FEMA has a similar system, they go door to door after a disaster and then mark the houses they've visited. Basically a spraypainted grid that lists found survivors, found dead, and some other stuff.
The markings in the game were basically the initials of the person that investigated a house, how many people eligible to join the community were found, and how many unfit were found.
Although I wonder why they even bothered. If one can't survive long enough to make it to the safe zone without help, what's the point? Those people were probably what brought down whatever that community called itself.
Each marking had a date (days since outbreak it looked like), who inspected the building, how many people were found that were eligible (to be taken to Crawford), ineligible, and dead. Or maybe the numbers aren't quite right, but that's the gist of the numbers.
It didn't have any real significance, just showing the history of the place and how involved the system was.
It was a simple system marking number of survivors/dead/walkers found in each house and the date of inspection. Possibly also initials of the searcher, I don't remember.
Anyway, if you're interested, rewind the game to the time when you're inside the school building, it is possible for Lee to find exact info on that, documents may be found either in the classroom or in the doctor's room.
i could say why would they bother, but there is no point in trying to figure out the reasoning behind a leader that is against procreation, it's so badly thought out it's insane
i could say why would they bother, but there is no point in trying to figure out the reasoning behind a leader that is against procreation, it's so badly thought out it's insane
I'm not sure Crawford was badly thought out because it was against procreation.
Long term survival is impossible in TWD. The current generation of humans is the last, and the species will be extinct within a few years. (This assumes, that no one develops immunity/finds a cure, but so far the TWD zombie apocalypse seems "perfect".)
So, what's the point of babies in TWD? They don't let people sleep, make a lot of noise, use a lot of resources, and they aren't going to live enough to grow into children.
The issue around babies is whether they are important for morale. Crawford failed because it made people so miserable that they snapped. Maybe babies would have prevented that. However, instead of babies, maybe Crawford could have kept morale up in other ways that don't have as many risks and drawbacks.
It's this. Military used it after Katrina (in new orleans). Basically it tells anybody who comes after them that the house was searched already. It also let's workers know if there are dead that need to be pulled from the house.
I'm not sure Crawford was badly thought out because it was against procreation.
Long term survival is impossible in TWD. The current generation of humans is the last, and the species will be extinct within a few years. (This assumes, that no one develops immunity/finds a cure, but so far the TWD zombie apocalypse seems "perfect".)
So, what's the point of babies in TWD? They don't let people sleep, make a lot of noise, use a lot of resources, and they aren't going to live enough to grow into children.
I don't think Crawford's necessarily against procreation - just against procreation in the immediate aftermath of the outbreak. On one of the videos, Dr. Logan tells Anna something along the lines of "you can try again in future, when things are better." It seems to me that their plan is to gather all the physically fit, self-sufficient people, use them to clear out zombies, build infrastructure and so forth until they've got a village in which they can raise children and then relax the no kids rule.
I'm not sure Crawford was badly thought out because it was against procreation.
Long term survival is impossible in TWD. The current generation of humans is the last, and the species will be extinct within a few years. (This assumes, that no one develops immunity/finds a cure, but so far the TWD zombie apocalypse seems "perfect".)
So, what's the point of babies in TWD? They don't let people sleep, make a lot of noise, use a lot of resources, and they aren't going to live enough to grow into children.
The issue around babies is whether they are important for morale. Crawford failed because it made people so miserable that they snapped. Maybe babies would have prevented that. However, instead of babies, maybe Crawford could have kept morale up in other ways that don't have as many risks and drawbacks.
I disagree, I think the first few years will be the worst but the walkers will start to deteriorate too much and become immobile. The human population would be alot smaller most of the old and sick would be dead and that means less new walkers. I think then people would be able to control it a lot better.
I disagree, I think the first few years will be the worst but the walkers will start to deteriorate too much and become immobile. The human population would be alot smaller most of the old and sick would be dead and that means less new walkers. I think then people would be able to control it a lot better.
If you want science in zombies, here is it: they will be totally fucked up after 1-2 weeks, not years.
Also, the infection can only make everybody a zombie because the virus affect by air and not only by bit, why? because zombies are walking dead people which can´t do ANYTHING against the ARMY, or a person with a shovel.
The only realistic thing is: the virus makes most of people zombie by air , not bit, and only the inmune ones survive (lee, carley, etc), but after 2 weeks or so all the zombies are fucked up so they can restore the humanity. The end. It isn´t fun, isn´t it?
Same with the fast-more realistic zombies, they will be dead in 2 weeks or so by hungry, just like in 28 weeks later. Same with slow zombies, an army can easy kill people who only knows to run and bite... imagine some tanks can kill a whole city and the infected people can´t do a shit about it. OMG they are gonna bit the tank? lol.
The only dangerous is take the virus by air, so the danger of this is just like other normal virus.
It's this. Military used it after Katrina (in new orleans). Basically it tells anybody who comes after them that the house was searched already. It also let's workers know if there are dead that need to be pulled from the house.
This is correct. I lived in New Orleans during Katrina. Its a alive-death-cleanup system. I speculate that Crawford was marking which houses were safe for storage, later in habitation, or later raiding.
