31 replies to this topic

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Would you rather fight robots or zombies?  Assume it's a robot/zombie apocalypse situation.

 

Why?

[King Biscuit]

Zombies.

... because you can't kill a robot with a blunt object.

[PrinceVegeta]

Hard to really decided, but I picked zombies. Mainly because, a robot can have many different perks, while a zombie, is just a zombie. I don't want any extra disadvantages. 

[the rebel]

Hard to really decided, but I picked zombies. Mainly because, a robot can have many different perks, while a zombie, is just a zombie. I don't want any extra disadvantages. 

 

Indeed its so vague, I mean you can have zomibes with many different perks depending on what source you look at same with robots.

 

Though I picked zombies as they are generally portrayed as stupid as easier to avoid/hide from and kill.

[rotty]

Robots. I really dont want to be some walking dead's dinner.

[Infopowerbroker]

I'd rather go against shawn of the dead zombies instead of AI drones.

I'd rather be able to react 10x faster than a zombie than 1000x slower than a robot.

[Alyster]

Robots.

 

Zombies use us for spare parts. 

[The Dark Empire]

I guess it comes down to how you want to die. Eaten alive or shot by a robot

[King Biscuit]

I'd rather be able to react 10x faster than a zombie than 1000x slower than a robot.

 

That and lack of atomic death-rays.

[Manoka]

Zombies = easier. 

 

Robots are sort of eh, they could last potentially for thousands of years with the right power source and be difficult to kill and escape from. Could be big, small, nanobots, everything; zombies are pretty straightforward and possess a number of clear weaknesses. 

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Yeah see I voted robots, but it was an impulse vote.  There are some excellent arguments made here for zombies.

[King Biscuit]

What you need now is a good arguement for robots.

Good luck with that one.

[the rebel]

What you need now is a good arguement for robots.

Good luck with that one.

 

 

If we are talking the possibility of it happening in the seeable future then I'd rather face these than zombies

 

[King Biscuit]

lol

TRUMPET PLAYING DANCING ROBOT APOCALYPSE!

 

We're doomed!

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

What you need now is a good arguement for robots.

Good luck with that one.

 

The argument for robots is the same as before:  Bad as they are, it could be possible to disable them all simultaneously.  Now if I could just figure out how to emit an EM pulse...

[King Biscuit]

Nukes!

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Stupid UN took all my nukes...

 

[Alyster]

Better argument for robots is that they're more complex to make. Resistance groups can bomb factories disabling manufacturing of the enemy. With zombies however, while they may be easier to kill, their numbers are basically infinate because they are dead people. To strike at their source we'd have to kill ourselves and burn the bodies.

 

Moreover robots require power. So far what we know of zombies they don't exactly starve to death when they don't get any brains. But if my LG smartphone only runs for a day on a battery, how much would a robot require? Fuel cells are another thing where we can create a bottle neck for their supply need. 

 

Strategical possibilities against robots are much better. They are complex and when we reduce the world to rubble the harder it will be to keep cutting edge tech running. While we're biological and go back to agricultural society and rebuild. 

 

I'd take my chances with robots. Chances are their running on windows anyway, then we just have to wait till they crash. 

Edited by Alyster, 22 December 2013 - 11:17 AM.

[Zoli84]

Zombies because if I loose they will let me join them!

[KiWi]

My thinking was simply, if "robots" took over, they wouldn't be the pushover variety, by essence of them having 'taken over' in the first place.

Unless we shouldn't be thinking "the world is infested, and we're the resistance" or rather "this is the outbreak".

Anyway, zombies, even if you use show zombies, I still think would be more manageable. You'd lose the majority of the population, but you'd slowly ascend out of the "dark ages" and some 1,000 years later you'd be able to move on. Unlike with robots, where the new world order(s)/cult(s)/church(es) afterwards would preach of the evils of robots (and people would agree. I mean hell, we need robots {technology}. Can't have them scaring everyone away from the idea).

Zombies would only remind people of the evils and realities of mankind, not to mention how practice safety in regards to diseases and such.

P.S. Also zombies can be of the stupid kind, but because of their 'exponential' growth, and panicking ways, and shit, I can see them more easily getting to the point of challenging the whole world etc. Just look at something like... bird flu. Very serious, but a zombie version would get out of hand (and affect more things, on a larger scale) um. much more.