FANDOM

A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • hi there,

    Can you direct me to the interview with Druckman regarding Shamblers.

    Thanks!

      Loading editor
    • View all 8 replies
    • Yeah. The funny thing is though that they're weaker than Clickers as well as they don't instant kill players when grappling them.

      My personal theory is like this:

      • Runners are stage 1: wild and weak, typical running zombies.

      However, then we get a split occuring after this.

      • Stalkers are stage 2a: agile, strong and extremely stealthy
      • Clickers are stage 2b: blind, super-strong but wild like Runners

      Then we this evolution

      • Shamblers are 3a: Bulky, puss filled, armoured and agile
      • Bloaters are 3b: Bulky, super-strong, heavily armored, but wild like Runners

      So, to sum it, the two Infected evolution branches are as follows:

      A) Runners --> Stalkers --> Shamblers

      B) Runners --> Clickers --> Bloaters

      My support for this comes from the Stalkers. It makes little sense for the Infected to evolve to become stealthy, completely antithetical to the wild, hyper state of Runners only to then revert back to that as Clickers. Therefore, to me, the inclusion of Shamblers confirms this branching path of Infected evolution because the lore for both Stalkers and Shamblers has them heavily associated with water whereas Clickers and Bloaters are in dense, spore-filled environments. Granted, there is now a counter in Part II because Stalkers can now fuse to walls in spore-filled areas, but that appears an anomaly to the rest of their lore.

      Still, this is only a theory though and not really supported in-game. ^_^

        Loading editor
    • Snivy,

      I really like your theory, but I don't think it's what ND intended (based on the CDC document found in both games). Which is unfortunate given it makes a lot of sense. Especially considering Stalkers are only encountered twice in tlou1, it makes sense that we don't see any Shamblers (from a probability standpoint).

      I have a theory to propose regarding infected behavior. Runners have basic zombie intelligence and behavior because the fungus does have complete fine control of brain (it has completely taken over the host, but does not yet have fine motor control). Next, as the fungus spreads, it gains this fine motor control as well as better use of the host sensory organs, however as it sreads, it starts to distroy certain parts of the host, like the face. Later, one the infection has further grown, it completely destroys the upper fase and eyes as well as certain parts of the brain. In the process it loses it fine motor controls and it's ability to see in exchange for armor and greater strength as a clicker.

      Next depending on environment conditions the infected becomes either a Bloater or a Shambler. Water is the suggested catalyst for Shamblers, but we find Shamblers in Santa Barbara, which is a very dry place. Perhaps it has something to do with the west coast. Or maybe it's just a mutation that has occurred sometime over 20+ years (which was promoted by water). And now this new mutation of the fungus is spreading out from Seattle. Given how aggressive and strong a Bloater is, it makes sense that a Shambler would be better at spreading the infection as people would be more likely to survive an encounter with a Shambler than an encounter with a Bloater. This is why there are more Shamblers then Bloaters in Part II. This theory suggests that there are two stains of the fungus, one that creates Bloaters and one that creates Shambler. But nothing in-game suggests multiple strains.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I have these new images pertaining to the WLF. But since it’s hard for mobile I figured maybe you’d have an easier time adding
    File:E5786C9B-3260-4FBE-B32A-5B610D738208.png
    File:DF9D2F02-59A4-4BBD-9F20-AD58EA46D3E2.png
      Loading editor
    • I am afraid I had to delete the images because you failed to provide a licensing for them. If you wish to upload them again, please make sure you provide a licensing you have for them.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • The last time I posted an image you said I had to put it under Fairuse. This time I put it under Fairuse this time but you deleted It. Why is that?

      Loading editor
    • You failed to put the licensing on the actual image. What you did do was put a template on an article that cluttered the page, forcing me to remove it to fix the coding error.

      Like I said the last time you uploaded an image, you have to put it on the actual image itself when uploading it rather than on a page you wish to put the image on.

      Hope that clears it up :)

        Loading editor
    • Ah my apologies. It’s very difficult to do so on mobile.

        Loading editor
    • It's all good. Happens to the best of us.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Would it be possible to limit the editing abilities of Lev's page to that of verified users? I know that it doesn't stop those who create an account just to go and vandalize articles, but it's an extra step in their way and I feel like it would possibly (I really, really hope) discourage the less persistent of said vandals from keeping at it. Sorry if I'm out of place on this, I don't mean to bother with this. Vandalism, especially when it comes to stuff about pronouns and sexuality, really gets to me.

