I actually said something like this to a friend. 'Why can't we take a few things from Fallout, and apply them to a zombie game?' Instead of a more fast paced game, it'd be an RPG game. Find small settlements that are safe from the zombies, possibly some upper/lower class seperation as a philisophical narrative, and for the sake of gameplay, you won't be infected, but you can die. Perhaps crafting your own armors and weapons. Raid police stations. Sleep in hotels or abandoned rooms, etc. I could go on and on, but I don't want to waste peoples times with my thoughts :laugh:

@Powermapler- Ironically, I'm BORED of those generic fast paced zombie shooters. I'd rather see a game with more of a survivalist mechanic.

Well, your going to need a story. Its not just "Run here, shoot zombies, run out of ammo, buy bigger gun," Etc. Etc. rinse and repeat.

I'm sure something plausible could be created.

As for me, I might buy an Open-World zombie game. Sounds like a neat idea; But again, has to be done right.

I'm bored of them too, but a "zombie RPG" just isn't a plausible sub genre to me. I think it may be time to retire zombie games altogether, at least for a while.




But that is what it is. Think of any quest in Morrowind, Oblivion or Fallout 3. Yes, there's dialogue and lore, but essentially you're just running from one place to another killing things, picking up items, and leveling your character when you're not talking to someone. The Elder Scrolls are my favorite games because of the way these tasks are varied. Different enemies, different people, different environments. A zombie RPG would be a game without any of these things. A good story would definitely make things better, but there would be no way to achieve the variety and depth of the other Bethesda games.

Yep, but, alas, as the 'online pass' thread proves, devs are only out to wash, rinse, repeat. Or they prefer to just do the easy way out, like Bioshock 2. If you think people bought it for the story, then you're nuts. Most games or sequals these days are crappy camaigns with multiplayer as it's main content, and a DLC consisting of 4-6 maps. The games these days man :sadvaultboy:

Once again; Who said all zombies have to be the same? Whats to stop them from creating different enemy types that require a different type of strategy to defeat?

As for "Go here, do this" quests, I have to agree with you, those games did induce just that. But this game doesn't have to.

Spontaneous events..

• Cornered into a small settlement, you can either assist the remaining survivors or make a run for it, leaving them to die as a huge horde swarms the town.
  
• Your exploring a science facility when you come across a infected scientist strapped to a chair. He saids he found the cure, blah blah blah, and if you help him, he'll tell you about etc. etc.
  
• A barricaded town has popped up, and your tasked with either helping them prosper or killing them off and using their goods to help you survive.

I could list a decent amount more, but I have a feeling you get the broad sense of what I'm trying to say.

A game like this could turn into a huge success if the right people make it.

I do get what you're saying, but you have to look past the set pieces and see what these tasks would entail. The scientist example is the only one of those three that appealed to me, as it would certainly shake up the formula and would introduce some depth to whatever it was that you were doing. The other two example would just be killing zombies or humans. Not much variety there.

The things that have made past zombie games so successful weren't the depth of the game, but the gameplay. Why did people play Left 4 Dead? To have fun killing things. This isn't Beth's strong suit, and even if it was this would be 'just another zombie game.'

As for the variety of zombies, you can only do so much before they aren't zombies anymore. Again, I'll use Left 4 Dead as an example. Look at the zombie types. What more could you do? You could change the way these zombies function, but you'd still have the basic 'generic, strong, support' zombies. If you tried to enhance them too much they wouldn't be zombies anymore, as they would have to have some kind of intelligence.

EDIT: I'm sorry if this post was incoherent, but I'm trying to say what I'm thinking without writing an essay.

Glad to see its at least being discussed.

As for different encounters, there could be lots of things. What if the game is set in small town Montana? Zombie Apocalypse style?

- zombies of course
- Humans, such as looters and people who have gone mad
- Wildlife, like bears.


Oh! And earlier I was talking about atmosphere.

Anyone ever played STALKER? That's the atmosphere I'm talking about, only with zombies. And I admit that a lot of zombie games are pretty much rehashed crap, but the same could be said about any genre ever. Open World Zombie RPG really hasn't been done yet. At least not to my knowledge.

Stalker has depth that you couldn't achieve with a zombie game, because of the real history behind it and the variety of (human) characters, environments and tasks. What would you possibly have to achieve in a zombie-populated city, other than to survive/get out? How would you get there? By scavenging/working for supplies. And how would you scavenge and work? By killing zombies. And do you really want to spend hours upon hours killing zombies with the gameplay that Beth is known for? Even if it had better gameplay, it would still be a generic zombie shooter, with more dialogue and with character development. I'm sorry, but I just don't see this working with the limitations zombies put on a game.

Hmm.. Perhaps you could add another faction to the mix? So, now you have to take out zombies and military-grade, skilled humans..

At this point I don't think the game would be zombie survival RPG.