zombies but..

i think you couldn't get away from them -once they spot you.

(*and i have the feeling DZS had same issue)

That's kinda bad imo.

Zombies must rely on player's last known position as long they retain LoS-aka if player

can hide successfully zombies mustn't have knowledgeof his exact position-unless

they actually see him hiding there

Edited September 5, 2013 by GiorgyGR

[Horner 13]

I hope it will be that way in the end.

Basically Celery's zombies was the MOST performance-affordable way to have Zombies but..

i think you couldn't get away from them -once they spot you.

(*and i have the feeling DZS had same issue)

I think DZS used Celery's zombies. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[ricki122 10]

Can't wait to see this mod in action! Hope it will be good optimized :D

[artsi 11]

This looks promising. Are you planning to include zombies that are usable in the editor?

[entspeak 1]

Look... the distinction being made here between infected and zombies is simply to keep people from confusing live humans with the undead. These (and the zombies in DayZ) are not rotting, undead zombies - that's it... simple as that. So, the semantic argument is pointless. The point is that these will not be rotting, undead humans; they are infected, living humans.

[omegasniper 2]

This mod sounds amazing, cant wait to try this

[das attorney 858]

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.

You hit the nail on the head there mate.

In the early days of DayZ, there was much camaraderie - maybe enforced by the unrelenting Zeds. As it went on, the focus of DayZ (unintentionally most likely) became more about ruling the roost against other players than dealing with the "annoyance" of killing zombies.

As for the whole infected/zombie thing: As far as I'm concerned, "the Infected" is just Danny Boyle speeding up film zombies and trying to individualize 28 Days Later from being another zombie film by rebranding the antagonists. Lots of people caught onto that and thus it is annoyingly in zombie lore forever... Now, the question is:

Romero zombies, or 28 Days Later zombies?

People can bollock on about how one is risen from the dead (or from toxic waste or whatever) and the other is infected with a *super realistic and convenient* virus, but fluff means nothing and it comes down to the fundamental difference that one group of zombies is slow, and the other fast.

Edited September 6, 2013 by Das Attorney

[celery 8]

Look... the distinction being made here between infected and zombies is simply to keep people from confusing live humans with the undead. These (and the zombies in DayZ) are not rotting, undead zombies - that's it... simple as that. So, the semantic argument is pointless. The point is that these will not be rotting, undead humans; they are infected, living humans.

There is no ultimate authority that says zombies are always undead. I get that some people prefer calling a certain kind of zombie infected instead, but the whole "infected are not zombies" thing is ridiculous and reeks of intellectual dishonesty.

[RushHour 11]

thing is ridiculous and reeks of intellectual dishonesty.

It´s really not though as there´s no groundwork for what a zombie is because it´s not a real thing, it´s something that has been completely made up by writers or if you go back even further, ancient tribes in Africa etc.

Zombies have been modified through time so there´s no thing you can point at and say this is a zombie and this is not.

It has nothing to do with intellect in any shape or form.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_(fictional)

There´s no specific template for what is a Zombie. If you hypnotize someone and make them do things you can rightly call them Zombies.

[celery 8]

It´s really not though as there´s no groundwork for what a zombie is because it´s not a real thing, it´s something that has been completely made up by writers or if you go back even further, ancient tribes in Africa etc.

Zombies have been modified through time so there´s no thing you can point at and say this is a zombie and this is not.

It has nothing to do with intellect in any shape or form.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_(fictional)

It is intellectual dishonesty because any normal person who has consumed Western pop culture will identify a zombie-like thing (including infected) as a zombie, and same goes for the very people who advocate their supposed non-zombieness. An infected's function in story and mechanics falls exactly in the same category as a zombie's: the only way you can tell it's "not a zombie" is the adamant proclamation of the author or believing in an artificial ruleset on what makes zombies and infected so different.

There´s no specific template for what is a Zombie.

That point is great for shooting down the "this is an infected and NOT a zombie because they're so different" argument.

If you hypnotize someone and make them do things you can rightly call them Zombies.

If you give people reflective eyes, diseased skin and bloody clothes and make them home into normal people in order to kill or infect them, you can quite rightly call them zombies.

Edited September 7, 2013 by Celery

[Veleno92 10]

but what changes if you are zombies or infected? , The important thing to come out a nice mod

[kremator 1065]

Hmmm wonder if it would be possible to play as infected ;)

[entspeak 1]

I agree with you, Celery. There are "zombifying" parasites, for example (take a look at The Last of Us or DayZ SA). In fact, 1/3 of the world is infected with a parasite that is linked to schizophrenia. So, undead or infected with a "zombie" parasite... they all can be called zombies. But my point is that both here and in DayZ the use of "infected" over "zombie" is intended to stop the requests that the zeds in the game behave more like they are undead - which is the way most people view zombies.

So, as I said... the semantic argument is pointless. Call them zombies if you like; just don't call them undead - which is how some in this thread have referred to them.

[RushHour 11]

It is intellectual dishonesty because any normal person who has consumed Western pop culture will identify a zombie-like thing (including infected) as a zombie, and same goes for the very people who advocate their supposed non-zombieness. An infected's function in story and mechanics falls exactly in the same category as a zombie's: the only way you can tell it's "not a zombie" is the adamant proclamation of the author or believing in an artificial ruleset on what makes zombies and infected so different.

