Review: Left 4 Dead 2

Jaranja

New member
Jul 16, 2009
3,275
0
0
Jiraiya72 said:
Jaranja said:
It gets old really quickly. It's far too easy. It's monotonous.
Too easy? I think you're full of shit. This game is easily twice as hard as the first. Killing zombies never gets old and the whole point of constantly killing zombies is the POINT, not monotonous.
Well maybe you just can't play it as well as some. Killing zombies does get boring, very quickly, in fact. Saying something is twice as hard as another isn't really that smart either; Double 1 is 2 and it's still a small number. I'm really nitpicking now. I'll stop.
 

TheJoojo

New member
Apr 28, 2009
134
0
0
Laura. said:
I agree with most points, the game is a huge improvement from L4D. The melee weapons, the maps, the run-like-hell crescendo events, the gore is awesome and small details like the safe room music is very cool as well.

The only thing I didn't really enjoy that much were the characters. I find them bland. Rochelle and Nick have no personality whatsoever, and Coach could have been a lot better.

Also, the game is way more difficult than its predecessor.
This.

I really loved the characters in the first one! Probably gonna buy L4D2 though, maybe for christmas...
 

BloodyOne

New member
Mar 23, 2009
296
0
0
CantFaketheFunk said:
...it just wouldn't be a valve game without a crowbar, would it?
No, indeed it would not be.

So is the gore vamped up? It looks like it, and there was the whole Australia issue.
I can't wait until they have a L4D3 where they cross over the survivors, but L4D and now L4D2 will satisfy my zombie lust.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
Out4Blood4 said:
CantFaketheFunk said:
...it just wouldn't be a valve game without a crowbar, would it?
No, indeed it would not be.

So is the gore vamped up? It looks like it, and there was the whole Australia issue.
I can't wait until they have a L4D3 where they cross over the survivors, but L4D and now L4D2 will satisfy my zombie lust.
From what I've seen from L4D1, yes. The gore has been ramped up CONSIDERABLY.
 

Gongon

New member
Sep 8, 2009
24
0
0
Before you start complaining about the difficulty, try playing it on expert with realism mode enabled. Not impossible, and sometimes it relies upon you getting lucky with the spawns. Two hunters and a spitter at the same time, then followed by two consecutive chargers can really mess you up. Killing zombies does get old rather fast though, but that's what versus is for.
 

BloodyOne

New member
Mar 23, 2009
296
0
0
CantFaketheFunk said:
Out4Blood4 said:
CantFaketheFunk said:
...it just wouldn't be a valve game without a crowbar, would it?
No, indeed it would not be.

So is the gore vamped up? It looks like it, and there was the whole Australia issue.
I can't wait until they have a L4D3 where they cross over the survivors, but L4D and now L4D2 will satisfy my zombie lust.
From what I've seen from L4D1, yes. The gore has been ramped up CONSIDERABLY.
Always a good thing IMO.

@topic: I was really expecting a skillet gag.
Also @topic: I hear the Director is crueler overall, but kind of evened out, like when me and a few others went through the No Mercy campaigns (L4D) and got half way through the first scene with not a drop of blood shed, the Director would even out our karma. With interest. The interest being a Boomer (and subsequent swarm), a Tank, a Smoker AND a Hunter, all in the manner of about 30 seconds, and we see a second hunter crawling around as our screen fades to black. And this happened every single time that we tried to do it "Black-Ops" style. Are there less of these events?
 

Byers

New member
Nov 21, 2008
229
0
0
I see nothing here that couldn't have been patched into the original game instead of being released as a new game six months after the original. Money talks and bullshit walks.
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
I'm really struggling on this.

L4D was possibly my game of 2009. Truly godlike.

L4D2 feels like L4D(1.5). It's good but...

And it's that that stops me buying at full price.

I don't even know what it is that doesn't make it as good, it's just that...it's not quite as good.

