Poll: Would you buy Left 4 Dead 3?

[Captain Pirate]

No. L4D has always been, to me, about as worthy as an XBLA title.
There is practically no sotry, the characters are mediocre, the gameplay if so very, very unimaginative and reptitive, and while I do admire the variety of Zombies, it just isn't variety enough for me to fork out £20 for it, let alone £40-£45.
I tried playing it with friends. Not really fun. We just shot Zombies. In a random fashion.
Not really teamwork, as much as all shooting things until nothing moves.

I regard teamwork in gaming, as, say driving a Warthog in Halo Reach while a buddy turrets and the teammate carrying the flag passengers, with another teammate in a Ghost as extra guard.

L4D is even less than no fun, so negative fun, on your own.
The gameplay is so simplistic, and in my opinion Valve tricked a shitload of Fanboys into paying full retail game price for what should've been a XBLA title for £10-£15.

 

[tombman888]

Yes i probably would.

 

[cluzapnabber]

Yes because I enjoyed L4D2. It should have Ellis's friend Keith as a survivor! He has survived a dozen terrible experiences, so how would a zombie apocalypse be able to stop him?

then keith could talk about all the adventures that he had with ellis ,plus you could have a dlc pack with both of them shooting zombies.

i will buy if it has keith.

 

[AgDr_ODST]

no because I want Valve to quit fucking with us and come out with something......anything about Episode 3 or Half Life 3......whatever the end of the Episode Saga is supposed to be

 

[XzarTheMad]

Probably, yes. Depending on what changed. But, being a huge fan of 1 and 2, I probably would.

 

[Lem0nade Inlay]

Not unless it was very different from the first 2. I mean L4D was amazing, and I couldn't really get into L4D2 after playing the first to death. So it wasn't exciting. The 3rd would probably be even less interesting for me.

 

[jebussaves88]

In the house, in a heartbeat, I would buy that shit up. THE co-op game, and one of the better versus modes, so long as you have friends.

 

[LawlessSquirrel]

How do you pee on a digital download?

Voted Maybe. More info needed before I judge a game.

 

[Kevonovitch]

i probably would i loved the 1st one, loved the 2nd one, and the 3rd, if it becomes real, i'd probably enjoy it too

 

[Smooth Operator]

While a good game it is strictly multiplayer, so it's not my thing from the start, and there are always issues with the people online you really haveto get together with a good bunch of people.
But the bigger issue why I wouldn't buy it... DAMN IT VALVE FINISH HALF LIFE FIRST!
As long as they make money off easy to ship games they will brush others aside, and I don't want to support that in any way.

 

[Juggern4ut20]

I research purchases...so if the quality is there(pretty much guaranteed considering the dev), most definitly.

That's funny, because when L4D was first released the quality + quantity vs price was horrible. You had to pay 60$ for what was basically a glorified mod. I did buy and play the first one a lot, but looking at it again, it was incomplete. The low number of levels and the limited number of weapons and zombies was kinda insulting considering it doesn't take a genius to say "we should put melee weapons in". Of course, the second one had everything the first one was missing, but they forced you to pay another 60$ for it.

At that point, most of my friends had moved on and grown tired of the repetitive levels despite the claim that the AI director made them repayable, which is a bunch of bs. So i probably wouldn't buy a third installment.

 

[ultrachicken]

No. I haven't gotten 10 minutes of enjoyment out of the previous Left 4 Deads.

 

[MonadProxy]

I'm in Australia, After Micheal Atkinson (Forgive me if i spelt that wrong) Royally butt fucked us with the L4D2 situation i didn't bother buying the sequal. I tried ordering the real version from NZ but it was cut off because it was classed as contraband.

If there was going to be a third entry in the series i would probly buy it depending on the Content and aslong M.K didn't get his Conservative Shit covered cock involved.

Troll me if i over reacted

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I research purchases...so if the quality is there(pretty much guaranteed considering the dev), most definitly.

That's funny, because when L4D was first released the quality + quantity vs price was horrible. You had to pay 60$ for what was basically a glorified mod. I did buy and play the first one a lot, but looking at it again, it was incomplete. The low number of levels and the limited number of weapons and zombies was kinda insulting considering it doesn't take a genius to say "we should put melee weapons in". Of course, the second one had everything the first one was missing, but they forced you to pay another 60$ for it.

At that point, most of my friends had moved on and grown tired of the repetitive levels despite the claim that the AI director made them repayable, which is a bunch of bs. So i probably wouldn't buy a third installment.

When it comes to multiplayer, it's most certainly a question of quality, not quantity. L4D didn't have much content, but it had solid mechanics that allowed for engaging competition...which is why people still play counter-strike all these years later, despite it not having much of anything.

The hours I put it into L4D justify the price of entry, it was more than a mod, it was a well made proof-of-concept.

 

[Juggern4ut20]

I research purchases...so if the quality is there(pretty much guaranteed considering the dev), most definitly.

That's funny, because when L4D was first released the quality + quantity vs price was horrible. You had to pay 60$ for what was basically a glorified mod. I did buy and play the first one a lot, but looking at it again, it was incomplete. The low number of levels and the limited number of weapons and zombies was kinda insulting considering it doesn't take a genius to say "we should put melee weapons in". Of course, the second one had everything the first one was missing, but they forced you to pay another 60$ for it.

At that point, most of my friends had moved on and grown tired of the repetitive levels despite the claim that the AI director made them repayable, which is a bunch of bs. So i probably wouldn't buy a third installment.

When it comes to multiplayer, it's most certainly a question of quality, not quantity. L4D didn't have much content, but it had solid mechanics that allowed for engaging competition...which is why people still play counter-strike all these years later, despite it not having much of anything.

The hours I put it into L4D justify the price of entry, it was more than a mod, it was a well made proof-of-concept.

I agree about the solid mechanics and addictive game play, but when it first came out, there was only TWO maps you can play on multi-player. That is a joke. It took like four or five monthes before they updated so that all four maps could be played in versus mode. I'd say that's BS and should have been done on launch. That is why i call it a mod when it was released.

 

[CarpathianMuffin]

With how quickly they released the second game after the first, I've lost some respect for Valve. However, I would play it if it goes on sale.

 

[suitepee7]

would only ever consider it if at least 3 of my pc gaming friends would also get it, i don't particularly find it fun playing with strangers (other than versus mode, but i still have my friends on my team).

 

[ViaticalTarsier]

Personally I like the CoD zombie modes better than left 4 dead. They are actually fun and crazy challenging plus they have tons of sweet weapons. L4d just seems meh with its limited arsenal, numerous bugs, and just plain lack of fun (to me at least). So no I wouldn't buy a 3rd L4d unless they mix things up and actually put a full game worth of content in it.

 

[Chibz]

Nope. Of course not.

 

[Slaanax]

I don't like the controls on the game, so no. It doesn't play well on the X-box.