World War Z has an overwhelming gameplay trailer

Screen Shot 2018-05-27 at 10.21.31 AM

The film World War Z is supposed to have a sequel coming. I’m not sure how or why, considering that the first title had one of the more troubled production histories in the last decade of cinema. Brad Pitt and director David Fincher pop up every few months to remind us that it is still happening, probably, sometime. That’s fine by me. But what’s much finer by me is the way that the new World War Z video game is shaping up. Between a teaser trailer and a bunch of pre-prod art, this had all the looks of a project that might never see the light of day. Well, today we have a gameplay trailer that seems to really get both the action and the themes of the story, and that’s much more than I’d been hoping for.

The game is primarily a four player co-op title, which looks to be using the same locations as the book and film. You’ll be bouncing from Jerusalem to New York as you set traps and alter the environment before you and your team are over-run by the horde. Today’s trailer reveal focuses on Moscow, and sees your team defending docks and the interior of an ornate mansion, as well as the subways. The zombies start to pile up organically and overcome obstacles just like you’d hope for in a WWZ adaptation. The focus on stories in the different survivor zones already feels like the game’s developers are taking all the right cues.

Those devs are, incidentally, Saber Interactive. You might know them from Timeshift or Inversion or Quake Champions. This seems both well within their wheelhouse and exactly the kind of IP that could do great things with a team known for taking chances.

Check out the trailer below:

Yeah. That’s… that’s a lot. It looks like the best place to follow along for updates will be Saber’s website for the game.

30 Comments

  1. DawnSword says:

    You guys posted the wrong link for their website, what you put there is WWZGGame.com, but the actual site seems to be wwzgame.com

  2. Fleko81 says:

    Not on topic in relation to the game, but WWZ the book was one of my all time favorites for an original approach to a hackneyed genre and the film delivered precisely the cliche everyone has come to expect of the zombie apocalypse, and the game appears (from the admittedly limited I have seen above) to deliver the same.
    Don’t get me wrong i wouldn’t expect a game based on the book on account of it not really having a narrative in the conventional sense, and deliberately underwhelming any potential ‘action scenes’ a game might derive from, but it feel again like a potential missed opportunity to do something different with interesting source material.
    Right, rant over!

    • KastaRules says:

      Ditto.

    • Shinard says:

      Yeah, I feel like making an FPS of WWZ is missing the point as much as the movie. Where’s the level to play a distress worker distributing information over the radio? What about the level where you play a filmmaker editing together a propaganda piece to boost morale? Where you’re forced to beat your fellow soldiers to death as punishment for disobeying orders? Or where you shiver and slowly starve in the middle of the woods?

      I love the book, but it does not lend itself to an FPS. It might end up being a good game, it won’t end up being a good adaptation.

      • Ross Angus says:

        I suppose you could make a game out of the scene in the book where they headshot zeds for hours at a time, with perfect, mechanical precision, until they form a wall of the post-living dead. But it might get a little dull.

        • LexW1 says:

          That one particular scene obviously might (out of dozens) but the issue is that the book as a whole, and the world it creates is one that would be extremely well suited to some sort of strategy or tactics game, with multiple fronts (actually killing zombies, staying alive, keeping morale up, planning for the future etc.), moreso actually than many other zombie scenarios, so making “FAST ZOMBIE KILLFEST MACHINEGUNS BLAZING” seems like, well, quite a let-down in kind of an old-fashioned “licensed game” way.

      • Quimby says:

        Ocean based trading and base buding game. Neighbourhood watch management game. Hawaii-based diplomacy game ahead of a big vote…

    • Bull0 says:

      Yeah, the book is excellent

    • A_Rude_gesture says:

      Cintro? Cincoto? I agree, is what I’m trying to say.
      Loved the book, hated it’s namesake film(because that’s the only thing they had in common; The name).

      • Captain Narol says:

        Loved the book, but also loved the movie despise its flaws.

        The third act was boring and slow but the opening scene was really impressive, and the scenes in Jerusalem too.

        I agree that they only share a name and a theme, but it’s a good name that clearly goes to the point !

        Obviously, the game is an adaptation of the movie rather than the book, I can understand that some people see that as a missed opportunity but it can be a great setting for a good FPS.