Yeah, the flames are gorgeous, the bilebomb is great and useful, the Infected are great, but...

And I really can't explain any more than that.
 

Internet Kraken

Animalia Mollusca Cephalopada
Mar 18, 2009
6,915
0
0
Byers said:
I see nothing here that couldn't have been patched into the original game instead of being released as a new game six months after the original. Money talks and bullshit walks.
There's a lot that couldn't have been put in the original game. The new AI director is vastly superior to the old one, and now uses the special infected in far more effective ways. Now they mostly use teamwork rather than bumbling into the survivors gunfire on their own. This was a major improvement to the AI director that was not possible to add to Left 4 Dead. The new engine for generating common infected could not be implemented into the old game. The same goes for the gore engine added into the game.

But when you get right down to it, none of this really matters.Left 4 Dead 2 is vastly superior to the original in almost every single way, and there is more than enough content to justify it as a sequel. Some of the new items such as the Adrenaline and Defibrillator have a significant impact on game play. The 5 new campaigns are incredibly well designed and each provides a unique and thrilling experience (also the weather mechanic in Hard Rain could also not be added to the original game). Plus the new game mode Scavenge is pretty damn good.

On Topic: I mostly agree with this review. However, I'm surprised that you didn't make any mention ( perhaps I simply didn't notice) of the games 2 biggest flaws. The game is plagued with many glitches, ranging from minor annoyances to game crippling. While Valve is patching these it's still worth noting that it rendered the game unplayable for some people. And while the Infected AI has been vastly improved, the Survivor AI seems to have plummeted. The game isn't intended to be played with bots, but you still have to deal with them when people quit in online games. The game is very complex and I understand that programming good AI is challenging, but this huge drop in quality is a noticeable flaw.
 

samsonguy920

New member
Mar 24, 2009
2,921
0
0
Left 4 Dead 2 is more than the original, enough to warrant the 2 at the end. The social between the characters is different from the first four, but I enjoy it all the same. Even with all the new stuff in this one, I still enjoy going back to the original to play that. The problem with a lot of sequels is they are just so over the top to the previous, that you just feel the earlier is 'just pants' and let it collect dust on the shelf. But Left 4 Dead is still fancy pants alongside 2, and it will remain so for a long time.
Internet Kraken said:
On Topic: I mostly agree with this review. However, I'm surprised that you didn't make any mention ( perhaps I simply didn't notice) of the games 2 biggest flaws. The game is plagued with many glitches, ranging from minor annoyances to game crippling. While Valve is patching these it's still worth noting that it rendered the game unplayable for some people. And while the Infected AI has been vastly improved, the Survivor AI seems to have plummeted. The game isn't intended to be played with bots, but you still have to deal with them when people quit in online games. The game is very complex and I understand that programming good AI is challenging, but this huge drop in quality is a noticeable flaw.
That is probably the one thing that helps me still enjoy the first, while the enemy AI is smarter and tougher(I still have yet to finish an Advanced campaign in 2, feels a lot like Expert in 1), the survivor bots in 2 seem to be atrociously gimped. I do realize that the appeal of Left 4 Dead is the coop and versus multiplayer, but it really feels that they either just didn't put the same effort into the survivor AI or left some hiccups. I am hoping they are just hiccups and we will see some improvement down the road. I've died too many times now because the bots were too damn slow(even at green health) or it seemed they just couldnt find me(on a path I know they found easily enough before.) This could easily ruin a coop game where there is one bot playing and its down to a player and a bot almost to the safe room. (I mean, seriously, Louisbot is actually more dependable to count on in a crunch than these guys). But on the other side of the coin, this definitely trains one to stay with the bots more often. At their slow leisurely pace....
Cool review though JF, I like that you didnt touch the first game before this one, therefore came into it with a fresh unbiased eye, unconcerned about whether it was too soon or not. Excelsior!
Addendum: And I, too, am sad that there was no reaper. As for future installments, I'd like to see the next take place in the southwest US, going through Arizona, Las Vegas, through California. Would make for some more awesome scenery, new situations, and a chance to bring in old friends of characters or just make new ones. (Yes I know the map in 2 didn't show any X's in Western US, but thats more likely because they didn't know what was happening over there.)
 

