FranticDan
Well-known member
A more important question is: why do some zombies that bleed to death, don't give XP?
PC Why are the zombies bleeding to death?
- Thread starter Tourist
- Start date
RestInPieces
New member
Bleeding skeletons is where I draw the line!
Where do you get that they bleed even bodily fluids? I have seen a few movies where monsters bleeded some glowy stuff that was called live essence. If the world operates on the principle that you have a soul and your soul stuff can leak from any part of your body, it might even bleed from a freshly amputated leg.While you can, and IMO should, leave the world unexplained, it should still work. The flux CAPACITOR (darn you, blasphemer!), wasn't explained, but it didn't do much else than "power" the time travel so it didn't annoy anyone. You needed the 88 to travel and getting there was a problem quite often, a problem everyone understood, but had no idea why, and it worked. Because the world worked, while it wasn't explained.
"Can't really put up theories about how they bleed" ... If it bleeds, it leaks bodily fluids.. the damage is done by the familiar cutting instruments; without redefining more words than the average marxist professor, you can't argue that we don't know how This Form of Bleeding works, it's bleeding. And it doesn't "work properly" in the mechanics of the game. And if it's not bleeding, why call it bleeding... I mean, calling "Murky water" just murky when you're pulling it from the toilet is clearly just to calm the squeamish, but other than that, what else isn't what we call it... My Sniper rifle happens to be a banana? Jen isn't a Trader?
And, yes, I might be quite bored ... but hey, at least this is fun
But even if we assume it is blood, the general case of your "item 2" was well explained (for a game) by Boidster and Roland. And it is safe to say that item 3 works that way because the developers did not waste their time simulating bleeding and amputation in this fine detail. And given the size of their development team this detail probably will never be corrected.
In mathematics when you start with two assumptions that directly contradict each other you can prove anything. For example if you assume 1+1=2 and 1+1=1 you can literally prove any conclusion you want. In zombie lore there is something similar: "Zombies are dead" and "Zombies are alive". The first might not be meant literaly, but then is summarizing that they don't need air, food, blood circulation, in effect violating a few physical laws, for example that of energy conservation. The latter is evident by them moving, having a form of intelligence and that they still can be killed.
Now starting from this you can prove anything. Simply by eliminating all alternatives as contradictory.
Do they have blood? Sure, they need it to generate the energy for the muscles, after showing that alternatives don't work. Do they have blood? No, the blood would have leaked out of all the open flesh wounds or dried up. Oops.
Last edited by a moderator:
theFlu
Well-known member
Umm, progression.xml. 61 hits for "bleed". Couple in the translations, I'm sure. If you substitute the meaning of the word bleed to "well, some kind of goo is coming out" then I'm bleeding from my nose quite often.. and from my urethra. And if we venture into the happy blissful world or word redefinitions to argue points, then how could you know that I actually hold any point of the matter as my words can't have a meaning? (If the previous sentence is a garbled mess, that may be intentional 
)
Sure, Roland's solution can be implemented in the game. It can be implemented many ways; by leaving everything as is, adding some kind of lore note somewhere, showing the mechanic in action in animations, re-using the idea in other places to create apparent inconsistencies to surprise the viewer, all of the above or likely other options. At the moment, I wouldn't count it "implemented", as in, it's not intentional. I wouldn't be that much happier with it, unless properly fleshed out, as just giving it as an explanation on a "Lab Note #27" isn't much better than saying, "yeah, it's a bug, but we'll live with it".
They could also simply add a bleed effect to the dismemberment effect; wouldn't be perfect as the mechanics wouldn't really line up, but it'd be closer to good. Quite a trivial addition as well, I'd assume.
With an illogical system you can then derive illogical consequences.. this is exactly what we have here, sure. But the less holes in the logic, the easier it is to swallow for general audiences. At least having watched a few Critical Drinker videos, one might end up with such a conclusion.