        • A_Rude_gesture says:

          In my view the book is vastly superior, but to each his own.
          The main thing for me is that the book is believable, whereas the film is just another Hollywood trope-fest.
          Still, you might be right in regards to a game adaptation. Guess we’ll find out. :-)

    • Jernau Gurgeh says:

      I’m not really a fan of the modern zombie genre apart from a few selected films, one of which was World War Z – I really didn’t understand the hate it received, which I put down to people wanting a straight-up action-fest zombie war movie, rather than a fairly interesting and intelligent internationalist science’n’suspense thriller. I didn’t realise it was based on a book though, and one that I assume from what you’ve said is not your typical zombie fayre. How does the film compare and differ to the book? Always keen to check out the source material for things I’ve enjoyed. (Currently have Annihilation and Under The Skin waiting on my bookshelf for me to read next).

      • onodera says:

        The book is actually much better than the film. It’s a series of interviews with people who have lived through the WWZ, starting from the first infections, through media coverups, mass hysteria, governments failing to contain the infection and desperately scrambling for a solution, mass evacuations, stabilization of the fronts and to the slow and purposeful extermination of the zombie hordes. There’s no big damn hero that saves everyone, but a lot of decent men and women doing their jobs and becoming unlikely heroes in the new circumstances.

  3. haldolium says:

    somehow I missed the “overwhelming” part in that rather boring trailer.

    • LexW1 says:

      Yeah, I’m not getting it, it just looks like a generic shooter with fast zombies who die easy. I’m not seeing any risks, anything clever, anything that makes it particularly WWZ-ish, except in the movie’s “pile of zombies” imagery (which never made much sense, btw – the zombies don’t work together in the books, and there’s no reason for them to in the movies).

      If it wasn’t for the text telling use it was co-op and you set traps and so on, I wouldn’t even know that, either, it’s not evident from what’s shown. Frankly it looks far more boring and less scary than L4D.

  4. A_Rude_gesture says:

    As mentioned by others; The book is great. The film is horrible. This game, like the film, has runners. So I ain’t interested.

    • TechnicalBen says:

      Did the book not then?

      As far as I could assume, if they are “slow”, then an outbreak, global or not, is not very likely with exception of very very densely populated areas.

      Look at what happened with Ebola and/or bird flu and the like. Unless it’s mosquitoes, even airborne viruses don’t spread that fast/easily. And thats with people you cannot identify as carriers (dead ;) ).

      • Bull0 says:

        No, they’re pretty much classic Romero zombies in all Max Brooks’ stuff.

      • Fleko81 says:

        It’s for exactly that line of questioning i’d really recommend you read the book. At the risk of synopsizing (and spoiler-ing) the whole thing the reasons for the spread are far more about decisions made at a geo-political level, misinformation in the media (fake news dare i say!) and ill thought out military counter measures than just ‘people acting stupidly’ when some zombies shuffle towards them. Equally the resolutions are far more interesting and grounded in reality than Brad Pitt doing a mission impossible-style heist in a zombie infested laboratory…

        • A_Rude_gesture says:

          To me the book is really believable, the movie is just a trope-fest. I also hate the concept of runners. The whole idea behind Zombies, in my view, is that they are not fast, they cannot think or form a strategy. They just go for you.
          Avoid a couple, sure…but what if the exits are closed off by Zombies?

          You might run faster than them, but sooner or later you will have to sleep, eat, refuel your car etc. And every time you do, the move closer. To me Zombies is a representation of the inevitability of death. Run all you want; Sooner or later it will catch up. Nowhere is safe. You might not see the half-rotted torso with just a head an and arm clawing at you from the undergrowth or the one stuck in the mud just below the water line.

          However, insofar as the book vs. film is concerned; There’s really no comparison in my view. The book is nuanced and well thought out, the film is not.

  5. kulik says:

    And there I was, thinking that a WWZ game would be a strategy game about executing Redeker’s plan to fall back west to the Rocky Mountains while sustaining small and big survivor zones as bait for the zombie horde to win time, regroup and reclaim the lost lands.

  6. Stromko says:

    It looks like the action and the themes of the movie, which was horrible, and not the book, which was great.

    • Stromko says:

      I think the specific problem, and the difference between the movie and the book, is that fast zombies aren’t interesting, and triply so when they’re moving in a weird unnatural tide. On the second point they might be trying to shore up on the zombie theme by making them a swarm without individual identity, but it doesn’t work.

      There is something fascinating about slow, cold, unyielding zombies that fast ‘rage’ zombies just can’t deliver.

  7. Jernau Gurgeh says:

    Four player co-op? Insta-Avoid. I have no friends.

  8. Quimby says:

    Came out of curiosity, stayed for the book love.

Comment on this story

HTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>