Poll: Left 4 Dead 2: Why? Why? Why?

Recommended Videos

Zydrate

New member
Apr 1, 2009
1,914
0
0
No opinion. I enjoyed ONE playthrough of L4D1, with a friend, and it was great. But I'm not sure how I would have felt trying it more. To me, it had the vibe of Army of Two, one playthrough was great but if you tried replaying it... it just fell flat.

I had only borrowed the game so I cannot say that as fact, so I'm not sure. But I do think it's a bit too soon?
 

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 1, 2009
16,478
5,078
118
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
well.... the south does suck, and killing its zombified, infected, sorry inhabitants would be amusing
 

Scarecrow38

New member
Apr 17, 2008
693
0
0
I don't actually mind having l4d and l4d2. Valve has said they aren't abandoning l4d. I also can understand that l4d2 adds so much to the game that it cant just be patched in.

I just think of them as two independent games that are both going to be updated by valve simultaneously (just like l4d and tf2 are both independent games and both updated and worked on by valve).
 

CNKFan

New member
Aug 20, 2008
1,034
0
0
I never played the first L4D because 1. I don't have XBL and 2. I hate the marathon runner zombies. I am a fan of good old fashioned shambeling hordes.
 

Yokai

New member
Oct 31, 2008
1,981
0
0
I'm enveloped in a furious storm of nerd rage, to tell the truth. I don't think anyone was expecting this as it goes against everything we know about Valve. It takes them two years to put together a five-hour expansion pack, and here they are releasing a full sequel after a mere twelve months. That's like if Crysis 2 or something was announced in July 2008 and came out three months later. The problem with such short development cycles is that there won't be much change. Frankly, it seems to me as though everything they're adding in could be contained in an update or an expansion pack, and they don't need a full game right away. The game is still a smash hit and judging by the public's general reception of Valves games it's going to stay that way for several years. It's far too soon for a sequel.
AND WHERE THE F*CK IS EPISODE 3? DAMMIT!
 

Yog Sothoth

Elite Member
Dec 6, 2008
1,037
0
41
I'm really looking forward to it, and I don't give two shits about HL: Episode 3....

Why does everyone else seem to care about it so much? When it's finally released , it will be maybe four hours long if you're lucky... I'll get far more gaming hours out of Left 4 Dead and it's sequels....
 

axle 19

Bearer of the Necronomicon
Aug 2, 2008
3,444
0
0
Honestly who really cares, Valve works in its own pardon the pun mysterious way. Honestly Left 4 Dead is a very popular game so Valve decided to speedily make a sequel. Could be for money or for the simple fact that they are Valve and can do whatever they please. Of course it could have been released as DLC but they chose to make it its own game. Maybe its a sign that they'll start updating faster like with the tf2 update. Personally i'm all for the new game and will get it.

I've been waiting for Episode 3 but honestly let valve take as long as they need to bring to a climactic ending that causes our eyes to ooze liquid joy. As long as it doesn't go down the same path as duke nukem forever i'm good to wait.
 

YummCookie

New member
Jun 5, 2009
13
0
0
Yeah I don't get why they announced a new game instead of just DLC. It hasn't even been 1 year.
(Although IMO: Games based upon multiplayer > story games. I don't give a damn about half lifes see saws GRRR )
 

Soigieoto

New member
Jan 15, 2009
195
0
0
lasherman said:
I'm just hoping they eventually release left 4 dead (first or second, whichever) for PS3. that is honestly the only Xbox 360 exclusive i wished would be available for PS3, unless i can count that downloadable fallout 3 content.


I feel your pain, but at least we get that Fallout content this summer :D


L4D2 looks like a better version of the first. That I gladly welcome.
 

Blood_Lined

New member
Mar 31, 2009
442
0
0
I agree with the naming sense in L4D2. The sequel to Left 4 Dead should be, "Left 2 Die" I think that would work.
 

TheECP

New member
Nov 1, 2007
81
0
0
Blood_Lined said:
I agree with the naming sense in L4D2. The sequel to Left 4 Dead should be, "Left 2 Die" I think that would work.
That doesn't make ANY sense, since the 4 had nothing to do with how many games there were, it was a clever name and the amount of players you had. Getting rid of a 4 and instead having a 2 where the number is just the number of games, would completely come out of nowhere, since the 4 is now missing.

They could have named it Left 4 Dead: New Orleans, or something like that.

But really, they shouldn't have made this a sequel at all, haha. Looking at it they could have updated the original...
 

Ryan_R

New member
Jun 5, 2009
1
0
0
Now while I agree that the game coming out so soon after the first one, and that is probably a bad decision for not only money reasons but also for fan-boy reason, it does however bring some decently interesting promise of things such as Hightened Game Director who actually changes the levels themselves, which make a zombie game that much more terrifying when you don't know how to MLG your way into every nook and cranny to help you beat a game or earn an achievement and ultimately losing your soul.So on top of changing the places special zombies spawn, and all that, they changed the levels which they spawn on, the time of day or night they spawn on, and that varies the different things they do. They have upgraded weaponry and characters, like every good and bad game share since the history of forever, and of course there has been speculation that there will be more aspects to the diversity of online play, rather than it being a simple tug of war on the aspect of who can be a bigger douche. I say it brings promise, but there is really no use in thinking about legitimate reviews until the game comes out and someone actually....er...Reviews it. Or your friends or acquintances play it. Til then, I wouldn't make any real decision, unless of course it is about Bioshock II, which will blow everything out of the water.
 

axle 19

Bearer of the Necronomicon
Aug 2, 2008
3,444
0
0
Ok, Valve decided not to release L4d2 as an update for several reasons, for one Left 4 dead is an easy game to make because they are reusing a lot of stuff from the original however it does not mean that it can be released as an update because of the new content they are shelling in. For example they are adding a gore skeleton to all the zombies and altering the AI director which involves a massive rewrite of code that can't be released as an update. Another reason is that while a PC can handle an update of the size necessary for it, the 360 has no where near enough room and Valve decided to rather than releaze to seperate ones they release it as a game. To those bitching about episode 3 needing to be released instead. Realize this, Half life 2 is an episodic game with a highly detailed story, of course its going to take a while to create the final climactic chapter of the game necessary to make everyone happy so please Valve take as long as you need to make it. Just look at their track record, they have not had a single bad game released in their 13 year history.

Finally to those who are boycotting L4D2 on the boycott group on steam, you may believe that you represent the left fof dead community as a whole but really you are only about 1.5% of it. I do applaud you for getting Valve attention but do you really believe that Valve a Multimillion dollar gaming giant is going to bend to your will. Personally, I will get left 4 dead 2 and enjoy it and I applaud what could be a new trend in Valve of pumping out games faster.