And yeah, I added a silly little OCD point of interest in a discussion about zombie blood, and now we're writing novels off it ... le sigh
)Sure, Roland's solution can be implemented in the game. It can be implemented many ways; by leaving everything as is, adding some kind of lore note somewhere, showing the mechanic in action in animations, re-using the idea in other places to create apparent inconsistencies to surprise the viewer, all of the above or likely other options. At the moment, I wouldn't count it "implemented", as in, it's not intentional. I wouldn't be that much happier with it, unless properly fleshed out, as just giving it as an explanation on a "Lab Note #27" isn't much better than saying, "yeah, it's a bug, but we'll live with it".
They could also simply add a bleed effect to the dismemberment effect; wouldn't be perfect as the mechanics wouldn't really line up, but it'd be closer to good. Quite a trivial addition as well, I'd assume.
With an illogical system you can then derive illogical consequences.. this is exactly what we have here, sure. But the less holes in the logic, the easier it is to swallow for general audiences. At least having watched a few Critical Drinker videos, one might end up with such a conclusion.
And yeah, I added a silly little OCD point of interest in a discussion about zombie blood, and now we're writing novels off it ... le sigh
Scyris
New member
This is pretty much /thread. They bleed cuz the devs want em to bleed, even if it makes no sense.
Last edited by a moderator:
mr.devolver
New member
Just because they're dead doesn't mean the blood suddenly vaporized out of their body. Just because you see their blood squirt out of their body when you stab them doesn't mean the blood loss is what ultimately sends them to hell. Haven't you watched the Walking Dead series? It's the brain you have to hit to really make sure they will stay dead. Ultimately though, zombies are fictional characters and in each universe where zombies are possible, their weaknesses may be different. In 7 Days to Die they just happen to be smart, but at the same time they are easier to kill than just having to hit the right spot at their head with a great force that would break their skull and puncture their brain.
hiemfire
New member
Provides alternative source of nutrients for continued production of "Rot" virus without requiring the host be consumed by the virus to do so.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bleed . I'd like your eyes to fasten on definitions 4, (maybe 5) and 9. Also https://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/spell.html?spell=29451Umm, progression.xml. 61 hits for "bleed". Couple in the translations, I'm sure. If you substitute the meaning of the word bleed to "well, some kind of goo is coming out" then I'm bleeding from my nose quite often.. and from my urethra. And if we venture into the happy blissful world or word redefinitions to argue points, then how could you know that I actually hold any point of the matter as my words can't have a meaning? (If the previous sentence is a garbled mess, that may be intentional
Sure, Roland's solution can be implemented in the game. It can be implemented many ways; by leaving everything as is, adding some kind of lore note somewhere, showing the mechanic in action in animations, re-using the idea in other places to create apparent inconsistencies to surprise the viewer, all of the above or likely other options. At the moment, I wouldn't count it "implemented", as in, it's not intentional. I wouldn't be that much happier with it, unless properly fleshed out, as just giving it as an explanation on a "Lab Note #27" isn't much better than saying, "yeah, it's a bug, but we'll live with it".
They could also simply add a bleed effect to the dismemberment effect; wouldn't be perfect as the mechanics wouldn't really line up, but it'd be closer to good. Quite a trivial addition as well, I'd assume.
With an illogical system you can then derive illogical consequences.. this is exactly what we have here, sure. But the less holes in the logic, the easier it is to swallow for general audiences. At least having watched a few Critical Drinker videos, one might end up with such a conclusion.
And yeah, I added a silly little OCD point of interest in a discussion about zombie blood, and now we're writing novels off it ... le sigh
Not a common use of the word, still we should not discount the possibility.
What about Rolands solution needs to be implemented? Zombies can't be explained, any explanation would just add further questions. How many players will even think about this detail with amputation not leading to bleeding? It never came up before in any discussion I had with other players. Maybe I'm keeping bad company
.The idea of adding bleeding to the amputation effect isn't bad by the way. Maybe some developer wants to scratch that itch and actually adds it.
Last edited by a moderator:
theFlu
Well-known member
Hah - partly as a non-native speaker, mostly for being a little insane - I appreciate the pedantry. From that list, I actually didn't know that trees can be bled as well. Plus, there's nothing better than being technically correct, so, in that sense, you winhttps://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bleed. I'd like your eyes to fasten on definitions 4, (maybe 5) and 9. Also https://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/spell.html?spell=29451
Not a common use of the word, still we should not discount the possibility.