You hit the nail on the head when you said "normal" (whatever that means) has consumed western pop culture. as you keep pointing out yourself, there´s no groundwork for what is a zombie.

If you give people reflective eyes, diseased skin and bloody clothes and make them home into normal people in order to kill or infect them, you can quite rightly call them zombies.

You don´t even have to do that. A regular hypnotizing of a person humping a chair could be classified as a zombie because, again, there´s no groundwork, no folder of criteria of what makes a zombie and what does not.

If you call your "things" in 2017 as infected then they should be called infected, the ball is in your court of what you want to call them.

[bad benson 1733]

there´s no groundwork, no folder of criteria of what makes a zombie and what does not.

not really true.

- they are monsters that were once human

- they want to eat/kill normal humans

- they are dumb in an animalistic way (no talking, instinctive, focused on predator like behaviour patterns)

- they occur in great numbers which is tied in with the whole end of days scenarios they are used in

saying that there are no criteria is just untrue. not that i'm passionate in any way about the distinction but it's simply not true. yea in some regards it's an open concept but there are certainly things that connect all the "different" versions.

[celery 8]

You hit the nail on the head when you said "normal" (whatever that means) has consumed western pop culture.

I'm not sure if you're trying to say something smart there or what.

as you keep pointing out yourself, there´s no groundwork for what is a zombie.

A regular hypnotizing of a person humping a chair could be classified as a zombie because, again, there´s no groundwork, no folder of criteria of what makes a zombie and what does not.

There is a "groundwork" for every term we use, otherwise you couldn't make any reasonable assumption that a miniature girl with insect wings is a fairy or that a muscular green guy is an orc. In the Western pop culture, a non-voodoo zombie's basic ingredients are that it's a person who's transformed into a more unpleasant thing that exists to kill and/or infect others. The thing is that pretty much everything else is up to the work of fiction: you have shambling zombies, running zombies, fresh zombies, rotten zombies, stupid zombies, (relatively) smart zombies, disease zombies and necromanced zombies. But they're all zombies and everyone realizes that despite the variance. "Infected" is just an elitist term for a zombie that has some sort of "plausible" disease (or just runs fast), and ironically the word is so medically unspecific that it's one of the worst things to call a zombie (or whatever) in a supposed real-world scenario.

If you call your "things" in 2017 as infected then they should be called infected, the ball is in your court of what you want to call them.

People call them zombies and people will continue to call them zombies because they're a type of zombie. You won't fool anyone with the "these infected that look, sound and act like zombies are not zombies" spiel.

Edited September 7, 2013 by Celery

[jabbajaws77 10]

I love how a group of intelligent people decide to make a mod that has the potential of being awesome and the whole focus gets changed to being a debate about what a zombie is and is not.

The mod looks and sounds great and as the designers they should be able to call their creatures whatever they like just like an author creates their own vision.

Too many people are caught up with making everything negative instead of concentrating on the positive.

How about a thanks to the designers/creators etc for offering what looks to be a great mod which a lot of people are excited about playing.

I know for 1 I am looking forward to playing it and hopefully hosting a server myself.

Peace out, Jabbajaws77

[gdscei 1]

I love how a group of intelligent people decide to make a mod that has the potential of being awesome and the whole focus gets changed to being a debate about what a zombie is and is not.

The mod looks and sounds great and as the designers they should be able to call their creatures whatever they like just like an author creates their own vision.

Too many people are caught up with making everything negative instead of concentrating on the positive.

How about a thanks to the designers/creators etc for offering what looks to be a great mod which a lot of people are excited about playing.

I know for 1 I am looking forward to playing it and hopefully hosting a server myself.

Peace out, Jabbajaws77

Thanks Jabba, you have the correct (imo) attitude :) I've noticed this happening lately on the BIS forums, people only looking at the negative points (in their eyes) and discussing pointless things.

As lead developer, I can bring in the following arguments. In the end, it is your decision what you want to call them, we're just going by the name of infected. Some arguments:

• There will be more than just 'zombie' like creatures that still fall under the category of infected.
  
• The argument that our infected will behave like zombies has no factual ground whatsoever. The only thing you know about our infected, is how they look (and that even is not final) - you've only seen impression shots.
  

In the end, as I said, it is your decision what you want to call them. We're simply giving you guidelines (if you will) into what they are, to provide you a backstory. We, in no way whatsoever, wanted to start a debate whether our infected creatures are zombies or not.

This is also my last post about this topic (infected vs. zombies): I hope people stop having this pointless discussion. There are many other things to talk about than this, for example that players will be unable to affect their survival aspects and gear with scripting commands! (unlike mods such as DayZ, where these aspects are stored mostly client-side and sent to the server)

How you may ask? Well that remains a secret for now, as I am not finished with it ;)

[EO 11277]

I agree with Jabba on this one, I have been super stoked about this project since Day 1 and wish the whole Development Team good luck.

Just a pity certain "highly regarded" members of this community have reasons for pouring scorn on the whole Zombie/Infected terminology.

Edited September 9, 2013 by evil-organ