Skarvig

New member
Jul 13, 2009
254
0
0
anian said:
Thing I want to know is - when can I preorder L4D3? :p
Just wait 5 months and there will be first screenshots and interviews. Wait another 2 monthts and you will be able to see the first videos. I would predict that you will be able to preorder the game somewhere in november.
 

Jaranja

New member
Jul 16, 2009
3,275
0
0
Caliban1972 said:
Jaranja said:
Jiraiya72 said:
Jaranja said:
It gets old really quickly. It's far too easy. It's monotonous.
Too easy? I think you're full of shit. This game is easily twice as hard as the first. Killing zombies never gets old and the whole point of constantly killing zombies is the POINT, not monotonous.
Well maybe you just can't play it as well as some. Killing zombies does get boring, very quickly, in fact. Saying something is twice as hard as another isn't really that smart either; Double 1 is 2 and it's still a small number. I'm really nitpicking now. I'll stop.
Nah, I really think your just full of it.

I played L4D on Expert as a matter of course, and L4D2 is much harder than L4D1 on Expert.

It just sounds like you are one those guys who has to brag about how good they are at things they haven't really done. You probably just played through it on Easy and got bored after one play through.
You're one of those people who thinks they always know exactly what's going on. I have played L4D2 on Expert and I found it easy. Just because you find something hard doesn't mean it's hard for everyone.
 

Internet Kraken

Animalia Mollusca Cephalopada
Mar 18, 2009
6,915
0
0
Jaranja said:
Caliban1972 said:
Jaranja said:
Jiraiya72 said:
Jaranja said:
It gets old really quickly. It's far too easy. It's monotonous.
Too easy? I think you're full of shit. This game is easily twice as hard as the first. Killing zombies never gets old and the whole point of constantly killing zombies is the POINT, not monotonous.
Well maybe you just can't play it as well as some. Killing zombies does get boring, very quickly, in fact. Saying something is twice as hard as another isn't really that smart either; Double 1 is 2 and it's still a small number. I'm really nitpicking now. I'll stop.
Nah, I really think your just full of it.

I played L4D on Expert as a matter of course, and L4D2 is much harder than L4D1 on Expert.

It just sounds like you are one those guys who has to brag about how good they are at things they haven't really done. You probably just played through it on Easy and got bored after one play through.
You're one of those people who thinks they always know exactly what's going on. I have played L4D2 on Expert and I found it easy. Just because you find something hard doesn't mean it's hard for everyone.
Out of curiosity, which campaign did you play? And did you try it with realism enabled?
 

paralost

New member
Aug 7, 2009
85
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
I'm really struggling on this.

L4D was possibly my game of 2009. Truly godlike.

L4D2 feels like L4D(1.5). It's good but...

And it's that that stops me buying at full price.

I don't even know what it is that doesn't make it as good, it's just that...it's not quite as good.

Yeah, the flames are gorgeous, the bilebomb is great and useful, the Infected are great, but...

And I really can't explain any more than that.
i feel the same way. i loved LFD1 i thought it was awesome and had a tremendous replay value. me and some friends kinda rushed through it the first time put then we got 4 players and actually played strategically as if we actually were in a zombie apocalypse. i played the LFD2 demo but from what i saw it's all...meh. even this review, which i was hoping would put me over the fence on a yay or nay, still leaves me in the center. i think everything added to LFD2 is a vast improvement and will add to the game significantly. but i still think everything they added could still have been given to us through DLC. i just don't think adding some characters, new weps, and different levels are worth 60$. i mean there are still only 5 campaigns. i might get it...later...when the price goes done or something.