What about Rolands solution needs to be implemented? Zombies can't be explained, any explanation would just add further questions. How many players will even think about this detail with amputation not leading to bleeding? It never came up before in any discussion I had with other players. Maybe I'm keeping bad company
The idea of adding bleeding to the amputation effect isn't bad by the way. Maybe some developer wants to scratch that itch and actually adds it.
Although, if we get to pick random definitions from that list, I'd go with 11; just because, well, the example given is "Labialization bleeds palatalization." ... sounds quite, enticing. An implementation of 8 would be interesting in game, especially if Deep Cuts had verbiage close to "applies bleeding" (can't remember) - taken far enough, you might apply temporary allyship to the poor zed at the tip of your blade.What needs implemented? I listed some options in my previous rant, including "by leaving everything as is", so, I recognize nothing Needs to be implemented to say it is in effect. It is the poorest implementation of such an intricate plot device though, it might deserve getting used visibly somewhere, that could only improve things. And no, your company isn't bad, just sane...
And indeed, the bleed would fit, but then it would take away from the already slightly weak blade specialization. Of course the blades saw major rework with the stealth buffs, it might not be all that significant in the end.
why would they even remove it .. our zombies have clearly liquid blood (every zombie withou heartbeat is bs because muscles simply cannot work withou oxygen so unless zombies magically fly around then both breathing heartbeat and liquid blood must stay intact)
... you can clearly see blood squirting out when limb/ head get dismembered
so yeah they might have crazy coagulation .... but they have liquid blood ... ergo original question is completely st*pid
bet next one is going to be .. why blocks fall down instead up ... or why we cant drink from bucket
What's "st*pid" is being able to shoot them in the face over and over again until you can't event see their head for all the arrows poking out like a wooden porcupine. Or shooting them with bullets over and over, reloading and shooting them some more. Yet we can stab them a few times and just kite them around while they bleed out and die. If you shoot something in the face, it should die. Period.
They need to be consistent in their damage model. If they bleed out from being stabbed, that's fine, but they should also bleed out from being shot.
EDIT: Yeah, why can't we drink from the bucket.
It's a container with water in it. But then, i've also wondered why we can't just drink directly from a pond.
Last edited by a moderator:
What's "st*pid" is being able to shoot them in the face over and over again until you can't event see their head for all the arrows poking out like a wooden porcupine. Or shooting them with bullets over and over, reloading and shooting them some more. Yet we can stab them a few times and just kite them around while they bleed out and die. If you shoot something in the face, it should die. Period.
They need to be consistent in their damage model. If they bleed out from being stabbed, that's fine, but they should also bleed out from being shot.
EDIT: Yeah, why can't we drink from the bucket.
if i shot them with ok-ish gun ( 100) dmg its 300 damage bleeding fromd serrated mod is 10% to 1damage/sec .. machetter 1damage/sec stacking up to 7 ... so you using clearly weakest weapon in game ( knives have lowest reach and 2nd lowest dmg after spear) to apply 6/sec short debuff by stabing them in face for 150 damage what a gamechanger
or simply just shot them for 300-600 .. bleeding isnt major factor .. if you look at numbers best melee weapon is club
on default difficulty everything dies in 2 head shots from desert vulture/ rifle only bears and possibly demolisher cantake third one to kill
to kill basic feral wight you need to stack full bleed wait 10sec and repeat 17 times to kill him (ignoring the fact he would regen significant part of your bleed damage
)1) we dont know if zombies even need head you can meet headless variants in many universes
2) most people shot in face survive and they are not even crazy mutated iradiated zombie jumping 24 meters
3) bleed is weak mechanic almost cosmetic
4) 4 of your zombies have helmet ith ptoential to reduce damage
5) if headshot meant always then game turns ridiculouslye asy once you get smg ... or even pistol .. demolisher ? nevermind my 20 dmg will 1 hit him ... nope even head explosion chance is kinda OP ... guaranteed kills devalue weapon stats progressiona dn difficulty all at once
err stop bringing realistic headshots into game where you crouch and your billet magically deal alot more damage