L4D2 or no L4D2?...

[Hat of Controversy]

I've been on the fence for this for a little while now. I got a bit of extra cash, and of course, can't think of anything else to spend it on other than a couple video games. I've already bought Fallout 3: GOTY for the PC, and am willing to buy 1 other game.

So yeah, I've been considering getting Left 4 Dead 2 quite a bit. I never played the first one, though I always wanted to. And by the time that I actually could get it, the sequel was announced, so I've been kind of holding back for this one. I just wanted some second opinions on this.

Also, if you don't think I should get this, have any suggestions? Preferrably anything on the PC, or maybe the Wii, since those are the only 2 game systems I have.

Thanks!

 

[Icecoldcynic]

Well the second one is superior to the first in every single way. If you're unsure try the demo, and if you like it, there's no reason not to buy it.

 

[AkJay]

I would buy L4D2, it's a fun game with good replay value. Get it for the PC

 

[TheSeventhLoneWolf]

Gah. I have this too.

I want to get them both, but they both have huge replay values. Lets see what the escapists say.

 

[TheLastCylon]

LFD2 has given me the most fun gaming experience ever.

Get it.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Well, honestly I bought L4D 1 a year ago and only played it 4 times. I found it got old pretty fast, I wished there had been more locations and gameplay variety.

Sure, the AI director shakes things up each time but you can only play the same campaign a certain number of times before it starts to get old.

I seem to be in the minority with this view, however.

 

[Arcticflame]

L4d2 is amazing amounts better than l4d, it's better in every way except for the characters. Sure Coach Ellis and Nick are cool enough, but they aren't quite as co-why am I bothering to explain that, when I can quite easily just say rochelle.

But yeah, l4d2 is a lot funner, and the extra infected make for some hilarious occurences. I can't play the original anymore because l4d2 is just so much better.

 

[RadioActiveChimp]

Well the second one is superior to the first in every single way. If you're unsure try the demo, and if you like it, there's no reason not to buy it.

other than the fact that the second one is freaking hard!

 

[Hat of Controversy]

That's the thing, I never played the first one. I wanted to of course, but never got around to it. Thanks for the insight though.

 

[Icecoldcynic]

Well the second one is superior to the first in every single way. If you're unsure try the demo, and if you like it, there's no reason not to buy it.

How about the fact that it's a full game's worth of price for what is, really, an expansion pack?

Don't get it, honestly. If you played the first game, imagine it with a chainsaw and some zombies that ride you like a cowboy and you've played Left 4 Dead 2.

You've been spoiled by valve's treatment of games in the past. There's plenty of new content in the game, and if you refuse to see that, then quite frankly, you don't deserve the treatment valve have given you in the past.

I'll admit that perhaps valve paced themselves poorly, like the boyfriend who buys an expensive extravagant gift randomly, then gets something much less impressive for their girlfriend's birthday. It's a good analogy, because valve basically burned out so much generosity in the past, that now, them doing something that's industry standard is considered terrible.

 

[Layz92]

Don't bother. Where zombies are involved, it's never worth money. Download a cracked version and play it over LAN.

 

[Lateinos]

The only half decent argument for not getting it that I've heard is that it's a waste of money because it's so much like the first game (I would disagree with that anyway). Since you don't have the first game, there is absolutely no reason I can dream of to not get it. Buy it. It's a truly amazing game.

 

[RADEOCIDE]

Honestly, it's not worth the buy. I only have it because I got it for free. The first Left 4 Dead got old very fast, and even the AI director trying to change things up gets very, very old. I can almost memorize where a Tank will come in certain campaigns... THAT'S how old it can get. In Left 4 Dead 2, it honestly is the same thing: it gets old quite fast even if there are more Special Infected and melee weapons. And just general weapons... in general.

It isn't worth the money... at all.



It should have just been a DLC for the original Left 4 Dead.

 

[Icecoldcynic]

snip

You could say that about ANY series. Look at battlefield. Battlefield 2 was released in june 2005, and then the sequel was released in october 2006. Now if you simplify it ridiculously the way you did, you could say that just because it has the same core gameplay as the previous game, all it is, is a reskin with different names on everything. I mean hell look at resi 4 - 5, it's the same game with different zombies, right? Advance wars.. they're all the same with slightly different campaign objectives, right? Fire Emblem, it's always the same with different characters, and characters don't count as new stuff do they?

See how easy it is to apply that kind of logic to ANYTHING when you simplify it the way you did?

 

[Shru1kan]

Well, honestly I bought L4D 1 a year ago and only played it 4 times. I found it got old pretty fast, I wished there had been more locations and gameplay variety.

Sure, the AI director shakes things up each time but you can only play the same campaign a certain number of times before it starts to get old.

I seem to be in the minority with this view, however.

I bought it a few weeks ago to kill 11 days and it lasted 4. Yeah.... not too much of a replay value.

 

[archvile93]

Since you haven't played the first one, yes you should buy it. I didn't find it different enough to be worth the money. Plus, the first one got boring within a week.

 

[Icecoldcynic]

Well, honestly I bought L4D 1 a year ago and only played it 4 times. I found it got old pretty fast, I wished there had been more locations and gameplay variety.

Sure, the AI director shakes things up each time but you can only play the same campaign a certain number of times before it starts to get old.

I seem to be in the minority with this view, however.

I bought it a few weeks ago to kill 11 days and it lasted 4. Yeah.... not too much of a replay value.

The game's true value lies in its multiplayer (especially local LAN/splitscreen). Me and my friends must have spent literally months of playtime playing the game together in co-op and versus. I have 2 friends who have over 1500 hours of gameplay combined.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Well, honestly I bought L4D 1 a year ago and only played it 4 times. I found it got old pretty fast, I wished there had been more locations and gameplay variety.

Sure, the AI director shakes things up each time but you can only play the same campaign a certain number of times before it starts to get old.

I seem to be in the minority with this view, however.

I bought it a few weeks ago to kill 11 days and it lasted 4. Yeah.... not too much of a replay value.

Especially if you play with random people over the web.

It can be good fun with 3 mates, but with strangers it's usually awful.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Guys whether or not Left 4 Dead 2 is a worthy sequel has no relevance here. The OP does not have the original game.

And yes, you should get it. Left 4 Dead 2 is loads of fun and since you expressed interest in the original game you will definitely love the second one. But you should probably read some reviews of it first. Just make sure these reviews aren't just comparing it to the original, as that often makes the games sound worse than it actually is.

 

[Icecoldcynic]

snip

You could say that about ANY series. Look at battlefield. Battlefield 2 was released in june 2005, and then the sequel was released in october 2006. Now if you simplify it ridiculously the way you did, you could say that just because it has the same core gameplay as the previous game, all it is, is a reskin with different names on everything. I mean hell look at resi 4 - 5, it's the same game with different zombies, right? Advance wars.. they're all the same with slightly different campaign objectives, right? Fire Emblem, it's always the same with different characters, and characters don't count as new stuff do they?

See how easy it is to apply that kind of logic to ANYTHING when you simplify it the way you did?

Yes, but Advance Wars, Resident Evil and the Battlefield games aren't held up as the greatest games in existence like Left 4 Dead 2 has been since it was announced.

And I hardly simplified it. The only things that they added were; weapons, characters, locations, zombies. Characters and locations are irrelevant since plot is non-existent in the Left 4 Dead games, and the weapons and zombies are paltry additions to justify Valve's employee's pay.

I can see your point of view, and I understand you're not going to change it, so I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. Personally I don't hold L4D or valve as the greatest things ever (that would have to go to Monster Hunter), but I still believe that they are quality developers who make good games.