      Loading editor
    • It's alright. It's good of you to bring it to our attention.

      I actually posted a message on the talk page warning users who edit war over the pronouns and to settle it through civil discussion rather than insult one another.

      If it continues to happen, despite my warning, the page will be protected for a time and those who edit warred/spread trans-phobic comments will be blocked.

      Hope that brings you peace of mind :)

        Loading editor
    • It does. Thanks, I appreciate it!

        Loading editor
    • Verytallfox wrote:
      ... I know that it doesn't stop those who create an account just to go and vandalize articles, ...

      Well, actually it limits "new and unregistered users", so if the page is locked then just making a new account with the intention to vandalize won't work. I don't know what qualifies as "new user" though, if it's an "amount of edits" thing or if it's a "you have to be on the wiki for x amount of days".

      Sorry this is happening, Verytallfox. It happens everywhere there's a trans character. Some people are just hateful The most we can do is protect Lev.

      Snivystorm, I know this is not my place to say, but there's a user that has made 9 edits in the past two days and 7 of them is just going through Lev's page and changing all of his pronouns. -.- (and the other two contributions are them arguing misinformed and grammatically incorrect nonesense on Lev's talk page)

      Sorry for commenting on a personal wall conversation, sorry if it was inappropriate. I just feel Lev needs to be protected and we've had a very similar situation on another wiki.

      Cheers

        Loading editor
    • @EmBELLEm

      One of my colleagues has resolved the matter and spoken with the individual. As stated, if they try it one more time, they will face an extensive block. I'll personally be proposing a 3 month long ban in our staff meetings. Transphobia is unacceptable, especially in this day and age.

      I hope that helps.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Multiple links on Abby's page have been replaced solely by pictures of dicks. I'm going to message the other Admins and Mods just in case so that this can be dealt with in a timely manner.  

      Loading editor
    • I believe it has been dealt with, thank you for notifying.

      In future though, if you're going to message all of the staff team, please make a post on our admin noticeboard rather than clutter all our message walls with copy-pasted posts.

      Thank you.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Zippo is not interested are u?

      Loading editor
    • To be honest, I'm prioritising this wiki right now (and for the foreseeable future) given a whole new game has come out with a ton of content to add.

      I wish you luck with your project though :)

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Now the game is out and people are playing it, what is the admins' attitude towards spoiler-heavy reviews and discussion on the forums?

      Loading editor
    • Maybe we should add a Spoilers tag to them, just to be on the safe side?

      Now that the game has released, I figure we'll be seeing lots of that. I'm a bit unsure how to deal with it myself.

        Loading editor
    • Hey @BenRG.

      As the game has officially released, all forum discussions are now permitted to include Part II content. Therefore, feel free to spark a discussion or write a review about the game.

      You can mark it for spoilers if you think you want to, but it is not needed.

      Hope that clears it up ^_^

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I am requesting permission to edit Joel’s page as I have seen gameplay and I can change something. I can’t say here, otherwise I can spoil the game. If you message me on my profile, I can explain there.

      Loading editor
    • Of course pal. You don't have to tell me the spoilers (I'd appreciate it if you didn't haha).

        Loading editor
    • I want to change the page a little, but what if I spoil it for everyone? Should I wait until the game fully comes out or what?

        Loading editor
    • The game has officially released, hence why we've allowed users to now create pages like Abby and so on. So yes, spoil away if you so desire in the articles.

      Alternately, you can get started on less spoilery things like the state pages if you'd prefer that.

        Loading editor
    • Imma get started on Joel first and I'll see what I can do with others.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • FEDRA is like the FEMA we know today. So Fedra is a civilian agency and when the military took over, they fell under the Military. Highly doubt they do anything. It's the CDC that looks for a vaccine and the military that does the protecting and supplying. I'm asking permission to change the info that The Military page gives us.

      Loading editor
    • View all 5 replies
    • You're right I was too focused real world knowledge being implemented into the video game universe. Don't have a degree yet, six more semesters to go...

        Loading editor
    • It's all good. Enjoy getting your degree :)

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • My edit to the cordyceps page was not vandalism. Did you follow the link to amazon? People do eat that fungus. It's for sale at amazon.

      Loading editor
    • View all 6 replies
    • ok, well the hell with it. sorry to bother you.

        Loading editor
    • To expand on what I saw above, given it is the trivia section, I am okay including some real world information granted it is appropriately related to The Last of Us.

      I think citing an article where people discuss how Cordyceps is eaten as food in the real world would work better as a source.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.