I disagree, I think the first few years will be the worst but the walkers will start to deteriorate too much and become immobile. The human population would be alot smaller most of the old and sick would be dead and that means less new walkers. I think then people would be able to control it a lot better.
I'm basing the argument against a future generation of humans on how the zombie apocalypse seems to work in TWD, not how other, perhaps more realistic, zombie apocalypses would work. In TWD, zombies are walking around perfectly fine months after the outbreak even though they aren't metabolizing to produce energy, eating food to restore energy, or have an immune system to stop bacteria from eating their bodies and making them fall apart. So, they last forever.
In TWD, everyone is infected by the virus. No one is immune. Anyone a zombie bites/scratches/whatevers will die. Everyone who dies comes back as a walker. The slightest mistake (which everyone will make at some point) is fatal. No matter how careful a system is, it will fall to the zombies.
In that kind of environment, there is no future, so it's arguable that babies don't make sense. The TWD zombie apocalypse is particularly, intentionally, and unrealistically hopeless. Maybe people who know more about TWD can disagree, as I'm only familiar with the game.
Comments
The markings in the game were basically the initials of the person that investigated a house, how many people eligible to join the community were found, and how many unfit were found.
Although I wonder why they even bothered. If one can't survive long enough to make it to the safe zone without help, what's the point? Those people were probably what brought down whatever that community called itself.
It didn't have any real significance, just showing the history of the place and how involved the system was.
Anyway, if you're interested, rewind the game to the time when you're inside the school building, it is possible for Lee to find exact info on that, documents may be found either in the classroom or in the doctor's room.
It listed Days since the initial outbreak, number of potential citizens, walkers, etc.
I'm not sure Crawford was badly thought out because it was against procreation.
Long term survival is impossible in TWD. The current generation of humans is the last, and the species will be extinct within a few years. (This assumes, that no one develops immunity/finds a cure, but so far the TWD zombie apocalypse seems "perfect".)
So, what's the point of babies in TWD? They don't let people sleep, make a lot of noise, use a lot of resources, and they aren't going to live enough to grow into children.
The issue around babies is whether they are important for morale. Crawford failed because it made people so miserable that they snapped. Maybe babies would have prevented that. However, instead of babies, maybe Crawford could have kept morale up in other ways that don't have as many risks and drawbacks.
Here's a recreation of the exact sign example found in the classroom.
It's an upside-down anarchy sign, by the way.
It's this. Military used it after Katrina (in new orleans). Basically it tells anybody who comes after them that the house was searched already. It also let's workers know if there are dead that need to be pulled from the house.
I don't think Crawford's necessarily against procreation - just against procreation in the immediate aftermath of the outbreak. On one of the videos, Dr. Logan tells Anna something along the lines of "you can try again in future, when things are better." It seems to me that their plan is to gather all the physically fit, self-sufficient people, use them to clear out zombies, build infrastructure and so forth until they've got a village in which they can raise children and then relax the no kids rule.
I disagree, I think the first few years will be the worst but the walkers will start to deteriorate too much and become immobile. The human population would be alot smaller most of the old and sick would be dead and that means less new walkers. I think then people would be able to control it a lot better.
If you want science in zombies, here is it: they will be totally fucked up after 1-2 weeks, not years.
Also, the infection can only make everybody a zombie because the virus affect by air and not only by bit, why? because zombies are walking dead people which can´t do ANYTHING against the ARMY, or a person with a shovel.
The only realistic thing is: the virus makes most of people zombie by air , not bit, and only the inmune ones survive (lee, carley, etc), but after 2 weeks or so all the zombies are fucked up so they can restore the humanity. The end. It isn´t fun, isn´t it?
Same with the fast-more realistic zombies, they will be dead in 2 weeks or so by hungry, just like in 28 weeks later. Same with slow zombies, an army can easy kill people who only knows to run and bite... imagine some tanks can kill a whole city and the infected people can´t do a shit about it. OMG they are gonna bit the tank? lol.
The only dangerous is take the virus by air, so the danger of this is just like other normal virus.
This is correct. I lived in New Orleans during Katrina. Its a alive-death-cleanup system. I speculate that Crawford was marking which houses were safe for storage, later in habitation, or later raiding.
I'm basing the argument against a future generation of humans on how the zombie apocalypse seems to work in TWD, not how other, perhaps more realistic, zombie apocalypses would work. In TWD, zombies are walking around perfectly fine months after the outbreak even though they aren't metabolizing to produce energy, eating food to restore energy, or have an immune system to stop bacteria from eating their bodies and making them fall apart. So, they last forever.
In TWD, everyone is infected by the virus. No one is immune. Anyone a zombie bites/scratches/whatevers will die. Everyone who dies comes back as a walker. The slightest mistake (which everyone will make at some point) is fatal. No matter how careful a system is, it will fall to the zombies.
In that kind of environment, there is no future, so it's arguable that babies don't make sense. The TWD zombie apocalypse is particularly, intentionally, and unrealistically hopeless. Maybe people who know more about TWD can disagree, as I'm only familiar with the game.